布坎南.pptVIP

布坎南论文读后感 社科0812 宋程成 3080101734 SOCIAL CHOICE, DEMOCRACY, AND FREE MARKETS 社会选择，民主和自由市场 基于标题，本文涉及的领域兼顾政治和经济两个领域，社会（或者说集体）选择是这两者的结合部分，本文的主要论述就是从这点着眼的。 对引言的理解 In this paper I propose to examine the arguments of Arrow and his critics within a more inclusive frame of reference. This approach reveals a weakness in the for-mal analysis itself and demonstrates that some of the more significant implications drawn from the analysis are inappropriate. 本文中，我将要解释阿罗的论断和他那涉及诸多领域的更具包容性的论述框架。这一方法，（将会）指出了先前（阿罗的）那些解释自身存在的不足，而且论证了源于那些解释的更为重要的含义是不合理的。 I shall first review briefly Arrows argument, in order to isolate the source of much of the confusion which has been generated by it. Following this, I shall raise some questions concerning the philosophical basis of the concept of social rationality. In the next section I shall attempt to show that the negative results of Arrows analysis as applied to voting represent established and desirable features of the decision-making process embodied in constitutional democracy. From this it follows that if the conditions required by Arrow were satisfied, certain modifications in the underlying institutional structure would become imperative. Finally, I shall develop the argument that the voting process is fundamentally different from the market when the two are considered as decision-making processes rather than as bases for deriving social welfare functions. Here it will be demonstrated that the market does produce consistent choices and that the market does not belong in the category of collective choice at all. 译文 首先我将简单回顾一下阿罗的论述，以便区分由于自身所造成的混淆的来源【1】。由此，我将提出一些涉及哲学基本理论的、关于社会理性概念的问题【2】。在这之后，我将证明阿罗的解释可应用于说明投票机制展现了宪政民主中包含的决策过程中固定而使人满意的特征。接着就是（要说明），如果阿罗提出的条件被满足的话，在基本制度结构的（任何）确切修改将是专断的【3】。最后，我想形成这样的观点：投票过程在根本上有别于市场机制，尽管投票过程和市场机制被认为是决策过程多于（被认为是）社会福利函数的基本来源。市场机制产生一致的选择和市场机制完全不属于集体选择领域的结论将在本文中得到论证【4】。 结合引文及全文对于该文观点的理解 【1】 布坎南认为，阿罗（Arrow）所假设的社会福利函数（social welfare function）其自身存在着含糊不清的定义，这一不足导致阿罗得出的一般选择理论（General Possibility Theorem）在有的人看来会得出了社会决策过程是不