关于商品对人类福利贡献的研究(英文)

On the Contribution of Commodities to Well-Being

毫无疑问,商品消费在人类福利的实现过程中发挥着非常重要的作用。但是,商品并不总对我们的福利有贡献,其甚至会使我们的福利受损。因此,随之产生的问题便是:"商品是如何及在什么条件下对我们的福利有贡献?"本文即试图从哲学视角回答这两个问题且形成一些政策建议。福利通常被定义为一个人的利益所在。然而,对什么是一个人的利益所在却有着不同的解释。根据福利的偏好满足观,我们想要的便是对我们有益的;实体价值观意味着一些客观、可确定的价值是对每一个人都有益的;享乐主义则认为愉快是唯一的实体价值。我认为,要为福利做出任何可信的阐释,个人偏好必须在其中发挥重要的作用;特别是只有在我们的终极偏好得以实现时,它才会对福利作出贡献。工具性偏好也许是错误的,它或许会导致人们终极目标的落空。基于对福利的讨论,本文考察了商品和福利之间的联系。我们不太可能对商品有终极性偏好,因此,我们或不会因自己的选择而降低了自身的福祉。在现实生活中,我们却观察到因商品消费而致使福利损失的现象,例如,食用变质食品而得病。可见,我们尤为关心的是一件商品所提供的特质而非直接的商品的本身。当然,即使一件商品包含了被冀望得到的特质,对该商品的消费也不总会提高福利,原因在于我们有可能缺乏使用这些对我们有益的属性的能力。一言以蔽之,我们通过消费而旨在实现的实际上是那些有价值的机能(functionings)。我们的生活恰恰由这些"存在(beings)"和"活动(doings)"组成,其质量也就可以通过机能的质量来判断。机能是我们终极偏好的目标,而商品只是实现终极偏好的工具。这里关于商品对人类福利贡献的解释可成功地用以处理各种可能出现的目标。我们不需进一步论述机能和福利之间的关系:愉快不是我们一生追求的全部,它更应被看作是一种特定的机能。类似地,对于自由、能力等概念,我们都可以有同样的理解。商品从不会直接影响我们的福利。换言之,存在内在价值的商品也会在工具层面有益于我们,因为前者贡献了某些有价值的机能。总之,商品对人类福利的作用并不受制于福利诠释的选择;在福利的实体价值观和偏好满足观框架中,这一逻辑是成立的。为使商品对福利有积极、正面的贡献,消费过程须满足两个条件。首先,商品需具备贡献有价值的机能的特性;其次,消费者将这些特性转换成有价值机能的能力。理解这些条件有助于我们形成提高消费者福利水平的政策。在商品供应充足的情况下,政策的首要目标必须是向消费者提供信息和教育,从而使之能够作出有效的选择。如果人们被剥夺了基本机能(如营养或健康),公共权力部门会经常性地直接向其提供必需的商品。他们必须确保解决这些根本问题的方法是最有效的,而且在商品提供过程中还应兼顾社会和文化结构等背景因素的影响。对商品和福利之间的关系进行详尽的考察可以让我们学到很多东西。消费者理论中消费者对商品信息完全掌握的假设事实上已将选择与福利视为等价,它忽视了消费过程中减少福利的所有问题。当我们允许这些问题发生时,我们才会明白这些错误到底是来自何处。福利的偏好满足的哲学理念及其实际应用都存在着一个关键问题:人们经常想得到的和最终选择的事物往往对他们毫无益处。本文的研究表明,这一问题通常因缺乏信息和能力而起。增进对商品的了解会提高改福利;不过,商品只是消费过程中的一个因素,政府更应关注商品的特定属性及人们应用这些属性的能力。

Consuming commodities and achieving well-being is, obviously, closely connected. This paper investigates how and under what conditions commodities contribute to our well-being. The discussion is based on philosophical theories of well-being and leads to some concrete policy recommendations interpretation of well-being as the The argument proceeds from the satisfaction of preferences. It is, however, not dependent on this view but works equally well for alternative conceptions of well-being. A person＇s well-being is defined as what is in her interest. Achieving what we want must play an important role for our well-being. Yet, it will only make us do better if we achieve what we ultimately, not instrumentally, prefer. And we often make mistakes when trying to achieve these ultimate goals. Looking at the steps where consumption errors occur provides an insight into the consumption process. These are the causal links that connect our instrumental preferences for commodities to our ultimate preferences. Sometimes we make mistakes because we have false beliefs about the characteristics of a commodity, sometimes about our ability to use the commodity for our purposes. The ultimate purpose of consumption is to be able to do or be something, such as learning or being healthy. The consumption process can then be described as a conversion of the characteristics of commodities into these doings and beings, our ＇functionings＇. This definition of the consumption process provides two conditions for a positive contribution of commodities to well-being： （ 1 ） A commodity＇s characteristics must contribute to some valuable functioning and （ 2 ） the consumer must have the ability to convert these characteristics into some valuable functioning. These conditions can help direct public policy, for example, by placing an emphasis on educating consumers to make better choices and thereby to improve their well-being. Moreover, it becomes clear that the provision of commodities will only alleviate poverty if it addresses people＇s basic functionlngs within their specific contexts. Understanding the relationship between commodities and well-being is therefore key in devising more effective policies; this study is a step in that direction.