On the Humanistic Economic Attributes of Chinese-Path Modernization

I. From Modernization to Chinese-Path Modernization

一、从现代化到中国式现代化

Since the end of the 19th century, generation after generation of Chinese people with lofty ideals have stepped forward one after another, leading the Chinese people in a strenuous exploration of the path to national modernization. After the founding of New China, especially after the basic completion of the task of socialist transformation of the relations of production, the Communist Party of China took building a powerful, socialist, modernized industrial country as its goal of struggle. The First National People's Congress, convened in 1954, for the first time explicitly proposed the task of realizing the modernization of industry, agriculture, transportation, and national defense.[1]1 “Species-being” (Gattungswesen) is a concept used by the young Marx, particularly in the *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*, to refer to humanity’s essential, universal, and creative nature, which is alienated under capitalism. The Third National People's Congress, convened in 1964, formally established the grand goal of the "Four Modernizations," proposing to build China into a powerful socialist country with modern agriculture, modern industry, modern national defense, and modern science and technology within a not-too-long historical period. After reform and opening up, China reaffirmed the development goal of the "Four Modernizations." In 1979, Comrade Deng Xiaoping proposed striving for a per capita gross national product of US$1,000 and entering a state of moderate prosperity. Comrade Deng Xiaoping called this goal "Chinese-style modernization," that is, a "moderately prosperous society." Later, Comrade Deng Xiaoping further pointed out the need to comprehensively realize the modernization of agriculture, industry, national defense, and science and technology.

自19世纪末以来，中国一代又一代的仁人志士前仆后继，带领着中国人民奋力探索实现国家现代化的道路。新中国成立后，尤其是在生产关系的社会主义改造任务基本完成后，中国共产党就把建设一个强大的社会主义的现代化工业国家作为奋斗目标。1954年召开的第一届全国人民代表大会第一次明确提出要实现工业现代化、农业现代化、交通运输业现代化和国防现代化的任务。(1)1964年召开的第三届全国人民代表大会正式确立“四个现代化”的宏伟目标，提出要在不太长的历史时期内，把中国建设成为一个具有现代农业、现代工业、现代国防和现代科学技术的社会主义强国。改革开放以后，中国重新明确了“四个现代化”的发展目标。1979年，邓小平同志提出，争取人均国民生产总值达到1000美元，进入小康状态。邓小平同志把这个目标称为“中国式的现代化”，即“小康之家”。后来，邓小平同志进一步指出要全面实现农业、工业、国防和科学技术的现代化。

The process of China building a modern socialist country is a process of continuously combining the general stipulations of modernization with Chinese characteristics. The Communist Party of China has been actively exploring a path to modernization with Chinese characteristics. After the 18th National Congress of the CPC, China's confidence and determination to take the path of a powerful modern socialist country with Chinese characteristics were further consolidated and enhanced. The report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC formally proposed the important expression "Chinese-path modernization" for the first time. This expression embodies a high degree of unity between historical logic and theoretical logic. On the one hand, it is a historical summary of the experiences and lessons gained from exploring the path to modernization in China and even globally up to the present; on the other hand, it is also a profound reflection on modernization theory up to the present. Based on China's status and influence as the world's largest, most successfully developing country that still possesses strong development momentum and potential, Chinese-path modernization, whether as a practical model or a theoretical paradigm, is bound to have a significant impact worldwide.

中国建设社会主义现代化国家的过程，就是不断地将现代化的一般规定和中国特色结合的过程，中国共产党一直在积极探索中国特色的现代化之路。党的十八大后，中国走中国特色社会主义现代化强国之路的信心和决心得到了进一步巩固和提升。党的二十大报告首次正式提出中国式现代化的重要表述，该表述体现了历史逻辑和理论逻辑的高度统一。一方面，它是对迄今为止中国乃至全球探索现代化之路所取得的经验和教训的历史总结；另一方面，它也是对迄今为止的现代化理论的一种深刻反思。基于中国是世界上最大、发展最成功且仍具强大发展动能和势能的发展中国家的地位和影响，中国式现代化，无论是作为一种实践模式，还是作为一种理论范式，都必将在世界范围内产生重大影响。

Over the past three centuries or so, the Western model of modernization and its narrative system have had a major impact on countries around the world, shaping the form of modernization in the vast majority of countries and regions. After the 1990s, when the "end of history" thesis emerged accordingly, claims that modernization equals Westernization, that modernization is based on the so-called "universal" development model of Western history, were promoted and disseminated to other regions. In other words, arguments became active that economies with huge differences in systems and culture converge or tend towards an "ideal type" of Western modernization form.

最近3个多世纪以来，西方的现代化模式与叙事体系对世界各国产生了重大影响，形塑了绝大多数国家和地区的现代化形态。20世纪90年代后，在历史终结论应运而生之时，现代化就是西方化、现代化就是基于西方历史的所谓“普世”发展模式等说法向其他地区推广和扩散，或者说，体制和文化存在巨大差异的经济体向着一个类似于“理想类型”的西方现代化形态趋同或收敛等论调活跃起来。

In the social sciences, there has never been a research field like modernization studies that possesses such great internal tension. Within this field, almost all research and its conclusions are products of the combination of analytical scientific argumentation and the implicit role of ideology. In the field of modernization or development theory research, disciplines such as history, political science, economics, sociology, anthropology, and psychology all have broad space for participation. And on aspects such as world order, the state, the market, community, and the individual, ideological systems including Marxism, liberalism, conservatism, historicism, and anarchism also have topics for mutual dialogue.

在社会科学中，从来没有一个研究领域，像现代化研究这样，富有如此大的内在张力，在该领域内，几乎一切研究及其结论都是分析性的科学论证与意识形态的隐性作用结合的产物。在现代化或曰发展理论研究的场域，历史学、政治学、经济学、社会学、人类学、心理学等学科都有着广泛参与的空间，而在世界秩序、国家、市场、社群、个人等方面，马克思主义、自由主义、保守主义、历史主义、无政府主义等思想体系也有相互对话的话题。

The proposition of "Chinese-path modernization" obviously cannot be equated with expressions such as "China's modernization," "Chinese modernization," or "modernization in China." As a theoretical proposition, what Chinese-path modernization seeks to express is not only an understanding of the different paths, mechanisms, and methods for achieving the "common" goal of modernization, or, in other words, not only an innovation in means under the premise of recognizing the so-called global "consensus on modernization goals." Chinese-path modernization seeks to prominently express the Chinese people's unique understanding and comprehension of issues such as "what kind of modernization goals should humanity pursue?" and "what are the legitimate ways to achieve these goals?" Of course, modernization (as a process and its result) always possesses certain common historical regularities, and as a narrative system, it is also unified under a common theoretical framework.

“中国式现代化”这一命题，显然不能与“中国的现代化”“中国现代化”或者“现代化在中国”这样的表述等而视之。作为一个理论命题，中国式现代化所要表达的不仅是对实现现代化这一“共同”目标的不同道路、机制、方式的理解，或者说，不仅是在认同所谓的全球“现代化目标共识”前提下的手段创新。中国式现代化要突出地表达，中国人对“什么才是人类应该追求的现代化目标”“什么才是实现这一目标的正当方式”等问题的特有认识和理解。当然，现代化（作为一种过程及其结果），总是有着某种共同的历史规律性，其作为一种叙事体系，也统一在共同的理论框架下。

The report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC points out that Chinese-path modernization is socialist modernization led by the Communist Party of China. It contains elements that are common to the modernization processes of all countries, but it is more characterized by features that are unique to the Chinese context. Chinese-path modernization is the modernization of a huge population, the modernization of common prosperity for all, the modernization of material and cultural-ethical progress, the modernization of harmony between humanity and nature, and the modernization of pursuing a path of peaceful development. This expression concerns both goals and means; it is the unity of goals and means. The modernization of a huge population is a historical and objective characteristic of Chinese-path modernization, but this characteristic does not merely represent China; it implies the majority of the world's population that has not yet achieved modernization. That is to say, for the world, modernization remains the modernization of a huge population, and China is merely a representative of many countries. Common prosperity for all is the essential characteristic of Chinese-path modernization and should be the most fundamental point distinguishing it from the common characteristics of modernization in other countries previously. This point is stipulated by the combination of China's historical culture and the dual characteristics of socialism (path, system, theory, culture). Common prosperity for all is both the goal to be achieved by Chinese-path modernization and the means to achieve this goal. That is to say, China regards common prosperity as a gradual, dynamically improving process; common prosperity is the organic unity of goal and means. The coordination of material and cultural-ethical progress has always been the value pursuit of the Chinese nation's virtue-based humanism and is also a concrete expression of the Marxist ideal of human emancipation and free development. This, too, is endowed with the characteristic of the unity of goal and means. Using means of truth, goodness, and beauty, and civilized methods, in the process of pursuing national prosperity and the people's wealth, the combination of material abundance and spiritual richness is achieved. Harmony between humanity and nature, as a distinctive hallmark of Chinese-path modernization, transcends the simple division between goal and means, presenting the intrinsic essence of ecological civilization holistically. Chinese-path modernization is the modernization of pursuing a path of peaceful development. This is not only what China hopes to achieve; in fact, it has already achieved it. Looking back at the more than 70 years of development history since the founding of New China, the history of China moving towards prosperity and the people achieving wealth has not been realized by relying on the inertial thinking of zero-sum games and the behavioral habit of beggaring thy neighbor. Instead, it has been fully realized by utilizing the Chinese nation's own traditional wisdom of "harmony in a family leads to prosperity" and "amiability attracts wealth," through the peaceful means of "each appreciating its own beauty and the beauty of others, and sharing beauty together." This is indeed the most admirable great achievement of Chinese-path modernization.

党的二十大报告指出，中国式现代化是中国共产党领导的社会主义现代化，既有各国现代化的共同特征，更有基于自己国情的中国特色。中国式现代化是人口规模巨大的现代化，是全体人民共同富裕的现代化，是物质文明和精神文明相协调的现代化，是人与自然和谐共生的现代化，是走和平发展道路的现代化。这个表述既关乎目标，又关乎手段，是目标和手段的统一。人口规模巨大的现代化，是中国式现代化的历史的、客观的特点，但这一特点也并非仅仅表征中国，而是意蕴着占世界总人口大多数的尚未实现现代化的人口。也就是说，对于世界而言，现代化依然是人口规模巨大的现代化，中国只是众多国家的代表。全体人民共同富裕，是中国式现代化的本质特征，也应该是区分于此前其他国家现代化共同特征的最基本的一点，这一点是由中国历史文化和社会主义（道路、制度、理论、文化）双重特性结合所规定的。全体人民共同富裕，既是中国式现代化所要达到的目标，也是实现这一目标的手段，也就是说，中国把共同富裕看作一个循序渐进的、动态提升的过程，共同富裕是目标和手段的有机统一。物质文明和精神文明相协调，从来就是中华民族德性人文主义的价值追求，也是马克思主义关于人类解放和自由发展的重要理想的具体表达。这同样也被赋予了目标和手段相统一的特性。以真善美的手段、文明的方式，在追求国家富强和人民富裕这个目标的过程中，实现物质富裕和精神丰富的结合。人与自然的和谐共生，作为中国式现代化的鲜明标识，超越了目标和手段的简单划分，把生态文明的内在本质整体性地呈现出来。中国式现代化是走和平发展道路的现代化，这一点，不仅是中国希望做到的，事实上她已经做到了。回顾自新中国成立以来的70多年发展史，中国走向富强和人民实现富裕的历史，完全不是依靠零和博弈的惯性思维和以邻为壑的行为习性来实现的，而是充分运用中华民族自身“家和万事兴”“和气生财”的传统智慧，以各美其美、美美与共的和平方式实现的。这确实是中国式现代化最令人自豪的伟大成绩。

The new worldview, values, view of history, view of civilization, view of democracy, view of ecology, etc., contained in Chinese-path modernization, together with its great practice on Chinese soil, constitute a major innovation in the theory and practice of world modernization. Its historic and global significance lies in creating a new form of human civilization.

中国式现代化蕴含的新的世界观、价值观、历史观、文明观、民主观、生态观等与其在中华大地的伟大实践，是对世界现代化理论和实践的重大创新，它的历史性和世界性的重大意义在于创造了人类文明的新形态。

II. Reflection on Modernization and the Humanistic Economy in the Context of Chinese-Path Modernization

二、对现代化的反思及中国式现代化语境中的人文经济

Chinese-path modernization is by no means a whim of fantasy or empty talk. It is built upon the practice and thinking of the Chinese nation over several millennia, especially the exploration by generation after generation of people with lofty ideals since modern times of a feasible path for national rejuvenation, national prosperity, and the people's happiness. If we say that in the first few decades after the founding of New China, the theory and practice of the Chinese people exploring their own path to modernization generally remained within the mindset of taking advanced countries as teachers and striving to catch up and surpass, then after the Third Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee, and especially after the 18th National Congress of the CPC, the theoretical and practical consciousness of Chinese-path modernization has been increasingly established.

中国式现代化绝非心血来潮的臆想和空谈，它建立在中华民族几千年，尤其是近代以来一代又一代仁人志士探索民族复兴、国家富强和人民幸福的可行之路的实践和思考之上。如果说，在新中国成立后的最初几十年，中国人民探索自己的现代化之路的理论和实践，总体上还是停留在以先进国家为师、奋力赶超的思维定式，那么十一届三中全会，特别是党的十八大以后，中国式现代化的理论自觉和实践自觉日益确立起来。

Advancing Chinese-path modernization requires not only sustained practical innovation but also deeper theoretical construction. In a certain sense, the latter is more important and more urgent.

推进中国式现代化，不仅需要持续的实践创新，也需要更深刻的理论建构。在某种意义上，后者更为重要，也更为迫切。

It is generally believed that Western modernization to date has been realized through the capitalization of factors of production, the industrialization of industrial structure, the marketization of allocation mechanisms, the urbanization of action arenas, and the democratization of political decision-making. These various "izations" are driven, regulated, and evaluated through the institutional synthesis of the capitalist political-economic system. Serious historical research has fully revealed that the capitalist mode of modernization harbors enormous drawbacks, creating numerous problems and hidden dangers in the economic, social, political, and cultural dimensions of modern society. Among these, many problems and hidden dangers have global negative externalities and intergenerational inequities, triggering deep-seated contradictions in the current international political and economic order. Under the capitalist modernization model, the relationships between nations, ethnic groups, people and people, the material and the spiritual, and humanity and nature are subordinated to the nature of capital and the fundamental logic it determines (i.e., the key variable of profit maximization). Unlike feudal and socialist societies, the social order under the capitalist system is built upon the demands of pan-capital organizations whose action goal is profit maximization. As Marx and Engels pointed out in the *Communist Manifesto*: "The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn asunder the motley feudal ties that bound man to his 'natural superiors', and has left remaining no other nexus between man and man than naked self-interest, than callous 'cash payment'. It has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervour, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation. It has resolved personal worth into exchange value, and in place of the numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up that single, unconscionable freedom — Free Trade. In one word, for exploitation, veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation." "The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honoured and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into its paid wage labourers." "The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation."

一般认为，迄今为止的西方现代化，是通过生产要素的资本化、产业结构的工业化、配置机制的市场化、行动场域的城市化、政治决策的民主化等方式实现的。这些“化”都通过资本主义政治经济体系这一制度总成来驱动、调控和评估。严肃的历史研究已经充分揭示，现代化的资本主义方式存在着极大的弊端，造成了现代社会在经济、社会、政治、文化等方面的诸多问题和隐患。其中，有不少问题和隐患具有全球性的负外部性和代际不公平，引发了当今国际政治经济秩序方面的深层次矛盾。在资本主义现代化模式下，国家与国家、族群与族群、人与人、物质与精神、人与自然之间的关系，从属于资本的本性及由其决定的基本逻辑（即利润最大化这一关键的变量）。与封建社会和社会主义社会不同，资本主义制度下的社会秩序，建立在以利润最大化为行动目标的泛资本组织的需求之上。正如马克思、恩格斯在《共产党宣言》中指出的：“资产阶级在它已经取得了统治的地方把一切封建的、宗法的和田园般的关系都破坏了。它无情地斩断了把人们束缚于天然尊长的形形色色的封建羁绊，它使人和人之间除了赤裸裸的利害关系，除了冷酷无情的‘现金交易’，就再也没有任何别的联系了。它把宗教虔诚、骑士热忱、小市民伤感这些情感的神圣发作，淹没在利己主义打算的冰水之中。它把人的尊严变成了交换价值，用一种没有良心的贸易自由代替了无数特许的和自力挣得的自由。总而言之，它用公开的、无耻的、直接的、露骨的剥削代替了由宗教幻想和政治幻想掩盖着的剥削。”“资产阶级抹去了一切向来受人尊崇和令人敬畏的职业的神圣光环。它把医生、律师、教士、诗人和学者变成了它出钱招雇的雇佣劳动者。”“资产阶级撕下了罩在家庭关系上的温情脉脉的面纱，把这种关系变成了纯粹的金钱关系。”

According to the basic viewpoints of Marxism, both the process and the outcome of modernization realized through the capitalist mode are significantly stamped with the attribute of capital (i.e., everything takes the logic of capital as its internal determining factor). Capital-dominated modernization inevitably inverts the proper relationship between people and things, achieving the goals and means of modernization through capital's domination over people. The root of all economic, social, and political problems caused by capitalist modernization lies in the fact that the logic of capital is profit-oriented rather than "people"-centered, which causes capitalist modernization to invert the relationship between ends and means.

按照马克思主义的基本观点，通过资本主义方式实现的现代化的过程和结果都显著地带有资本的属性（即一切都以资本逻辑为内在的决定因素）。资本主导的现代化必然颠倒人与物之间应有的关系，通过资本对人的宰制来实现现代化的目标和手段。资本主义现代化所导致的一切经济社会政治问题的根源，在于资本的逻辑是利润导向而不是以“人”为中心的，这使得资本主义现代化颠倒了目标和手段的关系。

Throughout this historical process spanning several centuries, human society inevitably falls into a state of division, confrontation, and conflict. Therefore, reflection on and assessment of this model is something that all late-developing modernization countries must undertake.

在这个长达几个世纪的历史进程中，人类社会总会不由自主地陷入分裂、对抗和冲突的境地。因此，对这一模式的反思与评估应该是所有现代化后发国家必须要做的事情。

Chinese-path modernization has inaugurated a new modernization narrative, abandoning the Western path of capital-centered modernization, polarized modernization, materialistically inflated modernization, and externally expansionist and predatory modernization. It has broken the myth that "modernization equals Westernization," expanded the pathways for developing countries to achieve modernization, and provided a Chinese solution for humanity's exploration of a better social system.

中国式现代化开启了新的现代化叙事，摒弃了西方以资本为中心的现代化、两极分化的现代化、物质主义膨胀的现代化、对外扩张掠夺的现代化的老路，打破了“现代化等于西方化”的迷思，拓展了发展中国家走向现代化的途径，为人类对更好社会制度的探索提供了中国方案。

The author believes that Chinese-path modernization has attributes at multiple levels, and the human attribute, or the people's attribute, is its most fundamental attribute. This attribute is the necessary result of the combination of two important aspects: adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the modernization of fine traditional Chinese culture represented by Confucian humanism. Economic life is the foundation of human life, and this also means that economic modernization is the foundation and guarantee for realizing Chinese-path modernization. Furthermore, economic modernization that takes the fundamental interests of all the people as its starting point and aims to meet the constantly improving material, spiritual, and cultural needs of all the people is the basic attribute of Chinese-path modernization. In short, the humanistic-economic attribute is the basic attribute of Chinese-path modernization.

笔者认为，中国式现代化具有多个层面的属性，而人的属性，或者人民属性是其最根本的属性，这一属性是由马克思主义中国化和以儒家人文主义为代表的中华优秀传统文化的现代化这两个重要方面相结合的必然要求。经济生活是人类生活的基础，而这也意味着经济的现代化是实现中国式现代化的基础和保障。进而，以全体人民的根本利益为出发点，以满足全体人民不断提高的物质精神文化需求的经济现代化就是中国式现代化的基本属性。要而言之，人文经济属性就是中国式现代化的基本属性。

"Humanistic economy" is composed of the two words "humanistic" and "economy." According to the Chinese word-formation pattern, this is a modifier-head structure phrase, meaning "humanistic" is used to modify "economy." Therefore, it can be understood as "a humanistic economy," "a humanistic mode of economy," "an economy of a humanistic nature," "a humanist economy," etc. The meaning of the word "economy" revolves around the allocation of resources for activities such as the production, exchange, distribution, and consumption of wealth (products).

“人文经济”，由“人文”和“经济”两个词语组成，按照汉语组词方式，这是一个偏正结构的词组，即“人文”是用来修饰“经济”的。因此，它可以被理解为“人文的经济”“人文方式的经济”“人文性质的经济”“人文主义的经济”等。“经济”一词的含义，是围绕财富（产品）的生产、交换、分配、消费等活动进行的资源配置。

The concept and connotation of the word "economy" are relatively clear. In contrast, the meaning of the word "humanistic" is multi-layered, multi-dimensional, and multifaceted. The *Cihai* dictionary states that "humanistic" (人文) "today refers to various cultural phenomena of human society." Culture consists of the symbols, values, and norms shared by humanity or a specific nation or group of people. Symbols are the foundation of culture, values are the core of culture, and norms include customary norms, moral norms, and legal norms. The term "humanistic" (人文) first appeared in the *Yi Jing* (Book of Changes), Hexagram Bi: "The interplay of the hard and the soft is the pattern of heaven (天文); civilization with its restraints is the pattern of humanity (人文). Observe the pattern of heaven to discern the seasonal changes; observe the pattern of humanity to transform and perfect the world." [1]1 “Species-being” (Gattungswesen) is a concept used by the young Marx, particularly in the *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*, to refer to humanity’s essential, universal, and creative nature, which is alienated under capitalism. Here, "humanistic" refers to the ritual, music, institutions, and systems created by humans and their function in regulating and educating human behavior. In the view of the founders of Confucian humanism, through the教化 (edification) of "humanity," people would live a civilized life, doing what they ought to do and stopping where they ought to stop. Society would have order, and life would have quality. This is the earliest meaning of the term "humanistic," and also its most basic and core meaning. Other definitions of "humanistic" are numerous and varied, but the basic meaning of these definitions generally includes two aspects: edification (教化) and culture (文化). The former concerns human moral character, the latter concerns human affairs.

“经济”这个词语的概念和内涵比较清晰，与此不同的是，“人文”一词的含义则是多层次、多维度和多方面的。《辞海》认为，人文“今指人类社会的各种文化现象”。文化是人类或者某一民族、某一人群共同具有的符号、价值观及规范。符号是文化的基础，价值观是文化的核心，而规范，包括习惯规范、道德规范和法律规范。“人文”一词最早出现在《易·贲》中：“刚柔交错，天文也；文明以止，人文也。观乎天文，以察时变；观乎人文，以化成天下。”这里的“人文”指人类制作的礼乐典章制度及其对人的行为的规范教化作用。在儒家人文主义的创立者看来，由于有了“人文”的教化，人们就会过一种文明的生活，行其所当行，止其所当止。社会既有秩序，生活亦有品质。这便是“人文”一词最早的含义，也是最基本、最核心的含义。其他一些关于“人文”的定义林林总总，但这些定义的基本含义均包含两个方面：教化与文化。前者关乎人的品德，后者关乎人的事务。

Between Chinese and Western cultures, the meaning of the term "humanistic" differs slightly: in Chinese culture, "humanistic" emphasizes the moral edification of people; in Western culture, "humanistic" emphasizes the protection of people's rights. Due to the polysemy of the concept of "humanistic" itself, coupled with differences in understanding tendencies in Chinese and Western cultural contexts, a consensus has not yet been formed in academia regarding the connotation and extension of the concept of "humanistic economy." If understood and grasped through cross-cultural common connotations, then the so-called "humanistic economy" is "the economy of people."

中西文化之间，“人文”一词的含义略有差异：在中华文化中，“人文”侧重于人的品德教化；在西方文化中，“人文”则侧重于人的权利保障。由于“人文”概念本身的多义性，加之在中西不同文化语境中存在的理解倾向的差异，有关“人文经济”这个概念的内涵和外延，学界尚未形成共识。如果以跨文化共同的内涵来理解和把握，那么所谓“人文经济”，就是“人的经济”。

To date, within the Chinese context, the connotation of the concept of "humanistic economy" is not clear. The author believes that "humanistic economy" includes at least three aspects (levels) of meaning.

迄今为止，在中国的语境中，“人文经济”这个概念的内涵并不清晰。笔者认为，“人文经济”至少包括三个方面（层面）的含义。

The most intuitive and superficial form of the humanistic economy is the cultural economy. In terms of its most core connotation, the humanistic economy is primarily an economic activity whose main form is the production, exchange, consumption, and distribution of cultural products. Different from products with use value based on physical attributes, the utility of cultural products depends on the extent to which the meaning they contain and carry satisfies the psychological and spiritual desires of consumers.

人文经济最直观、最表象的形态，就是文化经济。就其最核心的内涵而言，人文经济主要是以文化产品的生产、交换、消费和分配为主要形态的经济活动。区别于具有物理属性使用价值的产品，文化产品的效用大小取决于该产品所蕴含、所承载的意义在多大程度上满足了消费者心理的、精神的欲望。

The second meaning of humanistic economy concerns the "human" characteristics of the most dynamic factor of production in the production process, namely the laborer. That is, it emphasizes the physical and mental traits of the laborer as a "human being," and, when treating them as a factor of production, takes these characteristics into account as much as possible. This implies that the production process and labor organization methods dominated by traditional capital logic require necessary and strategic adjustments to enhance the laborer's productivity. Unlike the early capitalist production system, which prioritized things over people, capital over labor, technological logic over emotional logic, and use over cultivation, the later capitalist economic system began to value the "human" factor, striving to balance and accommodate the interests of both capital and labor. During this period, the capitalist economic system emphasized the impact or role of the laborer's qualities, abilities, performance, desires, and emotions as a "human being" on economic activity, stressing investment in the laborer and treating the laborer as a new type of capital.

人文经济的第二种含义，是关注生产过程中最具能动性的生产要素（即劳动者）所具有的“人”的特性，也即重视劳动者作为“人”所具有的身心特征，而在将其作为生产要素时，尽可能地考虑这些特征。这意味着，传统的资本逻辑主导的生产过程和劳动组织方式需要进行必要的、策略性的调整，以便提高劳动者的生产率。与资本主义早期生产体系重物轻人、重资本轻劳动、重技术逻辑轻情感逻辑、重使用轻培养的做法不同，后期的资本主义经济体系开始重视“人”的因素，开始平衡和兼顾资本与劳动的双方利益。在这一时期，资本主义经济体系重视劳动者作为“人”的素质、能力、表现、欲求、情绪对经济活动的影响或作用，强调对劳动者进行投资，把劳动者作为一种新型的资本来看待。

Both of the above "humanistic economies" treat people and their culture as elements and means of economic development. In essence, they still regard people as tools for producing wealth, or as irreplaceable creators of wealth, and thus remain within the category of what Sismondi called "chrematistics."

以上两种“人文经济”，都把人及其文化作为经济发展的要素和手段，在本质上还是把人作为生产财富的工具，或者说把人作为财富不可替代的创造者来看待，仍然属于西斯蒙第所指的“理财学”范畴。

The third meaning of humanistic economy refers to an economy that highlights human subjectivity, which can be termed a "people-oriented economy." Specifically, a humanistic economy is an economic system that takes people as the starting point, purpose, and basis of all economic activities. It is a more advanced economic form, opposed to "non-human" economic systems. This meaning of humanistic economy is committed to restoring the subject status of people, striving to build concepts, habits, institutions, and policies that guarantee people's rights to survival, labor, development, and enjoyment, and dedicated to realizing people's free labor and economic emancipation. Therefore, this meaning of humanistic economy can both greatly promote the development of productive forces and achieve the greatest possible all-round development for the greatest number of people. This can only become a reality under socialist conditions; hence, this meaning of humanistic economy is identical with the socialist economy.

第三种含义的人文经济，是指突出人的主体性的经济，可将其称为“人本经济”。具体而言，人文经济就是把人作为一切经济活动的出发点、目的和依据的经济体系，是与“非人”的经济体系相对立的、更加先进的经济形态。此种含义的人文经济致力于恢复人的主体地位，努力构建能够保障人的生存权、劳动权、发展权和享受权的观念、习惯、制度和政策，致力于实现人的自由劳动和经济解放。因此这种含义的人文经济既能极大地促进生产力的发展，又能实现最大多数人的最大可能的全面发展。这只有在社会主义条件下才有可能成为现实，是故，这种含义的人文经济，与社会主义经济是同一的。

III. The Intellectual Origins of Humanistic Economy

三、人文经济的思想渊源

(I) Pre-Capitalist Era Humanistic Economic Thought

（一）前资本主义时代的人文经济思想

Within the spiritual lineage of Chinese civilization, a main thread of humanistic economics runs through it. The keynote of this thread is the important views of pre-Qin Confucianism on the relationship between economic life, virtue, and happiness. Confucius was the synthesizer of Confucian humanistic economic thought. Through key texts such as the *Book of Songs*, the *Spring and Autumn Annals*, the *Book of Rites*, and the *Analects*, we can systematically understand his system of humanistic economic thought. After Confucius, Mencius became the most important inheritor and interpreter of Confucian humanistic economic thought. The continuity and inclusiveness of Chinese civilization both benefit from such an important gene. From the "Way of Confucius and Mencius," we can discover rich elements of humanistic economic thought, such as "frugality and love for the people," "the people are precious, the sovereign is light," "enrich them and then teach them," and "the unity of righteousness and benefit." It can be said that after the Western Zhou dynasty, the basic economic systems and economic policy designs of Chinese society were all influenced to varying degrees by Confucian humanistic economic thought. Confucius's extreme reverence for the well-field system, his preference for constructing an economic form that organically integrates morality and economy, and his high regard for the education of common people based on economic prosperity all surpassed the understanding of "what constitutes a good economic form" held by other ancient sages of civilization. Confucian humanistic economic thought is an important intellectual resource for constructing a humanistic economics for the New Era in China.

在中华文明的精神谱系中，贯穿着一条人文经济学的主线。这条主线的基调是先秦儒家关于经济生活与德性、幸福关系的重要观点。孔子是儒家人文经济思想的集大成者，通过《诗经》《春秋》《礼记》和《论语》等关键文本，我们可以十分系统地了解他的人文经济思想体系。孔子之后，孟子成为儒家人文经济思想最重要的继承者和阐释者。中华文明的延续性和包容性，皆得益于这样一个重要的基因。从“孔孟之道”中，我们可以发现丰富的人文经济思想的元素。例如“节用爱民”“民贵君轻”“富而教之”“义利合一”等。可以说，西周以后，中国社会基本经济制度和经济政策设计，都不同程度地受到了儒家人文经济思想的影响。孔子本人对井田制的极度推崇，对构建道德与经济有机结合的经济形态的偏爱，对基于经济富裕的庶民教化的高度重视，都超越了同时代其他文明先贤关于“何为好的经济形态”的认识。儒家人文经济思想是构建新时代中国人文经济学的重要的思想资源。

Before the Renaissance and the Reformation, humanistic economic thought also existed relatively clearly in ancient Greece, ancient Rome, and the late Middle Ages. We can easily find humanistic economic thought in the ethics of scholars such as Aristotle and Epicurus, as well as in the academic thought of Thomas Aquinas. Particularly worth mentioning is the "just price" theory, which originated with Aristotle and was developed and expanded by Aquinas. In a certain sense, this theory is a representative humanistic economic thought of the ancient Western world.

在文艺复兴和宗教改革之前，人文经济思想也曾较为明显地存在于古希腊、古罗马时期以及中世纪晚期。我们不难从亚里士多德、伊壁鸠鲁等学者的伦理学以及阿奎那的学术思想中，找到人文经济思想。特别值得一提的是，发源于亚里士多德，经过阿奎那而发扬光大“公平价格”理论，在某种意义上，是古代西方世界具有代表性的人文经济思想。

Both Confucian humanistic economic thought and Western humanistic economic thought originating from ancient Greece are spiritual products of the pre-capitalist era. The socio-economic form nurtured by the capitalist mode of production is completely different from any previous social form. In the 17th and 18th centuries, the West entered the Age of Enlightenment, an era belonging to great thinkers such as Montesquieu, Voltaire, Rousseau, Hume, Smith, and Kant. The mission of philosophical and social science theory was to liberate people from theocracy and feudal autocratic systems, granting them the function and status of complete autonomous actors. In the view of these thinkers, history would move forward along a path of progress. Regarding the commercial society that was taking shape and rapidly expanding, Enlightenment thinkers represented by Hume harbored optimistic expectations. Although Rousseau and Smith had some doubts about this, the main theme of the chorus of Enlightenment thought was the fervent eulogy and sincere welcome of capitalist industrial and commercial economy.

无论是儒家人文经济思想还是源于古希腊的西方人文经济思想，都是前资本主义时代的精神产物。资本主义生产方式孕育出来的社会经济形态，完全不同于此前的任何社会形态。17、18世纪，西方进入了启蒙时代，这是属于孟德斯鸠、伏尔泰、卢梭、休谟、斯密和康德这些伟大思想家的时代，哲学社会科学理论的使命，是将人从神权和封建专制体制下解放出来，赋予其完整的自主行动者的功能和地位。在这些思想家看来，历史会沿着一个进步的通道向前发展。对于正在形成并且迅速扩张成型的商业社会，以休谟为代表的启蒙思想家寄予了乐观的期待，尽管卢梭、斯密对此有些许疑虑，但启蒙时代思想合唱的主旋律是对资本主义工商经济的热切讴歌和真诚欢迎。

(II) Early Capitalist Era Humanistic Economic Thought

（二）资本主义时代早期的人文经济思想

In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the capitalist mode of production was established in continental Europe and North America, and, combined with colonial activities, spread to other civilizations. Almost globally, the relationships among humans themselves, and between humans and nature, were reshaped by the logic of capitalism. The logic of capital and the logic of wealth became the basic logic of economic and social life, while humanity itself was marginalized and "alienated." In this process, conflicts between people, between people and nature, and within people themselves intensified. Their manifestations include the polarization of wealth possession and income distribution, large-scale malignant violent conflicts between nations (the two world wars and numerous local wars, which caused enormous loss of life and property, all occurred in the capitalist era), an increase in the incidence of social mental illness, and an increasingly severe ecological and environmental crisis.

18世纪末和19世纪初，资本主义生产方式在欧洲大陆和北美地区确立，并且与殖民活动相结合，向其他文明扩散。几乎在全球范围内，人类自身的关系以及人与自然的关系，都被资本主义的逻辑重塑。资本的逻辑、财富的逻辑成为经济生活和社会生活的基本逻辑，人类本身被边缘化和“异化”。在这个过程中，人与人、人与自然、人与自身的冲突愈演愈烈，其表现就是财富占有和收入分配的两极化趋势、国家之间的大规模恶性暴力冲突（生命财产损失极为巨大的两次世界大战和多次局部战争都发生于资本主义时代）、社会性精神疾病发病率升高和日益严重的生态环境危机。

After the late 18th century, the utopian socialists and economic romantics (such as Saint-Simon, Owen, Fourier, Sismondi, Proudhon, etc.), who were among the first to feel the "inhuman" characteristics of the capitalist socio-economic form, began to accuse, condemn, and criticize the anti-human and inhumane phenomena of capitalism, and devoted themselves to finding solutions. Their works contain relatively rich humanistic economic thought. Among them, the French (Swiss) economist Sismondi can be said to be the classical political economist who most systematically elaborated humanistic economic thought. In his representative works *New Principles of Political Economy* and *Studies in Political Economy* (two volumes), Sismondi, from the perspective of small producers, angrily condemned the cruel oppression, exclusion, and exploitation of small farmers, small proprietors, and laborers by big capital. Unlike other utopian socialists, Sismondi did not limit himself to a sentimental critique of the capitalist economy or stop at cheap sympathy for the disadvantaged groups. Instead, he further analyzed and revealed the inevitability and persistence of the sharp contradiction within the capitalist production system between a powerful production system driven by the pursuit of profit and wealth accumulation, on the one hand, and insufficient consumption across society caused by the polarization of income, on the other. Sismondi severely criticized the post-Say and post-Ricardo classical political economists for their superstition regarding the *laissez-faire* economic system and their disregard for the fundamental contradictions of the capitalist economy.

18世纪末以后，较早感受到了资本主义社会经济形态“非人”特性的空想社会主义者和经济浪漫主义者（如圣西门、欧文、傅里叶、西斯蒙第、蒲鲁东等）开始对资本主义反人性、非人道的现象进行控诉、谴责和批判，并致力于寻求解决办法。他们的作品中有着较为丰富的人文经济思想。其中，法国（瑞士）经济学家西斯蒙第可以说是最系统地阐述人文经济思想的古典政治经济学家。在其代表作《政治经济学新原理》和《政治经济学研究》（两卷本）中，西斯蒙第从小生产者的视角出发，愤怒地谴责了大资本对小农、小业主、劳动者的残酷压榨、排挤、剥削。与其他空想社会主义者不同，西斯蒙第没有局限于对资本主义经济的感性批判、没有停留在对弱势群体的廉价同情上，而是进一步分析并揭示了资本主义生产体系中，以利润追逐和财富积累为本的动力强劲的生产体系与因收入两极分化导致的全社会消费不足的尖锐矛盾的不可避免性和持续性。西斯蒙第严厉地批评了萨伊、李嘉图以后的古典政治经济学家对自由放任经济体系的迷信以及对资本主义经济基本矛盾的无视。

Although Sismondi could not complete a truly scientific critique of capitalist society, nor could he fundamentally propose effective solutions to the "inhuman" characteristics of the capitalist economy, he was the first to argue that people must be the center of economic activity, that people's consumption must be the purpose of production, and that people's needs and desires must be the starting point of economics. In *Studies in Political Economy*, Sismondi wrote: "True political economy … ought to educate and direct human labor to achieve the following points: that all the people may enjoy the fruits of their labor, that everyone may have food to eat, a house to live in, and clothes to wear, that all may benefit from the gifts the Creator has bestowed upon mankind; that all the people may have sufficient leisure to maintain physical and mental health; that all the people may share in the fruits of wisdom…" "Legislators, administrative officials, and political writers should intend to procure for the whole people the greatest possible amount of welfare." (Sismondi, 1989, "Preface," p. 5) These ideas were the guiding principles of Sismondi's research in political economy. In Sismondi's view, whether a country is strong, prosperous, and developed depends on the living standards of the vast majority of the population, the poor. The enjoyment of the poor includes four aspects: abundant, diverse, and hygienic food; sufficient clean clothing appropriate to the climate; hygienic and comfortable housing that takes into account both climate and heating needs; and the confidence that these three aspects can be sustained in the future. Sismondi called the political economy after Smith, especially the economics of Say, Ricardo, and others, the "school of wealth." This school only cared about the quantity and speed of wealth production, only about the application of capital and the improvement of production techniques, only about the enhancement of the productive capacity of the whole society, and was never interested in who the produced wealth went to, who it served, and especially not in the lives of the poor and the底层 people. The economists of the school of wealth also colluded with powerful capitalists and aristocrats, cheering for their special interests and providing reasonable and legal justifications for their actions. Sismondi was deeply distressed by this and felt keenly the need for a new political economy to replace the political economy of the school of wealth. He wrote: "We are not expounding new theories; we intend to collect these facts; these facts relate to people, not to wealth; we intend to study people of all social statuses, with the aim of assessing the happiness of each status, not only in terms of material satisfaction, but also in relation to people's tastes and habits, and the development of wisdom and morality arising from daily life. In fact, our purpose is to determine the rules concerning the material interests of society and its means of subsistence. We will only appraise the relationship of wealth itself to human happiness and human moral dignity, rather than conducting abstract research on value and real price. In this way, we believe we can ultimately understand the enjoyment and suffering of each status, the extent of intellectual development society can give to each class, and finally, how much of the change in social order, from the perspective of political economy, deserves praise or condemnation." (Sismondi, 1989, "Preface," p. 37) Sismondi expounded the basic purpose, research object, and basic tasks of his new principles of political economy, the essence of which was to hope to create a humanistic school of political economy, different from the wealth school of political economy. In this regard, he can be regarded as the originator of humanistic economics.

尽管西斯蒙第不可能完成对资本主义社会真正科学的批判，也不可能从根本上提出解决资本主义经济“非人”特性的有效办法，但是他首次提出，必须以人作为经济活动的中心，必须以人的消费作为生产的目的，必须以人的需要和愿望作为经济学的出发点。在《政治经济学研究》中，西斯蒙第写道：“真正的政治经济学，……应当教育指导人的劳动，以达到以下诸点：全体人民都能享受劳动的成果，人人有饭吃，有房住，有衣穿，大家都能从造物主给人的恩赐中受益；全体人民都能有足够的闲暇时间，以保持身心健康；全体人民都能分享智慧的硕果……”“立法者、行政官员、政论家，应该立意为全体人民尽量谋取最多的福利。”（西斯蒙第，1989，《序言》第5页）这些思想是西斯蒙第政治经济学研究的指导思想。在西斯蒙第看来，一个国家是否强大富庶、繁荣发达，取决于占人口绝大多数的穷人的生活水平高低。穷人的享受包括四个方面的内容：丰富、多样化和卫生的食品，与气候相适应、数量足够的干净的衣服，同时考虑到气候和取暖需要的卫生的、舒适的住宅，保证以上三个方面在未来可以持续的信心。西斯蒙第把斯密以后的政治经济学，特别是萨伊、李嘉图等人的经济学称为“财富学派”。这个学派只关心财富生产的数量和速度，只关心资本的运用和生产技术的改进，只关心全社会生产能力的提高，从来不关心生产出来的财富到谁手里、为谁所用，尤其是对穷人和底层人民的生活不感兴趣。财富学派的经济学家还和有权有势的资本家、贵族勾结在一起，为他们的特殊利益摇旗呐喊，为他们的行为提供合理合法的说辞。对此，西斯蒙第痛心疾首，深切地感到需要有一个新的政治经济学来取代财富学派的政治经济学。他写道：“我们并不是阐述新的理论，我们打算搜集的也就是这些事实；这些事实与人相关联而不是与财富相关联；我们打算研究的是社会上各种身分的人，目的是鉴定每种身分的人的幸福，不仅是研究物质方面得到满足，同时也与人的情趣和习性有关，与日常生活所产生的智慧与道德的发展有关。实际上，我们的目的是要确定关于社会的物质利益和它的生活资料的规则究竟是什么，我们将只是对财富本身对人类幸福和人类道德尊严的关系加以鉴定，而不是对价值和真实价格抽象的概念进行研究，这样，我们自信最终能认识每一种身分的人的享受和痛苦，认识到社会能给予每个阶级的智慧发展有多少，最后，社会秩序的改变，从政治经济学角度来看，究竟有多少值得赞扬或加以谴责。”（西斯蒙第，1989，《序言》第37页）西斯蒙第阐述了他的政治经济学新原理的基本宗旨、研究对象、基本任务，其实质就是希望创立一门不同于财富学派政治经济学的、人文学派的政治经济学。就此而言，他堪称人文经济学的鼻祖。

Regrettably, although Sismondi keenly saw the poverty and suffering brought to humanity, especially to the vast number of workers, by capitalism, and crudely but correctly exposed the reasons, the plan he proposed—replacing capitalism with a system associated with small-scale production methods, attempting to return to the economic and social form of the medieval feudal lord era—was a serious violation of the trend of historical development. Designing institutions and policies according to Sismondi's plan would inevitably lead to stagnation in the development of productive forces. Lacking a truly scientific method and scientific standpoint, Sismondi's humanistic economics ultimately did not become a scientific theoretical system and could not replace the classical political economy of the school of wealth that he criticized.

令人遗憾的是，虽然西斯蒙第敏锐地看到了资本主义给人类尤其是给广大劳动者带来的贫困和痛苦，并粗陋但不失为正确地揭露了原因，但是他提出的用与小生产方式相关联的制度取代资本主义，试图回到中世纪封建领主时代的经济社会形态的方案，则是严重违背历史发展趋势的。按照西斯蒙第的方案进行制度与政策设计，必然导致生产力发展的停滞。由于缺乏真正的科学方法和科学立场，西斯蒙第的人文经济学终究没有成为科学的理论体系，也无法取代他所批判的财富学派的古典政治经济学。

(III) Critique of Political Economy: The Establishment of Marxist Humanistic Economics

（三）政治经济学批判：马克思主义人文经济学的创立

In 1844, Marx wrote an economic and philosophical manuscript, which was later officially published under the title *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844* (hereinafter referred to as the "*Manuscripts*"). In the *Manuscripts*, Marx conducted a profound investigation into the condition of "man" in the capitalist era from the perspectives of philosophy and political economy, and began to explore the fundamental causes of human "alienation" based on the characteristics of the capitalist economic system. The *Manuscripts* contain expositions on man's species-being, sensibility, aesthetics, and subjective consciousness, as well as profound discussions on the material poverty and universal spiritual "alienation" caused by capitalist private property, the competitive market, and the division of labor. Although the *Manuscripts* is not a mature text, it is the pioneering work of the Marxist humanistic economic system. It was in the *Manuscripts* that Marx found the correct fulcrum for the critique of political economy, and the *Manuscripts* also endowed the new political economic system he was to create with profound humanist ideas.

1844年，马克思撰写了一份经济学哲学手稿，这本手稿后来以《1844年经济学哲学手稿》（以下简称“《手稿》”）的名字正式出版。在《手稿》中，马克思从哲学和政治经济学的角度对资本主义时代的“人”的状况进行了深刻的考察，并且开始从资本主义经济体系的特征出发，探寻导致人的“异化”的根本原因。在《手稿》中，既有关于人的类本质、感性、审美、主体意识等的阐述，也有关于资本主义私有制、竞争市场、分工所导致的人类物质贫困以及普遍精神“异化”的深刻论述。尽管《手稿》并不是一个成熟的文本，但这是马克思主义人文经济学体系的开山之作。正是在《手稿》中，马克思找到了政治经济学批判的正确的支点，《手稿》也为他自己所要创立的新政治经济学体系赋予了深刻的人道主义理念。

The *Communist Manifesto*, published in 1848, is a document full of the brilliance of communist thought. In this text of less than 20,000 words, Marx and Engels comprehensively assessed the economic, social, political, cultural, and ecological consequences of the capitalist mode of production, affirming its positive historical significance while sharply criticizing the shocks and destruction it caused to human society. They pointed out that the true historical mission of communism and communists is to promote the transformation of capitalist society into a more advanced and more humane communist society. The ideological keynote established by the *Communist Manifesto* is that people must be liberated from the autocracy of capital through changes in the basic socio-economic system, enabling them to live in a new world that is both free and equal, both prosperous and fair. The *Communist Manifesto* laid the foundation for the ideas and concepts of humanistic economics.

于1848年出版的《共产党宣言》，是充满共产主义思想光辉的文献。在这份不足两万字的文本中，马克思和恩格斯全面评估了资本主义生产方式的经济、社会、政治、文化、生态后果，既肯定了其所具有的积极的历史意义，也尖锐地批判了它对人类社会造成的冲击和破坏，并指出共产主义和共产党人的真正历史使命就是推动资本主义社会向更为先进、更加人道的共产主义社会发展。《共产党宣言》确立的思想基调就是必须通过社会经济基本制度的变革将人们从资本的专制中解放出来，使其生活在一个既自由又平等，既富裕又公平的新世界。《共产党宣言》奠定了人文经济学的思想和理念的基础。

*Capital*, published in 1867, exhibits the outstanding scientific characteristic of the organic unity of logic and history. From the theory expounded in *Capital* itself, the strong humanist ethical sentiment of the *Manuscripts* seems no longer visible. We also rarely find in *Capital* a moral critique of the capitalist mode of production. *Capital* no longer employs the grand and unrestrained discourse style of the *Communist Manifesto*. However, as long as we carefully appreciate it, we can still clearly discern the humanist undertone of *Capital* as Marx's most mature theoretical text. This undertone gradually entered the deep structure of the great theoretical edifice of *Capital* from the more externalized and phenomenalized form in the *Manuscripts* and the more literary narrative in the *Communist Manifesto*. Without the fulcrum of the critique of political economy established in the *Manuscripts*, and without the ideological foundation laid by the *Communist Manifesto*, it would be impossible to truly grasp the theoretical characteristic of *Capital* as the most mature work of Marx's critique of political economy, that is, its theoretical function as a guide for human liberation. The *Manuscripts* proposed the scientific mission of the critique of political economy, and *Capital* successfully fulfilled this mission. In this sense, we can say that the new economics established by Marx through the critique of political economy essentially possesses the attributes of a scientific humanistic economics.

于1867年出版的《资本论》，表现出逻辑和历史有机统一的卓越科学特性。从《资本论》阐述的理论本身似乎已经看不出《手稿》的那种强烈的人道主义伦理情怀，我们也很少从《资本论》中发现对资本主义生产方式的道德批判，《资本论》也不再运用《共产党宣言》那样宏阔而汪洋肆意的话语方式，但只要认真体会，我们还是可以清晰地辨认出，《资本论》作为马克思思想最为成熟的理论文本，所具有的人道主义底色。这个底色从《手稿》中较为外化、现象化和《共产党宣言》中较为文学化的叙事，逐渐进入《资本论》伟大理论结构的底层。如果没有《手稿》所确立的政治经济学批判的支点，没有《共产党宣言》所确立的思想基础，那么也就不可能真正把握《资本论》作为马克思政治经济学批判最成熟作品的理论特性，即作为人类解放指南的理论功能。《手稿》提出了政治经济学批判的科学使命，而《资本论》圆满完成了这一使命。从这个意义上，我们可以说，马克思通过政治经济学批判而确立起来的新的经济学，本质上就具有了科学的人文经济学的属性。

Marxist political economy, which takes human liberation and all-round human development as its goal, is fundamentally different from classical political economy that preceded it. More systematically and profoundly than Sismondi, Marx dissected the historical and theoretical logic of capitalist society, producing *Capital* as a pathological report on capitalism, revealing the process of the birth and growth of the capitalist organism, the basic contradictions of the capitalist economy, and the inevitability of their movement leading to capitalism’s demise. Marx convincingly demonstrated the irrationality and illegitimacy of the capitalist economy in both moral and economic terms, and predicted its historical death and the inevitability of the birth of a new economic form—communist society—that better conforms to the requirements of the species-being of humanity. [1]1 “Species-being” (Gattungswesen) is a concept used by the young Marx, particularly in the *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*, to refer to humanity’s essential, universal, and creative nature, which is alienated under capitalism. For Marx, communist (socialist) society is a society that has cast off the “financial management” logic of the capitalist system, enabling greater progress in productive forces and the all-round development of humanity. By implementing public ownership and resolving the irreconcilable contradiction between socialized large-scale production and the private capitalist appropriation of the means of production, communist society not only escapes the economic ills of capitalism, but also, because all the people become the masters of the means of production and the controllers of the production process, the long-standing contradiction between production activity and consumption activity largely disappears, the actual mechanism causing human “alienation” no longer exists, and humanity truly realizes free labor and liberation. In this new society, the “people-centered” concept can be effectively guaranteed by the basic economic system, possessing an endogenous and sustainable practical logic.

以人的解放和人的全面发展为目的的马克思主义政治经济学，与之前的古典政治经济学存在根本区别。马克思比西斯蒙第更为系统、深刻地剖析了资本主义社会的历史逻辑和理论逻辑，写出了《资本论》这份资本主义的病理学报告，揭示了资本主义的有机体出生、长大的过程和资本主义经济的基本矛盾及其运动导致资本主义走向灭亡的必然性。马克思令人信服地证明了资本主义经济在道德和经济两个方面的非合理性和非正当性，并且预言了它的历史性死亡以及一个更加符合人的类本质要求的新经济形态——共产主义社会诞生的必然性。在马克思那里，共产主义（社会主义）社会是一个摆脱了资本主义制度的“理财学”逻辑，能够实现生产力的更大进步和人的全面发展的社会。实行公有制，解决了社会化大生产和生产资料的私人资本主义占有之间不可调和的矛盾，共产主义社会不仅得以摆脱资本主义的经济痼疾，而且由于全体人民成为生产资料的主人和生产过程的控制者，生产活动与消费活动之间长期存在的矛盾也基本消失，造成人的“异化”的现实机制已经不复存在，人类真正实现了自由劳动和解放。在这个新社会，“以人民为中心”的理念，可以得到基本经济制度的有效保障，具备了内生可持续的现实逻辑。

IV. The Basic Connotations of the Humanistic Economy from the Perspective of Chinese-Path Modernization

四、中国式现代化视域下人文经济的基本内涵

To define the humanistic economic attributes of Chinese-path modernization, the primary point is to establish the institutional premise of Chinese-path modernization. Reviewing the entire history of human social development, we can conclude that only under the background where the socialist system has been basically established and continuously improved through reform, and only under the premise where socialism with Chinese characteristics provides theoretical, path, institutional, and cultural guarantees for the development of the humanistic economy, can the humanistic economic attributes of Chinese-path modernization be stably and sustainably manifested.

定义中国式现代化的人文经济属性，首要的一点是确立中国式现代化的制度前提。回顾整个人类社会发展史，我们可以断定，只有在社会主义制度基本建立并且通过改革不断健全完善的背景下，只有在中国特色社会主义为人文经济的发展提供了理论、道路、制度和文化保障的前提下，中国式现代化的人文经济属性才有可能稳定、可持续地展现出来。

From the perspective of Chinese-path modernization, the humanistic economy, defined based on the unity of history and logic, possesses many characteristics, connotations, and requirements.

在中国式现代化视域下，基于历史和逻辑相统一的规定性来定义的人文经济，具有诸多方面的特征、内涵和要求。

(A) The Humanistic Economy is a People’s Economy

（一）人文经济是人民经济

This characteristic is determined by the essential attributes of the socialist system. As mentioned earlier, as early as the 1840s, when Marx and Engels were forming their basic ideas, viewpoints, and methods, they already had a distinct people’s standpoint. In the *Manuscripts*, [2]2 *Manuscripts* refers to Marx’s *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*. Marx proposed the concept of “species-being,” and thereby initially revealed the inevitability of the overall “alienation” of humanity within the capitalist production system. The core characteristic of communist society, which historically replaces capitalist society, is the full realization of humanity’s species-essence, that is, the liberation of all humanity from the iron cage of overall “alienation.” Later generations of Marxists, proceeding from practical possibility, recognized that the transition from capitalism to communism requires a transitional period of varying length (i.e., the socialist stage). Socialism, as a transitional stage, is a process where the factors of capitalism gradually decrease, the role of capitalism gradually weakens, and the nature of communism becomes increasingly prominent and gradually strengthens. In different countries and at different levels of development, the plurality possessed by the socialist stage also varies.

这个特征是由社会主义制度的本质属性决定的，如前所述，早在19世纪40年代，马克思、恩格斯在形成其基本思想、观点和方法的阶段，就已经具有了鲜明的人民立场。在《手稿》一书中，马克思提出了“类”的概念，并由此初步揭示了在资本主义生产体系中人类出现整体“异化”的必然性。历史性地取代资本主义社会的共产主义社会，最核心的特征就是人的类本质的全面实现，即全人类从整体“异化”的铁笼中解放出来。后来的历代马克思主义者，从现实可能性出发，认识到从资本主义向共产主义的转变，需要一个或长或短的过渡期（即社会主义阶段）。作为过渡阶段的社会主义，是资本主义的因素逐渐减少、资本主义的作用逐渐弱化、共产主义的性质日益凸显并逐渐增强的过程。在不同的国家和不同的发展水平，社会主义阶段所具有的多元性也各不相同。

As socialism with Chinese characteristics enters the New Era, the principal contradiction in Chinese society has transformed into the contradiction between the people’s ever-growing needs for a better life and unbalanced and inadequate development. The people’s needs for a better life mean a qualitative leap in the quality and a rich expansion in the types of material and cultural needs in the general sense. In this new stage, the people are no longer satisfied with solving problems of survival and initial development; instead, they seek tangible feelings of gain, happiness, and security. The people’s needs for a better life are neither abstract concepts nor static structures, but are concrete, vivid, and iteratively changing, manifesting the complex and diverse real interests of people across the land of China, characterized by diversity, hierarchy, and incrementality. Compared with these new needs of all the people in the New Era, China’s development remains unbalanced and inadequate. Inadequacy does not refer to insufficient supply of general products and services, but to the still insufficiently high supply level of high-quality products and services, with gaps not only in total quantity but also in unreasonable structure. Unbalance manifests in the unequal endowment, opportunity, and ability of all the people to share the fruits of development, concentratedly reflected in the urban-rural gap, regional gap, and income gap. To eliminate these gaps, it is necessary to establish the people as the subject of socio-economic development and answer well the biggest question of how to ensure the “people’s character” of the socialist economic system with Chinese characteristics.

随着中国特色社会主义进入新时代，中国社会的主要矛盾已经转化为人民日益增长的美好生活需要和不平衡不充分的发展之间的矛盾。人民的美好生活需要意味着一般意义上的物质文化需要在品质上的跃升和在类型上的丰富扩增，在这个新的阶段，人民已经不再满足于解决生存和初步发展问题，而是要具有实实在在的获得感、幸福感和安全感。人民美好生活需要既不是抽象的概念，也不是一成不变的静态结构，而是具体、生动和迭代变化的，展现着中华大地上人们纷繁复杂的现实利益，具有多样性、层次性和递增性的特点。与新时代全体人民的这种新需要相比，中国的发展仍然是不平衡不充分的。不充分不是指一般产品和服务的供给不足，而是指优质产品和服务的供给水平仍然不够高，不仅在总量上存在差距，在结构上也不尽合理。不均衡表现在全体人民分享发展成果的禀赋、机会和能力的不均等，集中体现在城乡差距、区域差距和收入差距上。要消除这些差距，就必须立足于确立人民这个社会经济发展的主体，回答好如何保证中国特色社会主义经济体系的“人民性”这个最大的问题。

(B) The Humanistic Economy is a Common Prosperity Economy

（二）人文经济是共富经济

The connotation of common prosperity in the humanistic economy originates from the basic characteristic of it being a people’s economy. As long as the humanistic economy is a people’s economy, it means that the people are both a community for creating wealth and a community for sharing benefits, and moreover, a community for mutual empowerment and sustainable development. On the one hand, only by relying on the common struggle of all the people can common prosperity be realized; on the other hand, only by guiding economic life with the principle of common prosperity can the people as a community continue to exist. The sustainability of common prosperity must be guaranteed by the progress of each individual’s capabilities, which requires ensuring and improving people’s wellbeing during development, universally raising the education level of all the people, and effectively enhancing the development capacity of each individual. Common prosperity requires society to create more inclusive and fair conditions, smooth the channels for upward social mobility, and create opportunities for fair competition and contest for more people.

人文经济的共富内涵，源自其人民经济的基本特征。只要人文经济是人民经济，就意味着，人民既是财富创造的共同体，也是利益分享的共同体，更是相互赋能、持续发展的共同体。一方面，只有依靠全体人民的共同奋斗，共同富裕才有实现的可能；另一方面，只有以共同富裕的原则指导经济生活，人民作为共同体才能持续存在。共同富裕的可持续，一定要以每个人的能力进步为保证，这就需要在发展中保障和改善民生，普遍提高全体人民的受教育程度，切实增强每个个体的发展能力。共同富裕需要社会创造更加普惠、公平的条件，畅通社会向上流动的通道，给更多的人创造公平竞争和竞赛的机会。

Common prosperity is not the ultimate goal; universal happiness is. Moving from increasing the prosperity of all the people to improving the happiness of all the people means not only that the people possess the material and spiritual conditions for general development, but also marks that the people have obtained the conditions for all-round development. Creating basic conditions for the universal happiness of all the people is an important and long-term task for socialism in the New Era. It requires exploration and practice in economic, political, cultural, social, and ecological aspects. From the perspective of historical materialism, happiness, as a form of social consciousness, essentially originates from specific social life practices and is the product of the combination of the human subject and specific social life fields. Taking universal happiness as the goal, continuously exploring effective forms of human labor practice and modes of production, and constructing new relationships between people and between people and nature, are the basic tasks of humanistic economics.

共同富裕并不是终极目标，普遍幸福才是。从全体人民的富裕度提升，到全体人民的幸福感提高，不仅意味着人民具备了一般发展的物质条件和精神条件，还标志着人民获得了全面发展的条件。为全体人民普遍幸福创造基本条件，是新时代社会主义重要而长期的任务。需要从经济、政治、文化、社会和生态等方面进行探索实践。从唯物史观来看，作为一种社会意识的幸福感，本质上来源于特定的社会生活实践，是作为主体的人与特定的社会生活场域结合的产物。以普遍幸福作为目标，不断探索有效的人类劳动实践和生产方式，构建新的人与人、人与自然的关系，是人文经济学的基本任务。

(C) The Humanistic Economy is a Market Economy

（三）人文经济是市场经济

The market economy is the primary mode of resource allocation in modern society. Its greatest difference from other non-market modes of resource allocation is that the market economy constructs a basic mechanism of economic democracy. In such an economic system, every person, as both consumer and producer, participates in the activities of resource allocation. The market price mechanism, built on the concept of fair competition, automatically realizes resource allocation and income distribution, ensuring not only universal participation but also universal benefit. Although the market mechanism itself has defects that need to be remedied, on the whole it is more efficient and more humane than any other mechanism humanity has ever implemented. For a socialist economy, the market is not an optional or arbitrarily disposable instrument, but rather the basic apparatus through which the socialist economy operates. The leaders and theorists of the Communist Party of China, having deeply summarized the experiences and lessons of China's socialist practice, keenly recognized that the market mechanism can be combined with various forms of ownership to form economic systems with distinct characteristics, and ultimately completed the major theoretical innovation of combining socialism with the market economy. The high-level recognition of the decisive role of the market mechanism in resource allocation under socialist society—this major theoretical innovation—is of extremely great significance for the humanistic economy. On the one hand, under the constraints and regulation of the basic socialist economic system, the market economy inevitably manifests the notable humanistic characteristic of being "people-centered," that is, it inevitably becomes the basic mechanism for realizing the humanistic economy. On the other hand, historical experience and lessons both fully prove that the true realization of the humanistic economy cannot be separated from the functioning of the market mechanism. Therefore, in this sense, the humanistic economy and the market economy are inseparable from each other.

市场经济是现代社会主要的经济资源配置方式，它与非市场的其他资源配置方式最大的不同，就是市场经济构建了基本的经济民主机制。在这样一个经济体系中，每一个人作为消费者和生产者，都参与到了资源配置活动中。建立在公平竞争理念之上的市场价格机制，使资源配置和收入分配自动实现，不仅保障了人人参与，还实现了人人得益。虽然市场机制自身有着需要弥补的缺陷，但总体上它比迄今为止人类实施过的任何其他机制都更有效率，也更加人道。市场对于社会主义经济而言，并不是可有可无、予取予求的手段，而是社会主义经济运行的基本装置。中国共产党的领导者和理论家们深入总结中国社会主义实践的经验教训，深刻认识到市场机制可以与各种不同的所有制结合，形成各具特色的经济体制，最终完成了社会主义与市场经济结合的重大理论创新。高度承认市场机制在社会主义社会资源配置中的决定性作用，这一重大理论创新对于人文经济的意义是极其重大的。一方面，在社会主义基本经济制度的约束和规范下，市场经济必然呈现出“以人为本”的显著人文特性，即它必然成为实现人文经济的基本机制；另一方面，历史的经验和教训都充分证明，人文经济的真正实现，无法离开市场机制的作用。因此，在这个意义上，人文经济与市场经济是互不可分的。

(4) The humanistic economy is a moral economy

（四）人文经济是道德经济

Both China's Confucius and ancient Greece's Aristotle placed the moral life of human beings at a position of vital importance at the core. Both held that human happiness is a kind of character and moral capacity; in other words, only virtue can guarantee happiness.

无论是中国的孔子，还是古希腊的亚里士多德，都把人类的道德生活放到至关重要的核心地位予以看待。他们都认为，人的幸福是一种品性和道德能力，换言之，只有德性才能保障幸福。

A humanistic economy centered on all the people and aimed at universal happiness is necessarily an economy with intrinsic moral functions. In each of the links of production, distribution, exchange, and consumption, there are corresponding moral stipulations. The behavior of managers, producers, consumers, and other social subjects also embodies the virtues required by the social community. Families, enterprises, governments, and other socioeconomic organizations also naturally fulfill corresponding social responsibilities and exert positive externalities.

以全体人民为中心，以普遍幸福为目标的人文经济，必然是一种具有内在道德功能的经济。在生产、分配、交换、消费的各个环节，都有相应的道德规定性。管理者、生产者、消费者及其他社会主体的行为，也体现着社会共同体所要求具备的德性。家庭、企业、政府及其他社会经济组织，也都自然履行着相应的社会责任，发挥着正外部性。

A humanistic economy defined in this way cannot take one-sided accumulation of wealth or the efficiency of allocation of economic factors as the sole standard for judging whether the economy is successful. Rather, it should be evaluated in terms of whether it can realize the sustainability of production and consumption, whether it benefits the public order and good customs of the whole society, whether it is conducive to the healthy development of all the people, whether it helps improve the moral quality of all the people, and whether it enhances the capabilities of all the people. As a moral economy, the focus of development of the humanistic economy is no longer to satisfy the people's lower-level material and cultural needs, but to satisfy higher-level needs (especially the needs of spiritual enrichment and development). It not only attaches importance to satisfying individual and partial needs, but also to satisfying the needs of the whole and of the collective. It not only attaches importance to people's current static needs, but also to the dynamic needs of future development. As a moral economy, because the humanistic economy has the function of satisfying people's moral sense and possesses notable moral legitimacy, it can obtain broad recognition and support from the whole society.

如此定义的人文经济，就不能仅仅以片面的财富积累多少和经济要素配置效率高低作为衡量经济是否成功的标准，而是应当从能否实现生产和消费的可持续，是否有益于全社会的公序良俗，是否有利于全体人民的健康发展，是否有助于全体人民道德品质的改善，是否提升全体人民的能力等方面进行评价。作为道德经济的人文经济，发展的重点不再是满足人民的较低层次的物质文化需要，而是满足较高层次的需要（特别是精神丰富与发展的需要）；它不仅重视满足个体的和局部的需要，还重视满足全体的、共同的需要；它不仅重视人们当下的静态需求，还重视未来发展的动态需求。作为道德经济的人文经济，因为具有满足人们道德感的功能和显著的道德正当性，因此能够获得全社会的广泛认同和支持。

Economic life is not only directly related to people's material life, but is also increasingly establishing close connections with people's spiritual life. How can economic life better help people elevate their spiritual realm? How can the design of economic mechanisms effectively realize the compatibility of wealth growth with the moral development of humanity? These questions are basic questions of the socialist economy, and they can only be thoroughly resolved under socialist conditions.

经济生活不仅与人们的物质生活直接相关，还日益与人们的精神生活建立起密切的联系。经济生活如何更好地帮助人们提升精神境界？经济机制的设计如何有效地实现财富增长与人类道德发展相兼容？这些问题是社会主义经济的基本问题，它们也只有在社会主义条件下才能得到彻底解决。

(5) The humanistic economy is a cultural economy

（五）人文经济是文化经济

From Marx's viewpoint, the natural characteristics of human beings based on biological meaning do not constitute the essence of the human being; in essence, the human being is created by culture. Culture carries the cumulative wisdom of the process of human evolution; that is to say, each of us, no matter in which era we live, is one link in the entire chain of culture. Culture in the broad sense both accumulates as the content of human historical development and evolution (it shapes the basic features and basic forms of society), and at the same time, with its intrinsic force, serves as the driving source of historical development. Therefore, the human being is culture, and culture is the human being; the humanistic economy is the cultural economy.

从马克思的观点来看，基于生物学意义的人的自然特性并不构成人的本质，人本质上是文化造就的。文化承载着人类进化过程中累积性的智慧，也就是说我们每一个人无论生活在哪个时代，都是整个文化链条当中的一环。广义的文化既作为人类历史发展和进化的内容累积（它塑造了社会的基本面貌、基本形态），同时也以其内在的力量充当历史发展的动力源。因此，人就是文化，文化就是人，人文经济就是文化经济。

When we define culture at the three levels of spirit, institutions, and artifacts, the humanistic economy as a cultural economy necessarily possesses connotations at all three levels simultaneously. The spiritual culture of a nation determines what preferences, concepts, visions, beliefs, tastes, and will its members possess. These spiritual elements are not entirely encompassed by the moral system. In economic life, such spiritual culture is embodied in the spiritual temperament of entrepreneurs, workers, and managers, and also in the people's value judgments and aesthetic preferences. The institutional culture of a nation is embodied in accumulated national habits, behavioral norms, and institutional arrangements (both formal and informal), and determines the type of collective action of the whole nation, as embodied in the ways and means of production, exchange, distribution, and consumption. The artifact culture of a nation is the real carrier of productive forces, embodied in the various material conditions of the people's clothing, food, housing, and transportation, as well as in the production and circulation systems that provide guarantees for these. The culture at all three levels can ultimately be displayed in a concentrated way in products; this is the concrete connotation of the industrialization of culture.

当我们以精神、制度和器物这三个层面来定义文化时，作为文化经济的人文经济，必然同时具有三个层面的内涵。一个民族的精神文化决定了它的成员具有何种偏好、观念、愿景、信念、趣味和意志，这些精神的元素，并不是道德体系所能完全涵盖的。在经济生活中，这样的精神文化体现在企业家、劳动者和管理者的精神气质上，也体现在人民的价值判断、审美偏好上。一个民族的制度文化体现在累积起来的民族习性、行为规范和制度安排（正规的和非正规的）等方面，决定了全民族集体行动的类型，体现在生产、交换、分配、消费的方式方法上。一个民族的器物文化则是生产力的现实载体，体现在人民衣食住行的各种物质条件以及为此提供保障的生产流通系统上。三个层面的文化，最终都可以在产品上集中展示，这就是文化产业化的具体内涵。

Even the culture of history is attached to the cultural heritage (in material and immaterial forms) that we face; with a little research and interpretation, it can be discovered. Excellent culture is transmitted through many carriers, and products are a very important carrier among them. For example, intangible cultural heritage in the current context concentrates the spiritual culture, institutional culture, and artifact culture of the era that produced it. Today, it has become a link connecting history and the contemporary era. On the one hand, intangible cultural heritage from the perspective of humanistic economics should not only serve as a historical and cultural element of wealth production, but also as an element of cultural and creative industries or cultural tourism industries. We must pay special attention to its special role in human survival, development, and enjoyment—a role that the mode of production of the era of large-scale machine industry does not possess. On the other hand, modern industry also has the aspect of needing to generate new use value through the implantation and empowerment of culture; culture endows a physical product with meaning and value, enabling it to establish closer and deeper connections with human spiritual life.

即便是历史上的文化，也依附在我们所面对的文化遗产（物质形态和非物质形态）之中，稍加研究解读，便可被发现。优秀文化通过很多载体得到传承，产品是其中很重要的载体。例如，当下语境中的非物质文化遗产，便集中了生产它的那个时代的精神文化、制度文化和器物文化。在今天，它成为链接历史与当代的一个纽带。一方面，人文经济学视野下的非物质文化遗产，不仅应该作为财富生产的历史文化元素，还应该作为文创产业的元素或者文旅产业的元素。我们要特别关注它对人的生存、发展、享受的特殊作用，这种作用是机器大工业时代的生产方式所不具备的。另一方面，现代产业也有需要通过文化的植入和赋能而产生新的使用价值的一面，文化为一个物理形态的产品赋予意义和价值，使其与人类的精神生活发生更加密切和深入的联系。

(6) The humanistic economy is an aesthetic economy

（六）人文经济是审美经济

Possessing aesthetic capacity is one of the main characteristics that distinguish human beings from animals. The human aesthetic capacity and the state of satisfaction of aesthetic needs complement each other. As aesthetic needs are continuously satisfied, human aesthetic capacity is also continuously elevated. It is precisely in the interaction of the two that the species-essence of the human being is presented at increasingly higher levels. In this sense, the more one departs from the low-level, animalistic "natural" needs, the more one manifests rich humanity. The comprehensive development of the human being, besides manifesting as a stronger body, a sounder mind, and a higher moral level, also manifests as the elevation of aesthetic capacity. Once a person's basic needs are satisfied, aesthetic needs become the main driving force guiding their production, consumption, and life. The satisfaction of aesthetic needs requires corresponding resource allocation and therefore has an indispensable economic character; the aesthetic economy naturally becomes an important marker of a high-level economy. Satisfying ever-strengthening aesthetic needs requires developing the corresponding capacity to supply aesthetic products.

具备审美能力是人类区别于动物的主要特征之一。人类的审美能力与审美需求的满足状况相辅相成。审美需求不断得到满足，人类的审美能力也会不断提升。正是在两者的互动中，人的类本质才得以在越来越高的水平上呈现。在这个意义上，越脱离低级的、动物性的“自然”需求，人就越表现得具有丰富的人性。人的全面发展，除了表现为身体更为强壮、心智更为健全、道德水平更高，还表现为审美能力的提升。人，一旦基本需要得到满足，审美需求就成为引导其生产消费、生活的主要动力。审美需求的满足，需要有相关的资源配置，因而具有不可或缺的经济性，审美经济就自然成为高水平经济的重要标识。满足不断增强的审美需求就需要发展相应的审美产品供应能力。

Aesthetic need, as a higher need that transcends humanity's material needs for survival, can only be satisfied through more creative and artistic production and management, and the aesthetic economy also possesses a more complex mechanism of value creation. In the era of the aesthetic economy, the use value of products is no longer measured on the basis of their physical properties; rather, products increasingly provide people with a mood or an atmosphere, a dream, the satisfaction of a spiritual desire. In terms of the fundamental force that guides it, the humanistic economy is an aesthetic economy. It takes humanity's ever-rising aesthetic need as its guide, humanity's inner impulse toward artistic creation as its driving force, and humanity's artistic skills as its mediating means, producing material or immaterial products to satisfy humanity's own aesthetic needs. In this sense, the aesthetic economy is the artistic form of the humanistic economy.

审美需求作为人类超越物质生活需求的更高需求，需要更具创造性和艺术性的生产经营才能满足，审美经济也具有更加复杂的价值创造机理。在审美经济时代，产品的使用价值不再基于产品的物理性能衡量，产品更多地为人们提供一种情调或氛围、一种梦想、一种精神欲望的满足。人文经济就其引领的基本力量而言，是审美经济。它以人类不断提升的审美需求作为引领，以人的艺术创造的内在冲动作为动力，以人的艺术技能作为实现中介，形成物质的或者非物质的产品，满足人类自身的审美需求。在这个意义上，审美经济是人文经济的艺术形态。

(7) The humanistic economy is a green economy

（七）人文经济是绿色经济

In the last short essay he left before his death, Mr. Qian Mu called the "view of the unity of Heaven and humanity" "the final destination of the entire tradition of Chinese cultural thought" and "the contribution of Chinese culture to the future survival of humanity in the world." (Qian Mu, 1991) In the ancient Chinese worldview, "the human" and "the heavenly," "the human way" and "the way of Heaven," are not two utterly distinct things; the relationship between them is not one of mutual opposition and mutual diminution, but one of mutual complementarity and unity. The Chinese recognized very early on that there is an intrinsic and fundamental relationship of coexistence between humanity and Heaven (nature). The "view of the unity of Heaven and humanity" is at once the ontological presupposition of Chinese philosophy concerning the mode of existence of humanity and the world, the essential stipulation constructed within the Chinese spiritual world concerning the relationship between the self and nature, and the cultural cognition, based on common sense, of the mechanism of mutual interaction between humanity and nature in material form—which is in fact the thought of ecological philosophy and ecology. Therefore, the "view of the unity of Heaven and humanity" is a holistic philosophical view that organically unifies the metaphysical and the physical aspects. With the development of anthropology, we today have come to understand more and more that, in the long history before the mode of production of capitalism came to dominate, whether in the stages of gathering, pastoral nomadism, or farming, humanity and nature were situated within an overall organic and cyclical ecosystem that was basically stable yet possessed dynamic evolutionary momentum.

钱穆先生在其生前留下的最后一篇短文里，将“天人合一观”称为“整个中国传统文化思想之归宿处”“中国文化对世界人类未来求生存之贡献”。（钱穆，1991）在中国古代的世界观中，“人文”与“天文”、“人道”与“天道”，不是截然不同的两个东西，它们之间的关系不是彼此对立、互为消长的关系，而是相辅相成的统一关系。中国人很早就认识到，人与天（自然）之间存在着内在的、根本性的共存关系。“天人合一观”，既是中国哲学关于人与世界之存在方式的本体论预设，是中国人精神世界中建构起来的关涉自身与自然之间关系的本质性规定，也是中国人基于常识的关于人与自然在物质形态方面相互作用机理的文化认知，这其实就是生态哲学和生态学的思想。因此，“天人合一观”是形而上和形而下两个方面有机统一的整体哲学观。随着人类学的发展，我们今天已经越来越多地了解到，在资本主义生产方式占统治地位之前的漫长历史中，无论处在采集、游牧、农耕的哪个阶段，人与自然都处于基本稳定又具有动态演化动力的整体有机循环的生态系统中。

The capitalist mode of production broke this ecosystem. In the process of rapid capital expansion driven by profit, the production system intensified its plunder of nature, and the ecological environment suffered unprecedented destruction. In the several centuries since the global expansion of capitalism, humanity's living environment has shown an overall trend of deterioration. Unrestrainable capitalist free competition and technological progress lacking regulation have indeed raised the efficiency of production, but the consequences they have brought about are rather severe.

资本主义生产方式打破了这一生态系统，在利润驱动的资本急速扩张的过程中，生产系统加大了对自然的掠夺，生态环境受到了前所未有的破坏。自资本主义全球扩张的几个世纪以来，人类的生存环境呈整体恶化趋势。难以约束的资本主义自由竞争与缺乏监管的技术进步虽然提高了生产效率，但造成的后果较为严重。

A people-centered humanistic economy must explore the establishment of a new nature-friendly economic system. Green must be the background color of the humanistic economy; the humanistic economy must be a green economy.

以人为本的人文经济，必须要探索建立自然友好型新经济体系。绿色必然是人文经济的底色，人文经济必然是绿色经济。

The above seven connotations of the humanistic economy all ultimately derive from "the human"; they are connotations extended outward with the human at the center. In the context of the humanistic economy, "the human" is no longer the human defined by the theoretical concept of the rational individual in the abstract sense, but the real human being active in the real world. It possesses both the characteristics of the "species" that Marx noted as distinguishing it from other natural species—that is, the commonality of humanity—and the characteristics of the "partial" human being who depends on historical and geographical space and carries the cultural accumulation of each community, and it is the unity of the two. This "human," embodying the universality of the "species," the partiality of society, and the particularity of the individual, is at once the subject that develops the humanistic economy and the goal and object that the humanistic economy serves. Among the expressions more familiar to the Chinese people, there are both the concepts of "the people" and "the masses" used in the political sphere, and the concept of "the common folk" used in the sphere of daily life. The humanistic economy is the economy of the people, the economy of the masses, the economy of the common folk.

人文经济的上述七大内涵，归根结底都是源自“人”，是以人为中心而延展出来的内涵。在人文经济语境中，“人”不再是由作为理性的个体意义上的理论概念定义的人，而是活跃在现实世界中的现实的人。它既具有马克思提到的区别于其他自然界别的“类”的特性，即人类的共性，也具有依存于历史地理空间、承载着各自社区的文化积淀的“局部”人的特性，是两者的统一。这个体现着“类”的普遍性、社会局部性和个体特殊性的“人”，既是发展人文经济的主体，又是人文经济服务的目标和对象。在中国人较为熟悉的各种表达中，既有在政治场域中使用的“人民”和“群众”概念，也有在生活场域中使用的“老百姓”概念。人文经济就是人民的经济、群众的经济、老百姓的经济。

Whether judged from the basic principles of Marxism or from the spiritual core of traditional Chinese humanism, the humanistic economy should be a basic attribute of Chinese-path modernization, and taking the road of the humanistic economy is the inevitable requirement and historical choice of Chinese-path modernization. Chinese-path modernization with humanistic economic attributes is what modernization ought to look like.

无论是从马克思主义基本原理还是从中国传统人文主义的精神内核出发来评判，人文经济应该是中国式现代化的基本属性，走人文经济之路是中国式现代化的必然要求和历史选择。具有人文经济属性的中国式现代化才是现代化应有的样子。

V. Exploration and Practice of Chinese-Path Modernization Based on Humanistic Economic Attributes

五、基于人文经济属性的中国式现代化的探索与实践

The humanistic economic attributes of Chinese-path modernization are not merely the belief of idealists, nor the rhetoric of politicians or textual formulations on paper; they are embodied in all aspects of the exploration and practice of Chinese-path modernization and are producing actual effects.

中国式现代化的人文经济属性，并非单纯是理想主义者的信念，也不是政治家的话术和文本上的说辞，它体现在中国式现代化探索与实践的各个方面，正在产生实际的效果。

At the level of the country as a whole, China has clearly and repeatedly emphasized the people-centered development thought, and has expressed the principal contradiction of society in the New Era as follows: "Socialism with Chinese characteristics has entered a New Era; the principal contradiction facing Chinese society has been transformed into the contradiction between the people's ever-growing need for a better life and unbalanced and inadequate development." The people-oriented character of China's political and economic systems provides the most fundamental institutional guarantee for the humanistic economic attributes of Chinese-path modernization.

从整个国家的层面看，中国已经明确并反复强调了“以人民为中心”的发展思想，并且把新时代社会主要矛盾表述为：“中国特色社会主义进入新时代，我国社会主要矛盾已经转化为人民日益增长的美好生活需要和不平衡不充分的发展之间的矛盾。”中国政治制度和经济制度的人民特性为中国式现代化的人文经济属性提供了最根本的制度保障。

From the perspective of the ideas and principles of political system design, whether it is the system of people's congresses, which aims at the organic unity of Party leadership, the people being the masters of the country, and law-based governance, or the system of multiparty cooperation and political consultation led by the Communist Party of China, the system of regional ethnic autonomy, and the system of grassroots self-governance, all may be called the systems most endowed with the character of the people in the history of humanity. Within such a basic political framework, economic activity naturally and reasonably acquires intrinsic and conspicuous humanistic characteristics.

从政治制度设计的理念和原则来看，无论是旨在实现党的领导、人民当家作主、依法治国有机统一的人民代表大会制度，还是中国共产党领导的多党合作和政治协商制度、民族区域自治制度、基层群众自治制度，都堪称是人类有史以来最具有人民性的制度。在这样一个基本的政治架构中，经济活动也就顺理成章地具有了内在的、显著的人文特性。

From the perspective of the ideas and reform goals of basic economic system design, the basic economic system with public ownership as the mainstay and diverse forms of ownership developing together, the resource allocation mechanism in which the market plays a decisive role, and the distribution system with distribution according to work as the mainstay and multiple modes of distribution coexisting, together form the system of the socialist economic system with Chinese characteristics. This system provides an important basic economic institutional guarantee for the realization of the humanistic economic attributes of Chinese-path modernization.

从基本经济制度设计的思路和改革目标看，公有制为主体、多种所有制经济共同发展的基本经济制度，市场发挥决定性作用的资源配置机制，按劳分配为主体、多种分配方式并存的分配制度，组成了中国特色社会主义经济制度体系。这一体系为中国式现代化人文经济属性的实现提供了重要的基本经济制度保障。

On the premise that the edifice of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics has laid its foundation and completed its four beams and eight pillars [4]4 "Four beams and eight pillars" (四梁八柱) is a Chinese idiom referring to the main supporting structure of a building, used figuratively to describe the establishment of the fundamental framework of a system., and that the basic connotations and requirements of Chinese-path modernization have all been made clear, all provincial-level administrative regions are striving to advance regional practice of Chinese-path modernization. Zhejiang Province bears the major missions of building an important window for comprehensively demonstrating the superiority of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics in the New Era, constructing a demonstration zone for common prosperity through high-quality development, and advancing the provincial-level pioneering of Chinese-path modernization. In the spirit of "doing solid work, marching in the forefront, and bravely standing at the helm," it has actively explored the path of developing the humanistic economy and has gained a series of valuable experiences worthy of further summation. In the more than 20 years since the implementation of the "Eight-Eight Strategy" [5]5 The "Eight-Eight Strategy" (八八战略) is a provincial development strategy for Zhejiang, put forward in 2003, which sets out eight advantages of the province and eight measures to promote its development., Zhejiang Province has taken the people's aspiration for a better life as its starting point, brought its own humanistic advantages into play, integrated a humanistic background color into the path of modernization, endowed economic growth with profound humanistic value, and striven to build a provincial-level model of Chinese-path modernization with humanistic economic attributes. The results have been highly conspicuous, and it has advanced to the forefront of the country.

在中国特色社会主义制度大厦已经奠定基础并完成四梁八柱、中国式现代化的基本内涵和要求都已明确的前提下，各省级行政区都在努力推进中国式现代化的区域实践。浙江省承担着打造新时代全面展示中国特色社会主义制度优越性的重要窗口、高质量发展建设共同富裕示范区、推进中国式现代化省域先行等重大使命，以“干在实处、走在前列、勇立潮头”的精神积极探索人文经济发展道路，取得了一系列值得进一步总结的宝贵经验。“八八战略”推行以来的20多年时间里，浙江省以实现人民对美好生活的向往为出发点，发挥自身的人文优势，在现代化道路中融入人文底色，为经济增长赋予深厚的人文价值，着力打造具有人文经济属性的中国式现代化省域样本，成效十分显著，走在了全国前列。

VI. Theoretical Innovation of Humanistic Economics in the Context of Chinese-Path Modernization

六、中国式现代化语境下人文经济学的理论创新

Realizing Chinese-path modernization with humanistic economic attributes is a great historical experiment without precedent. There is no doubt that China has achieved remarkable accomplishments that have attracted worldwide attention and has preliminarily displayed the bearing of a brand-new model of modernization oriented toward humanism. However, we must also see that the challenges ahead remain severe and the tasks remain complex and arduous. On the question of the great practice of using the humanistic economy as the main thread to drive the realization of Chinese-path modernization, conceptual innovation has been basically completed, but theoretical innovation is still far from sufficient. On some major theoretical questions, the academic community has not given due attention.

实现具备人文经济属性的中国式现代化，是一项前无古人的伟大历史实验。毋庸置疑，中国取得了举世瞩目的伟大成就，初步展现了人文主义导向的全新现代化模式的风采。但是，我们也必须看到，未来面临的挑战仍然严峻，任务仍然复杂而艰巨。在以人文经济为主线牵动实现中国式现代化的伟大实践这个问题上，观念创新已经基本完成，但是理论创新还远远不够。在一些重大的理论问题上，学术界没有给予应有的关注。

In the author's view, there are several aspects of the problem that still require in-depth research.

在笔者看来，有几个方面的问题尚需展开深入的研究。

First, it is necessary to comprehensively review the series of historically and globally significant practical explorations China has undertaken in implementing the people-centered basic development philosophy, taking the integration of basic Marxist theory and the fine traditional Chinese culture as the fundamental guiding thought, summarizing its experience and lessons, and elevating these to the level of theory. Establishing the “local normativity” of historical research, especially economic-historical research, is an urgent theoretical problem to be solved, and also a basic requirement for applying the basic principles of Marxism to guide historical research. The practice of Chinese-path modernization requires China to establish its own problem-consciousness and academic norms.

首先，要全面梳理中国在贯彻“以人民为中心”的基本发展理念方面所进行的一系列具有历史意义和世界意义的实践探索，以马克思主义基本理论和中华传统优秀文化的结合作为基本的指导思想，总结其经验教训并将其上升到理论的高度。确立历史研究尤其是经济史研究的“本土规范性”，是亟待解决的理论问题，也是运用马克思主义基本原理指导历史研究的基本要求。中国式现代化的实践，需要中国确立自身的问题意识和学术规范。

Second, it is necessary to conduct in-depth investigation and research, to discover the various real-world factors and principal problems that constrain the realization of humanistic-economic attributes, and further to carry out theoretical examination and analysis of these, seeking methods of resolution. The author has preliminarily sorted out some issues that should be studied as priorities: (1) After the establishment of the basic socialist economic system, how can the profit-seeking nature of capital be made maximally compatible with the humanistic attributes of Chinese-path modernization? (2) How can the modern administrative system and its mode of operation be effectively integrated with the socialist market economy system? (3) How can compatibility be achieved between common prosperity and sustained high-quality economic development? How should institutional and policy instruments be designed? How can the combination of efficient resource allocation and social justice be guaranteed through effective institutional mechanisms and policy design? (4) What kind of social organizations need to be built for the realization of humanistic-economic attributes? How should cooperatives, trade unions, and other mass organizations play their roles? What roles should they play? (5) In the construction of society-wide common capital, how should government, market, and society each play their roles? How should they coordinate with one another? (6) In resource-allocation activities centered on the humanistic economy, how can the authenticity and timeliness of market price signals be guaranteed? All these problems require serious and pragmatic research using the analytical methods of modern economic science.

其次，要深入调查研究，发现制约人文经济属性实现的各种现实因素和主要问题，并进一步对此进行理论上的考察分析，寻求解决的方法。笔者初步梳理了一些应该重点研究的问题：（1）在社会主义基本经济制度确立以后，如何保证资本的逐利性和中国式现代化的人文属性实现最大程度的兼容？（2）如何实现现代行政体制和运行方式与社会主义市场经济体制的有效结合？（3）如何实现共同富裕与经济高质量持续发展之间的兼容？制度和政策工具如何设计？如何通过有效的体制机制和政策设计保障资源配置高效率与社会公正之间的结合？（4）人文经济属性的实现需要建设何种社会组织？合作社、工会以及其他群团组织应该如何发挥作用？发挥何种作用？（5）在社会共通资本建设中，政府、市场和社会各自应该如何发挥作用？彼此又该如何联动？（6）在以人文经济为主线的资源配置活动中，如何保证市场价格信号的真实和及时？所有这些问题，都需要运用现代经济科学的分析方法进行严肃和务实的研究。

Third, it is necessary to attach great importance to and deeply study the impact of the modern technological revolution, represented by artificial intelligence, on humanistic-economic attributes. The continuous breakthroughs in artificial intelligence science and technology will certainly endow the development of productive forces with entirely new momentum and qualities. After humanity enters the New Era with artificial intelligence as its technological representative, the socio-economic form will undergo enormous changes, and human society will possibly achieve a leap in form—this is unquestionably revolutionary. But it must be recognized that the birth and development of artificial intelligence will greatly threaten the realization of humanity’s own humanistic characteristics. As far as economic activity is concerned, the widespread application of intelligent robots will trigger major crises in employment, income distribution, and other areas; the “non-human” character of industrial organization and its innovation will also increase exponentially; monopoly in economic life will be further strengthened, intensifying contradictions in the political, economic, social, cultural, ecological, and other spheres. How, against the backdrop of rapidly advancing technology, to realize Chinese-path modernization with humanistic-economic attributes is a major problem that must be treated with the utmost seriousness and addressed as early as possible.

再次，要高度重视、深入研究以人工智能为代表的现代技术革命对人文经济属性产生的影响。人工智能科学技术的不断突破，一定会为生产力发展赋予全新的动能和性质，人类在进入以人工智能为技术代表的新时代后，社会经济形态将会出现巨大的变化，人类社会将有可能实现形态上的跃升，这毫无疑问是革命性的。但是必须看到，人工智能的诞生和发展，将极大地威胁到人类自身的人文特性的实现。就经济活动而言，智能机器人的普遍应用将引发就业、收入分配等方面的重大危机；产业组织及其创新的“非人”特性也会指数型增加；经济生活中的垄断将会进一步加强，激化政治、经济、社会、文化、生态等多个方面的矛盾。如何在技术发展日新月异的背景下，实现具备人文经济属性的中国式现代化，是必须极端重视、尽早破题的重大问题。

Fourth, it is necessary to establish the due status of the modernization of the human person within Chinese-path modernization. Although the five major features of Chinese-path modernization all contain elements of the modernization of the human person, should we explicitly emphasize the foundational and core status of the modernization of the human person within Chinese-path modernization? How can the fundamental goal of the modernization of the human person be supported through ideological emancipation, institutional reform, and organizational innovation? How can education, medical care, culture, and other undertakings be organically incorporated into the foundational construction of Chinese-path modernization, strengthening and highlighting the fundamental significance of these fields in realizing the great cause of Chinese-path modernization? These are all questions worth exploring.

再次，要确立人的现代化在中国式现代化中的应有地位。中国式现代化所具有的五大特征，虽然都包含人的现代化因素，但是，我们是否应该明确地强调人的现代化在中国式现代化中的基础和核心地位？如何通过思想解放、制度变革和组织创新来支持人的现代化这一根本目标的实现？如何将教育、医疗、文化等事业有机地纳入中国式现代化的基础建设之中，强化和突出这些领域在实现中国式现代化伟大事业中的根本意义？这些都是值得探讨的问题。

Finally, it is necessary to comprehensively and deeply excavate the intellectual resources on the humanistic economy from ancient and modern times, China and abroad, and to treat humanistic economics research as an important lever and breakthrough point for building China’s independent economic-knowledge system. In this regard, the work we need to carry out includes at least the following aspects: first, research on the humanistic-economic dimension of Marxist political economy; second, research on the humanistic tradition in Western economic thought, especially excavating humanistic ideas since the founding of classical political economy in the eighteenth century; third, research on ancient Chinese humanistic-economic thought. In addition, the reflections of insightful persons during China’s modernization process are also something we should value and from which we should draw beneficial elements.

最后，要全面深入挖掘古今中外的人文经济思想资源，把人文经济学研究作为中国自主经济学知识体系建设的重要抓手和突破口来加以重视。在这个方面，我们需要开展的工作至少有以下几个方面：第一是作为马克思主义政治经济学的人文经济学向度研究；第二是西方经济思想中的人文主义传统研究，特别是挖掘自18世纪古典政治经济学创立以来的人文主义思想；第三是中国古代的人文经济思想研究。除此以外，中国现代化过程中有识之士的思考也是我们应该予以重视，并从中汲取有益成分的。

Web editor: Paul

网络编辑：保罗