Kapitalismi, marxismi ja neohumanistinen taloustiede | Participants
|
- Statistics
- Participants
- Translate into Finnish
- Translation result
- 11% translated in draft.
If you do not want to register an account, you can sign in with OpenID.
Capitalism, Marxism and Neo-Humanist Economics | Kapitalismi, marxismi ja neohumanistinen taloustiede | |
The essential link between neo-humanism and economics is that neo-humanism provides an ethical framework and value system within which all economic activity can be directly related to human welfare. The major schools of economic thought, whether capitalist or Marxist, are based upon materialist values and vested interests, which prevent them actuating the fullest possibilities of human welfare. | Olennainen linkki neohumanismin ja taloustieteen välillä on, että neohumanismi tarjoaa eettisen kehyksen ja arvojärjestelmän, jonka sisällä kaikki taloudellinen toiminta voi liittyä suoraan inhimilliseen hyvinvointiin. Taloudellisen ajattelun merkittävät koulut, joko kapitalistiset tai marxilaiset, perustuvat materialistisiin arvoihin ja oman edun tavoitteluun, jotka estävät niitä ajamasta inhimillisen hyvinvoinnin täysimpiä mahdollisuuksia. | |
Neo-humanism advances a new value system based on the principle of social equality, rather than self-interest, and gives a new perspective on the integration of theories of social and spiritual liberation. Under the influence of neo-humanism, economics become a means of liberation from material problems rather than a tool of exploitation and enslavement. | Neohumanismi edustaa uutta arvojärjestelmää, joka perustuu sosiaalisen tasa-arvon, eikä oman edun, periaatteeseen ja antaa uuden näkökulman sosiaalisen ja hengellisen vapautumisen teorioden integrointiin. Neohumanismin vaikutuksen alaisena, taloustieteestä tullee keino vapautumisesta materiaalista ongelmista sen sijaan työkalu hyväksikäytön ja orjuuttamisen. | |
The science of economics is over 200 years old and it first developed as a theoretical justification for capitalism. Its major branches have either explicitly supported or opposed capitalist values, exemplified by classical and neo-classical schools of economic thought and Marxism respectively. Smith, the father of modern economics, published “Wealth of Nations” in 1776 and argued that human conduct is actuated by six motives – self-love, sympathy, the desire to be free, sense of propriety, a habit of labor, and the propensity to barter and exchange one thing for another. Each person is the best judge of their own interests and should be left free to pursue their interests in their own way. If people are left to themselves they will not only attain their objectives, but they will also further the common good. This result is assured because providence has made society into a system in which the natural order prevails. The different natures of human conduct are so carefully balanced that the benefit of one does not conflict with the good of all. Thus Smith considered that in pursuing their own interests each individual was “led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was not part of their intention.” In this way the individual promoted the interests of society more effectively than if they had consciously set out to do so. In essence Smith believed that that public good arises out of acquisitiveness, individualism and self-interest. The work of Smith and later classical economists like Ricardo and Malthus provided the first theoretical foundation for capitalism, and the philosophical justification for policies like opposition to all forms of state intervention in business and commerce, support for colonialism and later imperialism and strong advocation for laissez-faire economics. |
© Copyright The author 2009.
