|
|
经济学家日历：维弗雷多·帕累托
Poun 发表于 2006-3-10 16:57:26 |
经济学家日历：维弗雷多·帕累托
www.mtpu.com
knight2005-07-10 10:07 |
|
 500)this.width=500" border=0>
Vilfredo Pareto
(July 15, 1848 - August 19, 1923)
维尔弗雷多·帕累托
（1848—1923）
（转载自《经济学季刊》第63卷第二期，1949年5月。1948年版权属于哈佛大学）
布斯凯教授在一本研究帕累托生平和著作的书中（①参见G．H．布斯凯：《维尔弗雷多·帕累托的生平和著作》（载《现代史研究、史料与考证汇编》，巴黎，1928年）。除了有关帕累托著作的数学部分的内容外，我们特别推荐这本书。此书是由一位怀着极大热情的作者写成的，他本身就是一位当之无愧的经济学家和社会学家。同时，作者又尽量避免了门生或传记撰写人的那种专门反映光荣事迹的心情。布斯凯还著有《帕累托以来的社会学概论》，并为帕累托的《社会主义体系》和《政治经济学手册》两书撰写了序言，1928年用英文写了一篇题为《维尔弗雷多·帕累托的著作》的短篇评论。此外，在《论经济思想的发展》一文中，布斯凯也为帕累托保留了光荣的地位。在其他的纪念评论文章中，只要提到所谓的官方评论就够了，它们是：阿方索·德·彼得里—托内里教授在意大利科学进步协会经济组的演讲（发表于1934年11月、12月及1935年1月的《政治经济学评论》上），以及卢吉·阿莫罗索教授于1938年1月在《计量经济学》上发表的文章。），引用了社会主义者的《前进日报》上的一篇悼念文章中的词句，把帕累托描绘为“资产阶级的卡尔·马克思”。我不知道把他这样的人称为“资产阶级”是否恰当，因为他从来没有放弃过任何对无知与懦弱的资产阶级表示蔑视的机会。至于其他方面，这种类比恰当地表达了帕累托给他的同胞们所留下的印象：他们实际上已经把他摆在了凌驾于同时代的其他经济学家和社会学家之上的显著位置上。没有别的国家为他建立类似的塑像台。而在英美世界，直到今天，人们对这位名人和思想家仍然是陌生的。诚然，在他的社会学著作被翻译出来后，这里曾出现过短暂的帕累托热，（①在哈佛，这种帕累托热以著名的生理学家、已故的L．J．亨德森教授为代表。请参阅他发表于1935年的《帕累托的普通社会学》一文。一些哈佛人仍然会记得亨德森教授的非正式的帕累托“讨论会”，实际上，“讨论会”是由这位教授的一系列独白组成的。在那里，对帕累托思想的同情、理解以及对帕累托思想的非凡伟大的深刻认识正在与一些不可避免的专业上的障碍进行坚决的斗争。）但它很快就在一种冷淡的气氛中消失了。然而就纯理论家的小圈子而言，帕累托对20世纪20年代和30年代的英美经济学产生了相当大的影响，那是在鲍利教授的《经济学的数学基础》一书出版之后。但在英国和美国，在帕氏具有优势的方面，马歇尔主义和后马歇尔主义的经济学家做了足够多的工作，甚至抢在其他思潮夺走帕累托已经占领的阵地之前，阻止他占领更多的阵地。
理论经济学的若干重要发展现在看来起源于帕累托，这一事实可能令人感到惊异。但解释起来并不困难。帕累托是法意文明的产物，这种文明远离英美思潮。即使在法意文明范围内，他的突出形象几乎也是无与伦比的。帕累托不能归入哪一学派。他不追求什么“主义”。没有什么宗派或政党声称帕氏是自己这一派的，虽然有许多宗派和政党从帕氏所掌握的广博的知识领域中盗取了一些碎片。他似乎以与占主导地位的情绪与口号背道而驰为乐。极端放任主义的信徒们可能从他的著作中寻章摘句来支持他们的观点，但是没有什么东西像自由主义的“财阀民主”或“财阀宣传”那样受到他的强烈藐视。社会主义者应该感谢他，像我们将要看到的那样，他对社会主义学说作出了一项十分重要的贡献。他还抗议意大利政府在1898年所采取的反社会主义措施。可是他不仅是一位反社会主义者，而且是出于藐视而进行讽刺批评的人。法国的天主教徒可以因为帕累托攻击了对法国教士们的迫害——这种迫害是非常不光彩的德雷福斯案（①1894年，法国军事当局诬告犹太血统的法国军官德雷福斯（Alfred Dreyfus，1859—1935）出卖国防机密给德国的事件。德雷福斯被判终身苦役。当事实证明为诬告后，当局拒绝重审，导致民主力量（德雷福斯派）与反动势力（反德雷福斯派）之间的尖锐政治斗争。在舆论压力下，1899年德雷福斯被政府宣告无罪，1906年复职。——编辑注
）的后续——而感谢他。他还反对孔贝部长的“政权还俗主义”政策，因为他是一位绅士，而不是因为他相信天主教会的教义。
帕累托就是这样一位独立性和好斗性强的绅士，他习惯于在辩论当中给予对手强有力的抨击，可能在这一派或那一派人中得到赞同，但很难有机会受到普遍欢迎。此刻他已成为过去的人物。但是即使在他事业的全盛时期，我们所熟悉的政治和社会口号统治着官方语言、报纸、政党纲领以及一般文献，其中也包括经济文献，帕累托表达其严谨的科学成果的材料也不比现在更为流行。一个人只要感染上充斥于美国教科书中的精神，当他翻开帕累托的《政治经济学讲义》时，就会认识到下面这句话的涵义：“现代社会主义信仰和口号的天真爱好者，一定会感到自己被棍棒赶出帕累托的家门；爱好者所阅读的是自己永远不肯承认其真实性的东西，他同时也阅读了大量的令人为难的实例。”因此，现在的问题似乎不在于解释为什么帕累托没有产生更广泛的影响，而在于解释帕累托是如何产生这么大影响的。
如果我们能把自己的视线控制在帕累托对纯粹理论的贡献范围内，就不需要对这位人物、他的社会背景及地位进行回顾了。但是完整的帕累托以及制约他的一切力量，都明白无误地与不属于经济学纯粹逻辑原理的任何事情有关，因此有关其人及那些制约力量的评价比科学成就评价中的类似内容更重要、有益。我将首先试图表达这种意见，然后简略地评述一下他在纯粹理论方面的工作，最后，我将看一下他在《普通社会学》一书中作了不充分表述的关于社会的概念。（①由罗科与斯皮内迪两位先生在1924年的《经济学家杂志》上提供的书目大体上较为完整，但是我们必须提出下列各种参考资料：《关于纯粹政治经济学基本理论的研究》；《洛桑大学政治经济学讲义》；（巴黎高级社会研究学院讲义得要》；《社会主义体系》；《政治经济学手册》（1906年）；《政治经济学手册》（1909年），这是前一本书的法文译本，但我们必须把它单独列出来，因为其中的数学附录完全是重新编写而成的；《普通社会学》（1916年），法文译本（1919年），英文译本名为《心灵与社会》（1935年）；法文版《数学科学百科全书》中的《数理经济学》（1911年），该书原来德文版中的相应论文并不重要。另外还有一些书和不计其数的论文，但据我所知（帕累托在日报上发表了许多论文，其中大多数我不知道），它们所包含的具有科学性质的内容，都已包括在前面所提到的出版物里了。）
一、生平
帕累托的父亲、热那亚人马尔凯塞·拉斐尔·帕累托似乎是19世纪上半叶意大利复兴运动的典型产物、马志尼（②马志尼（Giuseppe Mazzini，1805—1872）意大利民族解放运动（复兴运动）中民主共和派的领袖。曾加入烧炭党，后被捕，被驱逐出国。1831年在法国马赛创立青年意大利党。参加1848年意大利革命，为1849年罗马共和国三头政治的领导人之一。1860年支持加里波第对西西里和那不勒斯的远征，提出建立共和国的主张，未果。19世纪60年代，宣传在“劳资合作”和“生产合作社”的基础上解决工人问题。——编辑注）的热情拥护者——或许较多地由于国家原因而不是由于社会原因——他是“阻碍意大利走向全国统一的一切政府”的毫不妥协的敌人，而且是在这一意义上而不是在其他意义上的一位革命家。因此他流亡国外，逃到巴黎，娶了一位法国妻子。本文的主人公在那里出生了。如果加雷尼将军曾经把自己描述为“法国人但也是意大利人”，那么维尔弗雷多·帕累托也可以把自己说成是“意大利人但也是法国人”。他于1858年被带回意大利受学校教育，1869年获得了工程学博士学位。他立即从事工程学和工业管理工作，并在几次调换工作以后升任意大利钢铁公司的总经理——应该是“董事长”——直到1893年，他才到洛桑大学，并被任命为瓦尔拉的继承人，虽然几年前他就已经可以算得上是专职的经济学家了。这样，他主要从事经济学研究的时间大约是1892-1912年，后来他的全部工作实际上都是社会学性质的。1906年，他辞去教授职务，退休回到位于日内瓦湖畔的乡村的家里。在充满旺盛精力和富有成果的老年阶段，他成为“塞利尼的孤独思想家”。
上述情况基本上已满足了我们的需要。我们必须强调这些事实中的若干部分，而不是添加其他事实。首先，理论家们会注意到，由于他受过工程学的训练——而且他似乎形成了理论观点——他早年所掌握的数学知识已达到专家水平（①我不能准确地说明这水平有多高。帕累托需要沃尔泰拉告诉他。Xdx＋ Ydy表达式经常有无限多的积分因子，而当它有两个以上变数时就不需要这样的因子存在。我不知道一位真正的专家能否忽略这一点。）。其次，值得注意的是，他已是一位非同寻常的经济学家，他完全熟悉工业实际，从某种意义上说，这与学院经济学家、公务员和政治家靠所能利用的方法获得的熟悉、精通程度是十分不同的。但是，第三，正因为他对当时的经济政策和一般政策表现出了强烈兴趣，才使得他在开始创造性工作之前，差不多就已是一位经济学家了，关于这一点我们将马上在另一处加以评述。弗朗西斯科·费拉拉当时仍然声名卓著，而自由主义者不加批判地赞美的那种理论结构仍然没有遭到冷遇。费拉拉的著作，特别是发表于《经济学家文库》中为古典经济学著作而写的著名序言使帕累托深受教益，其影响不亚于甚至超过了帕氏学生时代的大学课程。帕累托对瓦尔拉著作的研究则源于马费奥·潘塔莱奥尼为建议。
上述事实没有一样能全面地说明帕累托的社会和政治观点，或者说明他对那个时代和意大利的实际问题的态度。我绝不相信他的个性能像极易被抽干的池塘一样轻易地被人了解。但是，贵族出身对他的影响多于对一般人的影响，我相信所有认识他的人都会同意这一点，特别是这一背景使他不能与现实生活中的人们在精神上成为兄弟，不能成为在各种团体中完全被接受的成员。它也阻碍了他同那些资产阶级思想的产物建立感情联系，例如被称作“民主”和“资本主义”的孪生兄弟。这一背景的作用是，使他有足够维持生活的经济收入——起初勉强够用，后来变得相当富裕了（①这是由于继承了一份遗产，而不是由于早年担任总经理所致。）——使得他更加离群索居，因为这为帕累托提供了把自己孤立起来的条件。
在这样的背景下，他的古典学识按同样的方式起着作用。我所说的不是他与同时代受过教育的每个人共享的那部分古典学识，而是他通过不懈地研究希腊与罗马的古典作品，经历许多不眠之夜后形成的属于自己的那部分古典理论。古代世界是一座博物馆，而不是一间应用科学的实验室。他太相信那里面所积累的智慧，结果必然会远离生活于1890年或1920年的任何人群。参加本国的政策和政治辩论使得他完全孤立，以至于在接受洛桑大学邀请之前，他就已决定移居瑞士。孤立对他的暴躁脾气有影响——只是在晚年，第二次结婚所带来的家庭和睦才使他脾气好些——而暴躁脾气实质上是不能容忍孤独的。
但他为什么怀着极其愤怒的心情离开了自己的祖国？他从内心深处热爱她，祖国的新生不但是他所渴望的，而且是他亲眼看见了的。公正的观察家很可能提出这一问题，因为在这样的观察家看来，似乎在帕氏离开祖国以前的30年里，这个新的民族国家的情形不算太糟。除了以相当快的速度促进经济增长和从财政混乱中解脱出来以外——得向我们的凯恩斯主义者们表示歉意——这个国家首先采取的措施是进行社会立法，并成功地把意大利建成当时所谓的列强之一。从这一角度来看问题，我们的观察家们将会对阿戈斯蒂诺·德普雷蒂这样的政权表示极大的尊敬。而且考虑到新的民族国家在初创阶段容易遇到的困难，观察家们会原谅那些不太令人高兴的情景。但是帕累托没有任何原谅的表示。他所看到的只是无能与腐败。他怀着公正的愤怒与走马灯似的政府进行战斗，于是那时他就成了公认的极端自由主义者——在19世纪其涵义就是自由放任主义的毫不妥协的鼓吹者——而且在那个时期的德国新政者们中间，他帮助造成这样的印象，即边际效用只是被用来反对改革者的邪恶诡计。（①因此，德国的批评家接受了他的《政治经济学讲义》。事实上书中很少含有可作不同解释的内容。但是它包含有这样的观点：在这里所断言的纯粹的竞争的优点对实际经济过程不起任何作用，因为纯粹的竞争实际上没有普遍盛行。）关于帕累托对经济政策问题的态度以及1900年以前他在科学著作中所留下的深刻痕迹，这可能就是全部的内容了。但是即使在那时，在他的那种极端自由主义的思想中仍然有些东西是直接反对官方自由主义的教条和口号的。他确实是一位反国家干预主义者，但这是出于政治理由，而不是出于纯粹经济的理由：与英国古典经济学家不同，他不反对政府活动本身，但是反对议会民主制的政府，反对英国古典经济学家热烈拥护的那种议会民主制的政府。从这一点来看，他这种类型的自由放任主义有了引申意义，与英国式的自由放任主义完全不同。只要我们认识到这一点，其他的就容易理解了。
在19世纪末和本世纪前20年中，越来越多的法国人也意大利人开始表示不满，从单纯地表示失望，发展到对议会民主不断更迭的方式及其在法国和意大利所产生的后果表示强烈厌恶。有这类情绪的人有很多，如E．法盖和G．索雷尔，而他们并不属于任何一个党派。分析这些情绪不是本文的目的所在，更不用说去评判它们了。对我们来说，重要的是存在着这些情绪，而且，晚年的帕累托之所以在这种思想潮流中显得突出，是因为他在同时代的人们中更为突出，还因为他写了一部社会学方面的著作——还有索雷尔和莫斯卡的著作——使这些情绪合理化了。
英国人和美国人忘记了特殊的和历史上独特的情况，这些情况使他们在心目中产生了同样特殊和独特的对议会民主制的态度，他们怀疑帕累托对法西斯主义的态度的可能意义。不过他的这种态度一点也不成问题，不需要用什么理论去加以解释。1914-1922年的事件已经把他召回了政治辩论的舞台。他发表的有关第一次世界大战的起源、凡尔赛和约的失策以及国际联盟的无能等的精辟分析都是最强有力的论述，虽然这些文章在意大利以外的地方没有引起反响。但是他毕竟目击了带有某种恐怖色彩的意大利社会的解体，这是只有亲眼看到才会相信的。
他把这些年间的一切动乱都归因于颓废的资产阶级政治制度的软弱性。这位罗马史学者可能想到罗马共和国元老院使用过的一个方案，即：为了应付紧急局面，元老院常常命令执政官们任命一位实际上具有无限权力——虽然是临时权力——的官员，即独裁者。执政官应该注意不使国家利益受到损害。但是在意大利宪法里没有这一条款，而且即使有了这一条款，也不会有任何好处。因此，独裁者必须自己任命自己。帕累托决不曾超越这一界限，也不曾超越只赞成墨索里尼恢复秩序所取得的成就这一界限。墨索里尼为了标榜自己，向这位始终宣传温和主义、始终主张新闻自由和学术自由的人授予参议员职位。（①参阅《维尔弗雷多·帕累托的生平和著作）第182－194页相关叙述。）但直到去世前，帕累托都拒绝信奉这种“主义”，就像他拒绝信奉任何其他主义一样。从英美世界的传统观点来看，没有任何必要去裁判他的行为——他的任何行为或情绪。
其他任何事情都沉在“池塘”的底部。
Vilfredo Pareto, 1848-1923
The Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto was one of the leaders of the Lausanne School and an illustrious member of the "second generation" of the Neoclassical revolution.Although only mildly influential during his lifetime, his "tastes-and-obstacles" approach to general equilibrium theory were resurrected during the great "Paretian Revival" of the 1930s and have guided much of economics since.
Vilfredo Pareto was born in the year of people's revolutions at its epicenter -- Paris, 1848 -- to an Italian aristocratic family.His father, a Ligurian marchese (marquis) and civil engineer, had fled to Paris in 1835 in self-imposed exile,following the example of Mazzini and other Italian nationalists. Vilfredo was the third child (and first son) of his marriage to a Frenchwoman.
The Pareto family returned to Piedmont circa 1858. Following his father's footsteps, Vilfredo Pareto studied classics and then engineering at the Polytechnic Institute of Turin.It was here that he acquired his proficiency in mathematics and his basic ideas about mechanical equilibrium that were to characterize his later contributions to economics.After graduating at the top of his class in 1870, Pareto took his first job as a director of the Rome Railway Company.In 1874, Pareto become the managing director of an iron and steel concern, the Societ?Ferriere d'Italia in Florence.
Pareto's stay in Florence was marked by political activity, much of it fuelled by his own frustrations with government regulators. After the Cavourist liberal government was replaced with a more interventionist government in Italy in 1876, Pareto was quick to identify the vested political interests that lay behind economic regulation, protectionism and nationalization that proceeded.A democratic republican and free-trader by instinct, Pareto deplored aristocratic and government corporatism.He saw the new Italian parliamentary system as a sham, a "pluto-democracy", a fig leaf for the naked power of the nobility and the wealthy.He sided with the radical democratic movements and the liberals whom, he believed, would replace privilege with meritocracy, restore real democracy, pursue free trade and true competition and promote social welfare.Pareto ran unsuccessfully for office on an opposition platform in the district of Pistoiain 1882.
In 1889, after the death of his parents, Pareto changed his lifestyle.He inherited the marchese title, but he never used it.Instead, he quit his job, married a penniless Russian girl from Venice, Alessandrina Bakunin, and moved to a villa in Fiesole.From his retreat, he began writing numerous polemical articles against the government and gave public lectures at a working man's institute.He was quickly targeted as a troublemaker by the authorities.Trailed by police, intimidated by hired thugs, his lectures were often closed down and his applications for teaching jobs blocked. (incidentally, being well-trained with the sword, a crack shot with a pistol and equipped with an aristocratic sense of honor, Pareto never let himself be physically intimidated).
His activities brought him to the attention of Maffeo Pantaleoni, then Italy's leading Neoclassical economist. A friendship sparked between the two men, and Pantaleoni introduced Pareto to economic theory, particularly the Walrasian strand.Pareto, a quick learner with exceptionally good mathematical aptitude, took to it immediately and published several theoretical articles in the Giornale degli economisti.
In the meantime, L閛n Walras was looking for someone to take over his chair in political economy at the University of Lausanne in Switzerland.Pantaleoni recommended Pareto to him -- "He is an engineer like you; he is an economist not like you, but wishing to become like you, if you help him."Walras and Pareto disagreed on many economic policy issues such as free trade and the role of the State.They also had opposing temperaments -- Walras was a timid, bourgeois idealist while Pareto remained his caustic, disputatious, aristocratic self.In spite of this, Walras decided that Pareto ought to succeed him.Pareto was appointed in 1893, and his position at Lausanne made permanent in 1894.Although courteous and respectful to each other in public, Walras and Pareto did not get along very well.
Doubtlessly, there were many people in Italy who were glad to see Pareto safely hidden away in Switzerland.But from his new academic perch, Pareto's nerve only increased.His attacks on the Italian government continued in his monthly column to the Giornale degli economisti and in foreign journals.He assisted and even housed many socialists and radicals that had been chased out of Italy (particularly after the 1898 May riots).When the Dreyfus affair broke in France, Pareto put his poison to work against the anti-Semitic authorities.
Pareto also set himself to work, producing a three-volume edition of his lecture notes, Cours d'閏onomie politique (1896, 1897).This was more than merely an restatement of the doctrines of the Lausanne School.Interspersed with his presentations of pure economic theory were numerous asides on methodology and applied economics and extensive sociological observations. His recent reading of Karl Marx and Social Darwinists like Herbert Spencer leaves its imprimatur.Mathematics was neatly relegated to footnotes and corners.
In the Cours, his main economic contributions was his exposition of "Pareto's Law" of income distribution.He argued that in all countries and times, the distribution of income and wealth follows a regular logarithmic pattern that can be captured by the formula:
log N = log A + m log x
where where N is the number of income earners who receive incomes higher than x, and A and m are constants.Over the years, Pareto's Law has proved remarkably resilient in empirical studies.
Pareto was also troubled with the concept of "utility".In its common usage, utility meant the well-being of the individual or society, but Pareto realized that when people make economic decisions, they are guided by what they think is desirable for them, whether or not that corresponds to their well-being. Thus, he introduced the term "ophelimity" to replace the worn-out "utility". Preferences was what Pareto wanted to get at.
Another contribution of the Cours was Pareto's criticism of the marginal productivity theory of distribution, pointing out that it would fail in situations where there is imperfect competition or limited substitutability between factors.He'd repeat his criticisms in future writings.
Also of importance was Pareto's observation that since the equilibrium is merely a solution to a set of simultaneous equations, then it is at least theoretically possible that a socialist or collectivist economy could "calculate" this solution and so attain exactly the same outcome as in a system guided by free markets. This proposition was picked up and extended by Enrico Barone and became the first shot of the famous socialist calculation debate, .
In a famous 1900 Rivista article, Pareto suddenly changed direction.Heretofore a radical democrat, Pareto now decided to declare himself an anti-democrat.The disturbances of the 1890s in Italy and France led Pareto to realize that, far from restoring true democracy, meritocracy and promoting social welfare, the radical movements were really just seeking to replace one 閘ite with another 閘ite, the privileges and structures of power remaining intact.The struggle was not for a good society, but a squabble among 閘ites over whom exactly was to going to govern.And the ideals and theories they claimed to fight for?Just propaganda, Pareto declared, the way upwardly-mobile folks incite the helpless, hopeless mob to take to the streets on their behalf.For Pareto, humanitarianism, liberalism, socialism, communism, fascism, whatever, were all the same in the end. All ideologies were just smokescreens foisted by "leaders" who really only aspired to enjoy the privileges and powers of the governing 閘ite.
Pareto decided to have none of it -- and went on a crusade to expose the sham of political ideology and doctrine.He condemned socialists of all stripes roundly in a 1902 book, but took particular aim at logically demolishing the "new gospel" of Marxian economics. As revealed in the Cours and in his own introduction to an abridged 1893 edition of Karl Marx's Capital, Pareto applauded Marxian theories of class struggle and even thought historical materialism was on the right track (albeit not deep and general enough, in his view).But he deplored Marx's Wizard-of-Oz-like conclusion.For Pareto, class struggle is eternal; the promised "classless" society that would emerge under communism was merely ideological fodder for socialist leaders to lay on their flock.Of course, as a good Neoclassical, Pareto could notfathom the labor theory of value either.
In 1906, Pareto published his Manual of Political Economy, his magnum opus on pure economics and moved him out of the shadow of Walras.Unlike the Cours, the Manual concentrates on presenting pure economics in an explicitly mathematical form (especially after it was heavily revised for the 1909 French edition).The Walrasian equations are still there, but the focus is on formulating equilibrium in terms of solutions to individual problems of "objectives and contraints".To illustrate this, the indifference curve of Edgeworth (1881) was employed extensively -- both in his theory of the consumer and, another great novelty, in his theory of the producer.It is in the Manual that we find the first representation of what has since become known (and misnamed) as the "Edgeworth-Bowley" box.
Like Irving Fisher (1892), Pareto stumbled on the idea that cardinal utility could be dispensed with.Preferences were the primitive datum, and utility a mere representation of preference-ordering. With this, Pareto not only inaugurated modern microeconomics, but he also demolished the "unholy alliance" of economics and utilitarianism.In its stead, he introduced the notion of Pareto-optimality, the idea that a society is enjoying maximum ophelimity when no one can be made better off without making someone else worse off. (for more details, see our discussion of the Paretian general equilibrium system).
His sociological observations also begin to indicate the future course of his ideas.In 1900, Pareto had entered into a brief controversy in the Giornale degli economisti with Benedetto Croce.Croce had criticized economists' positivistic approach, particularly the assumption of "rational economic man". Pareto defended economists, but, at the same time, realized that the conventional defense was not even convincing enough to himself.Why did the predictions of economics fail to correspond to reality?Why were its policy recommendations, to him logically irrefutable, not adopted?The explanation, he concluded, echoing Georges Sorel, was simply that much of human activity was driven not by logical action, but rather by non-logical action.On this, of course, economics has nothing to say -- which is why, ultimately, economics will always fail empirically.Pareto realized that he had to move beyond economics to look for his answer.
Pareto retired from his chair at Lausanne in 1907, gradually passing on his teaching responsibilities to Pasquale Boninsegni. He moved to Villa Angora in C閘igny, near Lake Geneva.There he was nursing a heart disease, surrounded by a dozen cats, his enormous personal library, a cellar full of superb wines and a large cabinet of exquisite liquers.His wife ran off in 1901, but, as an Italian citizen, he could not legally divorce her.A Frenchwoman, Jane R間is moved in shortly afterwards, and they remained devoted companions for the rest of his life. He only married her in 1923, after he became a citizen of the city-state of Fiume and thus overcame the legal obstacles to divorce.
Pareto used his time at C閘igny to write his Trattato di sociologia generale, which was finally published, after wartime delays,in 1916.This was his great sociological masterpiece. He explains how human action can be neatly reduced to residue and derivation.People act on the basis of non-logical sentiments (residues) and invent justifications for them afterwards (derivations). The derivation is thus just the content and form of the ideology itself.But the residues are the real underlying problem, the particular cause of the squabbles that leads to the "circulation of 閘ites". The underlying residue, he thought, was the only proper object of sociological enquiry.
Residues are non-logical sentiments, rooted in the basic aspirations and drives of people.He identifies six classes of residues, all of which are present but unevenly distributed across people -- so the population is always a heterogeneous, differentiated mass of different psychic-types. The most important residues are Class I the "instinct for combining" (innovation) and Class II, the "persistence of aggregates" (conservation). Class I types rule by guile, and are calculating, materialistic and innovating.Class II types rule by force and are more bureaucratic, idealistic and conservative.
Pareto's theory of society claimed that there was a tendency to return to an equilibrium where a balanced amount of Class I and Class II people are present in the governing 閘ites. People are always entering and leaving the 閘ite thereby tending to restore the natural balance.On occasion, when it gets too lopsided, an 閘ite will be replaced en masse by another If there are too many Class I people in a governing 閘ites, this means that violent, conservative Class II's are in the lower echelons, itching and capable of taking power when the Class I's finally make a mess of things by too much cunning and corruption (he regarded Napoleon III's France and the Italian "pluto-democratic" system as an example).If the governing 閘ite is composed mostly of Class II types, then it will fall into a bureaucratic, inefficient and reactionary mess, easy prey for calculating upwardly-mobile Class I's (e.g. Tsarist Russia).
Pareto colored his sociological theory with numerous classical and contemporary illustrations of his theory.He published two more books (1920, 1921) expanding on the theme.His quasi-mystical arguments about the non-logical motivations attracted many Italian Fascists (Mussolini himself claimed to have attended his lectures at Lausanne).Pareto, however, was largely disdainful of the Fascist movement -- he never had patience for ideologies or ideologues -- but he found them quite amusing.When Mussolini's small band of Class II Fascists marched on Rome in 1922 and brought the whole Class I-dominated Italian government tumb*** down, Pareto mumbled triumphantly in his sick-bed, "I told you so!".He was not unhappy at the turn of events.
The Fascists showered Pareto with honors from afar, making him a Senator of the Kingdom of Italy, inviting him to join the Italian delegation to the Geneva Disarmament Conference, asking him to contribute to the Fascist party periodicals, etc.He declined most of the honors, but spoke favorably of certain early reforms undertaken by the Fascists.However, he also warned them to avoid despotism, censorship and economic corporatism.When the Fascists clamped down on freedom of expression in Italian universities, Pareto managed to rouse himself to write a protest.
Pareto died a mere ten months into Mussolini's reign -- before the uglier aspects of Fascism became obvious.The Fascists continuedto use his name unreservedly to give intellectual veneer to their movement.Writing in 1938 on the legacy of Pareto, the economist (and Fascist) Luigi Amoroso would have the gumption to write (and Econometrica the editorial lapse to publish) the following:
"Just as the weaknesses of the flesh delayed, but could not prevent, the triumph of Saint Augustine, so a rationalistic vocation retarded but did not impede the flowering of the mysticism of Pareto. For that reason, Fascism, having become victorious, extolled him in life, and glorifies his memory, like that of a confessor of its faith."(Luigi Amoroso, "Vilfredo Pareto", Econometrica, 1938: p.21)
Despite his association with Fascism, Pareto's sociological work has been taken seriously, going through recurring phases of popularity andcritical scrutiny. Freudian psychology has given much weight to some of his notions.It is not so much its main thrust, but its roughness, simplicity and incompleteness that are the main sources of complaint.
Pareto's economics have had a much greater impact.Pareto managed to construct a proper school around himself at Lausanne, including G.B. Antonelli, Boninsegni, Amoroso and others as disciples.Outside this small group, his work also influenced W.E. Johnson, Eugen Slutsky and Arthur Bowley.But Pareto's big break came posthumously in the 1930s and 1940s, a period which we have decided to call the "Paretian Revival".His "tastes-and-obstacles" approach to demand were resurrected by John Hicks and R.G.D. Allen (1934) and extended and popularized by John Hicks (1939), Maurice Allais (1943) and Paul Samuelson (1947).Pareto's work on welfare were resurrected by Harold Hotel***, Oskar Lange and the "New Welfare Economics" movement.Finally, Pareto's ruminations on the potential efficiency of a collectivist society were aired in the Socialist Calculation Debate that arose between the Paretians and the Austrians.
小传
维弗雷多·帕累托（1848年7月15日 - 1923年8月19日），意大利经济学家、社会学家，对经济学，社会学和伦理学做出了很多重要的贡献，特别是在收入分配的研究和个人选择的分析中。 他提出了帕累托最优的概念，并用无异曲线来帮助发展了个体经济学领域。他的理论影响了墨索里尼和意大利法西斯主义的发展。
帕累托因对意大利20%的人口拥有80%的财产的观察而著名，后来被约瑟夫·朱兰和其他人概括为帕累托法则（20/80法则），后来进一步概括为帕累托分布的概念。
帕累托指数是指对收入分布不均衡的程度的度量，参见基尼系数。
| |
|
发表评论：
|
