有限理性的“社会人”与最优行为目标——基于对新古典经济学的批判视角

Bounded Rational “Social Man” and Optimal Behavioral Goals—Based on the Critical Perspective of Neoclassical Economics

“理性经济人”和“行为目标最大化”作为西方经济学的两大假设,始于对斯密“看不见的手”的概括和提炼,究其对西方主流经济思想和理论范式的塑造,着重体现在以“假设–演绎”为特征的新古典经济学。通过简要梳理西方经济学的形成过程,本文指出:第一,新古典经济学继承并固化了由边际主义者进一步发展的“理性”假设和“最大化”目标,二者共同体现了一种机械式的均衡思想,行为经济学的“有限理性”假设有力地反驳了以新古典经济学为代表的西方主流理论的根本假设,其承认一个真实的“社会人”同时具有理性和非理性;第二,借由“Allais Paradox”指出“最大化”的目标并不一定是“最优的”,因此,“社会人”的行为目标不仅仅以经济利益为最终归宿,而是会体现出兼具经济利益与非经济利益的双重属性。

As the two major assumptions of Western economics, “rational economic man” and “maximization of behavioral goals” began with the generalization and refinement of Smith’s “invisible hand”. The shaping of the western mainstream economic thought and theoretical paradigm is mainly embodied in the neoclassical economics characterized by “hypothesization-deduction”. By briefly combing the formation process of Western economics, this paper points out that: Firstly, neoclassical economics inherits and solidifies the hypothesis of “rationality” and the goal of “maximization” further developed by marginalists, which together represent a kind of mechanical equilibrium thought. The hypothesis of “bounded rationality” of behavioral economics strongly refuted the fundamental hypothesis of western mainstream theory represented by neoclassical economics, which recognizes that a true “social man” has both rationality and irrationality. Secondly, according to “Allais Paradox”, it can be found that the goal of “maximization” is not necessarily “optimal”. Therefore, the behavioral goal of “social man” is not only the final destination of economic interests, but the dual attributes of both economic and non-economic benefits.