宋圭武观点5：“斯密悖论”本质是不存在的

    甘肃省委党校宋圭武教授认为：“斯密悖论”本质是不存在的。宋圭武教授说：所谓“斯密悖论”，是指斯密在《道德情操论》和《国富论》两本书中所体现出的不同价值倾向。在《道德情操论》一书中，斯密倾向于利他是经济发展的动力，而在《国富论》一书中，斯密更倾向于利己是经济发展的动力，于是，这一问题被德国学者约瑟夫·熊彼特称为“斯密问题”或“斯密悖论”。

“斯密悖论”本质是不存在的，推动经济发展的真正动力是利他，而不是利己。利己是一种反向动力，只有经过特定的制度约束，利己才能转化为经济发展的正向动力。

为什么利他是经济发展的真正动力，为分析问题方便，我们先做一理论假设。假设有两个群体，一个是由利他者构成的群体，一个是由利己者构成的群体，两个群体构成两个不同的社会，且二个社会之间没有交往；另外，假设两个群体的人从事的产业都是做饭。在这种情况下，我们分析一下到底是利己的群体构成的社会经济发展更有动力，还是利他的群体构成的社会经济发展更有动力。

    对于利他的群体构成的社会，从微观角度看，第一，从产品质量看，同样是做饭，显然利他的群体在饭菜质量上也会有保证，因为出于利他的目的，利他的群体也有很大动力把饭菜做好，让人吃得可口。第二，从产品价格看，利他的群体会要价更合理，绝不会坑蒙拐骗，并最终导致市场价格更符合均衡价格特性。第三，从生产过程看，利他的群体必然花在监督方面的成本很低。由于人们劳动自觉，自然非生产人员就大大减少，监督制度也就要不了那么复杂。从宏观角度看，第一，由于人们会更多从全局角度考虑问题，而不是从小团体角度考虑问题，这有利于建设公平社会，有利于缩小贫富差距问题。第二，利他的群体人们的环保意识会更好，这有利于解决好生产过程中存在的环境污染问题。第三，利他的群体会更有节约意识，这有利于建设资源节约型社会，有利于经济可持续发展。第四，利他的群体社会管理成本会很低。第五，利他的群体更有利于技术创新。因为由利他精神衍生的奉献精神为技术创新提供了一种精神支援。第六，利他的群体有利于更好解决信息不对称问题。

    而利己的群体构成的社会则是另一种经济发展景观。从微观看，第一，从产品质量看，饭菜质量不一定有保证，存在假冒伪劣的可能性。第二，从产品价格看，饭菜价格不一定要价合理，存在坑蒙拐骗可能性。第三，从生产过程看，需要更多监督成本投入，需要更严密的制度设计来防范各种机会主义行为。从宏观看，第一，更容易导致社会不平等。第二，环境保护的难度更大。第三，炫耀性消费等严重，不利于资源节约利用。第四，社会管理成本大。第五，利己本质不利于技术创新，尤其不利于发挥技术的社会效益。第六，会放大信息不对称问题。

    所以，所谓“斯密悖论”，实际应是斯密在理论认识上的一个欠缺，是其理论上逻辑不清楚所导致的一个“悖论”，而实际的社会经济实践，并不存在“悖论”。经济发展的真正动力，是利他，而不是利己。利己只有经过特定的制度约束，让利己变为利他形式，才能转换为经济发展的真正动力。

   由于利他才是社会经济发展的真正动力，所以，社会经济发展，我们一定要惩恶扬善。惩恶，就是要通过各种制度设计，严密防范各种不合理的利己主义，使利己主义转换为社会正能量，成为经济发展的正向动力。扬善，就是要采取各种有效措施，大力弘扬社会的利他精神，让正向动力更充足。

Song Guiwu's viewpoint 5: "Smith's paradox" does not exist in essence

Professor Song Guiwu of the Party School of Gansu Provincial Committee believes that "Smith's paradox" does not exist in essence.Professor Song Guiwu said: The so-called "Smith's paradox" refers to the different value tendencies reflected in the two books of "The Theory of Moral Sentiments" and "The Wealth of Nations".In the book "The Theory of Moral Sentiments", Smith tends to be the driving force of economic development, while in the book "The Wealth of Nations", Smith tends to be the driving force of economic development. Therefore, this issue was called "Smith's problem" or "Smith's paradox" by the German scholar Joseph Schumpeter. "Smith's paradox" does not exist in essence, and the real driving force of economic development is altruism, rather than selfishness.Selfishness is a reverse driving force, and only through specific institutional constraints can selfishness be transformed into a positive driving force of economic development.Why is selfishness the real driving force of economic development? For the convenience of analyzing the problem, we first make a theoretical assumption.Suppose there are two groups, one is composed of altruists, and the other is composed of selfishness. The two groups form two different societies, and there is no communication between the two societies.In addition, suppose that the people in the two groups are engaged in cooking. In this case, we analyze whether the social economy formed by selfish groups is more dynamic, or the social economy formed by altruistic groups is more dynamic. For the society formed by altruistic groups, from the micro perspective, first, from the perspective of product quality, the same is cooking, obviously altruistic groups will guarantee the quality of food, because out of altruistic purposes, altruistic groups also have a great incentive to make food delicious.Second, from the perspective of product price, altruistic groups will charge more reasonable prices, will never cheat, and eventually lead to market prices more in line with the equilibrium price characteristics.Third, from the perspective of production process, altruistic groups will inevitably spend very low costs on supervision.Because people work consciously, natural non-productive personnel will be greatly reduced, and the supervision system will not be so complex.From the macro perspective, first, because people will consider problems from the overall perspective rather than from the perspective of small groups, it is conducive to building a fair society and narrowing the gap between rich and poor.Second, altruistic groups have better environmental awareness, which is conducive to solving the problem of environmental pollution in the production process. Third, altruistic groups will have a stronger sense of conservation, which is conducive to the construction of a resource-saving society and sustainable economic development.Fourth, the social management cost of altruistic groups will be very low.Fifth, altruistic groups are more conducive to technological innovation.Because the spirit of dedication derived from altruism provides a spiritual support for technological innovation.Sixth, altruistic groups are conducive to better solve the problem of information asymmetry.The society composed of selfish groups is another economic development landscape.From a micro perspective, first, from the perspective of product quality, the quality of the meal is not necessarily guaranteed, and there is the possibility of counterfeit and shoddy products.Second, from the perspective of product price, the price of the meal is not necessarily reasonable, and there is the possibility of cheating.Third, from the perspective of production process, more supervision costs are needed, and more rigorous institutional design is needed to prevent various opportunistic behaviors.From a macro perspective, first, it is more likely to lead to social inequality.Second, it is more difficult to protect the environment.Third, conspicuous consumption is serious, which is not conducive to the conservation and utilization of resources.Fourth, the cost of social management is large.Fifth, the nature of selfishness is not conducive to technological innovation, especially not conducive to the development of technological social benefits.Sixth, it will amplify the problem of information asymmetry. Therefore, the so-called "Smith's paradox" is actually a lack of theoretical understanding by Smith, a "paradox" caused by unclear theoretical logic, but there is no "paradox" in actual social and economic practice.The real driving force of economic development is altruism, not selfishness.Selfishness can only be transformed into the real driving force of economic development through specific institutional constraints, so that selfishness can be transformed into altruism.Since altruism is the real driving force of social and economic development, we must punish evil and promote good in social and economic development.Punishing evil means that through various institutional designs, we should strictly guard against all kinds of unreasonable selfishness, so that selfishness can be transformed into positive social energy and positive driving force of economic development.Promoting good means that we should take various effective measures to vigorously promote the altruistic spirit of society and make the positive driving force more sufficient.