Research on Humanistic Economics: A Major Agenda for the Theoretical Innovation of Adapting Marxism to the Chinese Context and the Needs of the Times

Chinese Communists bear the sacred mission of advancing theoretical innovation in adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times. In recent years, research on humanistic economics has become a major agenda for the academic community in promoting Marxist theoretical innovation. On March 5, 2023, General Secretary Xi Jinping, during his participation in the deliberation of the Jiangsu delegation at the First Session of the 14th National People's Congress, set a research topic: "Up above there is heaven, down below there are Suzhou and Hangzhou. [1]1 A classical Chinese saying from the Song Dynasty, praising the prosperity and beauty of Suzhou and Hangzhou. Both Suzhou and Hangzhou are cities that have taken the lead in economic development. Places with a well-developed culture can still take the lead economically. One can study the humanistic economics within this." On July 6 of the same year, General Secretary Xi Jinping, during an inspection tour in Suzhou, Jiangsu, made remarks that highlighted the distinctive features of the Suzhou model's development approach, pointing out Suzhou's future, which is also China's future: "Suzhou has done well in combining tradition and modernity. It not only has historical and cultural heritage but also high-tech innovation and high-quality development, representing the direction of future development."

中国共产党人肩负着推进马克思主义中国化时代化理论创新的神圣使命。近年来，人文经济学研究成为学界推进马克思主义理论创新的一项重大议程。2023年3月5日，习近平总书记参加十四届全国人大一次会议江苏代表团审议时布置了一个研究题目：“上有天堂下有苏杭，苏杭都是在经济发展上走在前列的城市。文化很发达的地方，经济照样走在前面。可以研究一下这里面的人文经济学。”同年7月6日，习近平总书记又在考察江苏苏州时谈了一席话，点出了苏州样本发展方式的鲜明特点，指明了苏州的未来，也是中国的未来，“苏州在传统与现代的结合上做得很好，不仅有历史文化传承，而且有高科技创新和高质量发展，代表未来的发展方向”。

General Secretary Xi Jinping's new thesis on humanistic economics has raised a major new proposition for contemporary Chinese Marxist theoretical innovation: humanistic economy and humanistic economics (Humanistic economy, Humanomics). In recent years, Chinese scholars have closely focused on the theme of humanistic economics, launching multi-disciplinary, multi-angle, and multi-faceted "problem-breaking" research and interpretation from aspects such as the profound background and important significance of the proposition of humanistic economics, its core essence, and the principles of systematic and theoretical construction. General Secretary Xi Jinping's new thesis on humanistic economics reveals a new relationship and new pattern of the integrated development of humanity and economy, highlights the people-centered development thought, unlocks the "humanistic code" of high-quality development, deepens the humanistic logic of "coordinating material and cultural-ethical progress" in Chinese-path modernization, represents the direction of future development, and is of extremely important significance for the theoretical innovation of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times. Centering on this new proposition, in order to further deepen the understanding of the important significance of research on humanistic economics, we should anchor on the following focal points: First, with methodological consciousness, deeply recognize the original contribution of General Secretary Xi Jinping's new thesis on humanistic economics to the theoretical innovation of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times. Second, how humanistic economics can become the humanistic logic that scientifically reflects and expresses the inherent requirements and future development direction of Chinese-path modernization. Third, comprehensively reveal and systematically elucidate the intellectual resources and theoretical lineage of humanistic economics. Fourth, accurately grasp the core essence and theoretical system of humanistic economics, and promote the theoretical innovation of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times.

习近平总书记关于人文经济学新论断为当代中国马克思主义理论创新提出一个重大新命题：人文经济和人文经济学（Humanistic economy，Humanomics）。近年来，我国学者紧紧围绕人文经济学这一主题，着力从人文经济学提出的深刻背景和重要意义、核心要义以及体系化学理化建构原则等方面，展开了多学科、多角度、多方面的“破题”性研究和阐释。习近平总书记关于人文经济学新论断揭示了人文与经济融合发展的新关系、新样态，彰显了以人民为中心的发展思想，解开了高质量发展的“人文密码”，深化了中国式现代化“物质文明和精神文明相协调”的人文逻辑，代表未来的发展方向，对于马克思主义中国化时代化理论创新具有极为重要的意义。围绕这一全新命题，为了进一步深化理解人文经济学研究的重要意义，我们应当锚定以下着力点：一是以方法论自觉深刻认识习近平总书记关于人文经济学新论断对马克思主义中国化时代化理论创新具有的原创性贡献。二是人文经济学何以成为科学反映和表达中国式现代化的内在要求与未来发展方向的人文逻辑。三是全面揭示和系统阐明人文经济学的思想资源与理论脉络。四是准确把握人文经济学的核心要义和理论体系，推动马克思主义中国化时代化的理论创新。

I. Humanistic Economics: A Major Proposition and Original Contribution in Adapting Marxism to the Chinese Context and the Needs of the Times

一、人文经济学：马克思主义中国化时代化的重大命题与原创性贡献

The first focal point for deepening research on humanistic economics is to systematically sort out and comprehensively understand the history of the emergence of General Secretary Xi Jinping's new thesis on humanistic economics, that is, the theoretical evolutionary logic of both maintaining continuity and advancing with the times from the proposal of "cultural economy" in *Zhejiang, A New Chapter* [2]2 *Zhejiang, A New Chapter* (《之江新语》) is a collection of 232 short commentaries to the proposal of "humanistic economics" after the 20th National Congress of the CPC, understand the questions of the era it addresses and the solutions it provides, systematically summarize and accurately understand the core essence of General Secretary Xi Jinping's new thesis on humanistic economics, and provide the most crucial ideological guidance and theoretical basis for constructing an independent knowledge system of humanistic economics.

深化人文经济学研究的第一个着力点，就是要系统梳理和全面理解习近平总书记关于人文经济学新论断的出场史，即从《之江新语》提出“文化经济”到党的二十大之后提出“人文经济学”的既一脉相承又与时俱进的理论演化逻辑，理解其针对的时代之问和解答方案，系统总结和准确理解习近平总书记关于人文经济学新论断的核心要义，为建构人文经济学自主知识体系提供最关键的思想指导和理论依据。

The textual-documentary history shows that humanistic economics, as an original theoretical innovation proposition in adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times, has undergone a complete process of innovation. General Secretary Xi Jinping has long paid attention to the interactive relationship between culture and economy. As early as October 30, 2006, in an article titled "'Cultural Economy' Lights Up Zhejiang's Economy" published in the "Zhejiang, A New Chapter" column of *Zhejiang Daily*, General Secretary Xi Jinping proposed the concept of "cultural economy," emphasizing that its "essence lies in the integrated development of culture and economy." In multiple documents including *Zhejiang, A New Chapter*, General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized the relationship between culture and economy. Since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, the integration of culture and economy has gradually enriched and deepened through the organic combination of Xi Jinping Thought on Culture and Xi Jinping's Economic Thought, until it was condensed into the proposition of humanistic economics within the major strategy of comprehensively advancing Chinese-path modernization, reflecting and expressing the essential requirements and future development direction of Chinese-path modernization. It is a complete discourse logic that advances with the times. Comprehensively sorting out the discourse logic of these documents and deeply recognizing the new thesis on humanistic economics is an inevitable choice for the theoretical innovation of contemporary Chinese Marxism, the theoretical crystallization and consistent proposition of the organic combination of Xi Jinping Thought on Culture and Xi Jinping's Economic Thought, and an original contribution of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. To this end, we must strive to understand it from the following aspects.

文本-文献史表明：人文经济学作为马克思主义中国化时代化具有原创性意义的理论创新命题，经历了一个完整的创新过程。习近平总书记长期关注文化和经济的交融互动关系。早在2006年10月30日，习近平总书记在《浙江日报》“之江新语”专栏刊发《“文化经济”点亮浙江经济》一文中就提出“文化经济”的概念，强调其“本质在于文化与经济的融合发展”。习近平总书记在《之江新语》等多篇文献中强调文化与经济的关系。党的十八大以来，文化与经济的融合在习近平文化思想和习近平经济思想的有机结合中逐步丰富与深化，直至在全面推进中国式现代化重大战略中被凝练为人文经济学命题，反映和表达中国式现代化的本质要求和未来发展方向，是一个与时俱进的完整话语逻辑。全面梳理这些文献话语逻辑，深刻认识人文经济学新论断，是当代中国马克思主义理论创新的必然选择，是习近平文化思想和习近平经济思想有机结合的理论结晶与一贯主张，是习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想的原创性贡献。为此，我们要着力从以下几方面加以理解。

First, the new proposition and original contribution are rooted in the questions of practice. Humanistic economics is an original theoretical generalization rooted in China's soil, drawing on China's experience, and reflecting and expressing the essential requirements of the Chinese path. Theoretical innovation must be problem-oriented, originating from practice and guiding practice. As early as during his work in Zhejiang, General Secretary Xi Jinping deeply pondered why the "Zhejiang people's economy" was successful, as Zhejiang was a pioneer of China's reform and opening up. Originating from this question, General Secretary Xi Jinping focused on the important role of "the interaction and integration of culture and economy" in promoting Zhejiang's development, and then used "cultural economy" as the theme to elucidate the important thought of the interaction, integration, and integrated development of culture and economy. Starting from a comprehensive observation of Zhejiang's development reality, General Secretary Xi Jinping deeply analyzed and comprehensively summarized the historical experience of Zhejiang's development, emphasizing that Zhejiang people are both "sensitive to excavating economic elements and commercial opportunities in cultural traditions" and adept at "using cultural forces to promote economic development." "Cultural economy" lights up Zhejiang's economy. It can be seen that this new thesis is rooted in China's soil, has obtained rich support from practical samples, and is a Chinese reflection highly refined and sublimated from reality.

第一，全新命题与原创性贡献根源于实践之问。人文经济学是扎根中国大地、汲取中国经验、反映和表达中国道路本质要求的原创性理论概括。理论创新要以问题为导向，源于实践、指导实践。早在浙江工作期间，习近平总书记就深入思考浙江作为中国改革开放的先行地，“浙江人经济何以成功”。由这一问题萌发，习近平总书记着力关注“文化与经济的交融互动”在推动浙江发展中的重要作用，进而再以“文化经济”作为主题来阐明文化与经济交融互动、融合发展的重要思想。习近平总书记从全面观察浙江发展的现实入手，深度分析和全面总结浙江发展的历史经验，强调浙江人既“敏于挖掘文化传统中的经济元素和商业契机”，又善于“以文化的力量推动经济发展”。“文化经济”点亮浙江经济。可见，这一新论断扎根中国大地，获得了丰富的实践样本支撑，是从实际出发的高度提炼升华的中国之思。

Second, the new proposition and original contribution are manifested in the "newness" of the research object and essential content, requiring "grasping the root of the thing" for thorough reflection and theoretical sublimation. Research on a new proposition requires theoretical thoroughness. Marx said: "Theory is capable of convincing the masses when it is thorough... and it is thorough when it grasps the root of the thing. But the root of the thing is man himself." [3]3 "Zhejiang people's economy" (浙江人经济) refers to an economic concept emphasizing the human and cultural factors behind the economic activities of people from Zhejiang province, distinct from the narrower "Zhejiang economy" which focuses on territorial output. The discourse in *Zhejiang, A New Chapter* uses the thorough spirit of "grasping the root of the thing" to reflect on and penetrate perceptual practical experience, accurately expressing the basic connotation of "cultural economy" with original discourse: "The so-called cultural economy is a general term for the economization of culture and the culturalization of the economy, and its essence is the interaction, integration, and integrated development of culture and economy." This classic generalization of "cultural economy" breaks the chronic ailment of fetishistic thinking in Western economics. It not only elucidates the relationship between economy and culture based on the basic principle of "determination and counteraction" in historical materialism but also innovatively expands the new relationship of their interaction and integration, clarifying the two-way transformation mechanism of "economization of culture and culturalization of the economy." Moreover, this generalization emphasizes the dialectical relationship in the development of human society that "the economy is the flesh and blood, and culture is the soul."

第二，全新命题与原创性贡献表现为研究对象与本质内容之“新”，需要“抓住事物根本”加以彻底反思与理论升华。全新命题研究需要理论彻底。马克思说：“理论只要彻底，就能说服人……所谓彻底，就是抓住事物的根本。而人的根本就是人本身。”《之江新语》文献论述以“抓住事物的根本”的彻底精神反思穿透感性实践经验，以原创话语精准表达了“文化经济”的基本内涵：“所谓文化经济是对文化经济化和经济文化化的统称，其实质是文化与经济的交融互动、融合发展。”这一“文化经济”的经典概括，破除了西方经济学拜物教之思的痼疾，既以唯物史观“决定与反作用”基本原理阐明经济与文化之间的关系，又创新拓展了两者交融互动的新关系，阐明了“文化经济化和经济文化化”双向转化机制。不仅如此，这一概括还强调了在人类社会发展中，“经济是血肉，文化是灵魂”的辩证关系。

Third, the new proposition and original contribution are manifested in the "newness" of the theoretical answer. It is necessary to stand on the principle of adhering to historical materialism to provide innovative answers to adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times, and comprehensively elucidate the mechanism of "cultural empowerment": "Culture endows economic development with profound humanistic value." First, establishing people through culture: culture makes people's economic activities become subjective behaviors, breaks free from "reification," and enables people to develop freely and comprehensively. Second, invigorating industries through culture: the combination of advanced culture and human factors improves the quality of the labor force, greatly expands the space for labor, and causes the ability and quantity of people to create wealth to grow geometrically. Third, nurturing harmony through culture: promoting mutual communication among people, enhancing social cohesion and competitiveness, promoting political and social harmony, using culture to enhance community functions to resolve social contradictions, and optimize the development environment. This comprehensive elucidation fully reveals the scientific mechanism of how culture casts the soul for the economy and promotes the interaction and integration of culture and economy into a "cultural economy," composing a great chapter rooted in China's soil to develop and expand the cultural economy.

第三，全新命题与原创性贡献表现为理论解答之“新”，必须站在坚持唯物史观原则的高度对马克思主义中国化时代化加以创新解答，全方位阐明“文化赋能”机理：“文化赋予经济发展以深厚的人文价值”，一是以文立人，文化使人的经济活动成为主体行为、摆脱“物化”、使人能够自由而全面发展；二是以文兴业，先进文化与人的因素结合提高劳动力素质、极大拓展劳动空间、使人创造财富的能力与数量呈现几何级数增长；三是以文化育和谐，促进人们相互沟通、提升社会凝聚力和竞争力，促进政治、社会和谐，以文化增进共同体功能来化解社会矛盾，优化发展环境。这一全方位的阐释，充分揭示了文化何以为经济铸魂、推动文化和经济交融互动成为“文化经济”的科学机理，谱写了一篇扎根于中国大地，开拓发展文化经济的大文章。

Fourth, the new proposition and original contribution are manifested in the "newness" of the research horizon, which necessitates expanding theoretical innovation. The classical textual exposition profoundly elucidates that "'the essence of the 'cultural economy' lies in the integrated development of culture and economy, and ultimately it must highlight the word 'human'." "The 'Zhejiang people's economy' [3]3 "Zhejiang people's economy" (浙江人经济) refers to an economic concept emphasizing the human and cultural factors behind the economic activities of people from Zhejiang province, distinct from the narrower "Zhejiang economy" which focuses on territorial output. 'takes people as its foothold and is more of a cultural concept.'" In advancing China's urban and rural development, "its core is people, and its end goal is also people." "People enhance their own value by creating greater economic value." "Culture is 'humanization'; cultural undertakings are those that nurture people's aspirations and cultivate their character. People, in essence, are cultural beings, not 'reified' beings; they are dynamic, well-rounded beings, not rigid, 'one-dimensional' beings. Humanity pursues not only material conditions and economic indicators but also a 'happiness index'; not only harmony in the natural ecology but also harmony in the 'spiritual ecology'; not only efficiency and fairness but also harmony in interpersonal relations and the enrichment of spiritual life, and the pursuit of the meaning of life."

第四，全新命题与原创性贡献表现为研究视域之“新”，必须拓展理论创新。文献论述深刻阐明了“‘文化经济’的本质在于文化与经济的融合发展，说到底要突出一个‘人’字”。“浙江人经济”“立足点是人，更多的是文化概念”。在推进中国城乡事业发展中，“其核心就是人，归宿也都是人”。“人通过创造更多的经济价值提高了自身价值。”“文化即‘人化’，文化事业即养人心志、育人情操的事业。人，本质上就是文化的人，而不是‘物化’的人；是能动的、全面的人，而不是僵化的、‘单向度’的人。人类不仅追求物质条件、经济指标，还要追求‘幸福指数’；不仅追求自然生态的和谐，还要追求‘精神生态’的和谐；不仅追求效率和公平，还要追求人际关系的和谐与精神生活的充实，追求生命的意义。”

In summary, this classical textual exposition profoundly elucidates the essential connotation and main functions of the "cultural economy," emphatically underscoring that culture is the soul that sustains the economy, and that the foundation of the cultural economy lies in people themselves, among other key elements. It outlines a theoretical map of the "cultural economy," laying a solid ideological foundation for our further profound understanding and accurate grasp of the evolution from the "cultural economy" to the new thesis of humanistic economics in keeping with the times, and thereby for it becoming a brand-new proposition for adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times, and an original contribution to Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era.

概而言之，这一原典文献论述深刻阐明了“文化经济”的本质内涵和主要功能，着力强调文化是支撑经济的灵魂，以及文化经济的根本在于人本身等关键内容，勾勒出一幅关于“文化经济”的理论图谱，为我们进一步深刻理解和准确把握从“文化经济”与时俱进地发展为人文经济学新论断，进而成为马克思主义中国化时代化全新命题，为习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想的原创性贡献打下坚实的思想基础。

Since the 18th National Congress of the CPC [4]4 The 18th National Congress of the CPC was held in 2012, marking the beginning of the New Era under Xi Jinping's leadership., the comprehensive proposal of the new thesis of humanistic economics represents a deepening of research on the "cultural economy" issue from the perspective of the organic integration of Xi Jinping's Cultural Thought and Xi Jinping's Economic Thought. It is also an innovative answer to the "question of practice" concerning how to comprehensively advance Chinese-path modernization in the historical juncture of the New Era and the new journey. Regarding culture, General Secretary Xi Jinping's statements such as "to promote high-quality development, culture is an important pivot point" and "to meet the people's ever-growing needs for a better life, culture is an important factor" all fully indicate that the integrated development of culture and economy is an inevitable choice conforming to the laws of the New Era and the new journey. It is also the concrete expression of the report to the 20th National Congress of the CPC, which states that "Chinese-path modernization is the modernization of material civilization and cultural-ethical progress in harmony." In a series of speeches on continuing the Chinese cultural lineage, strengthening cultural confidence and cultural innovation, and endowing Chinese-path modernization with profound heritage through Chinese civilization, General Secretary Xi Jinping comprehensively expounded on cultural thought. At the same time, in the reports to the 19th National Congress of the CPC and the 20th National Congress of the CPC, he proposed strategies to drive economic development through major cultural innovations, prominently emphasizing the important content of empowering economic and social development through culture. Thus, as a major proposition for the theoretical innovation of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times, humanistic economics has finally made its splendid debut, evolving from a focused reflection on the "cultural economy" behind the "Zhejiang experience" strategy to a theoretical proposition grasping the overall strategic situation of Chinese-path modernization.

党的十八大以来，全面提出人文经济学新论断，是在习近平文化思想与习近平经济思想有机结合的视野对“文化经济”问题的不断深化研究，更是在新时代新征程的历史方位对何以全面推进中国式现代化发展的“实践之问”的创新解答。关于文化，习近平总书记提出的“推动高质量发展，文化是重要支点”，“满足人民日益增长的美好生活需要，文化是重要因素”等都充分表明，文化与经济的融合发展是新时代新征程上顺应规律的必然选择，更是党的二十大报告指出的“中国式现代化是物质文明和精神文明相协调的现代化”的具体表达。习近平总书记在关于赓续中华文脉、坚定文化自信和文化创新、通过中华文明赋予中国式现代化以深厚底蕴等系列讲话中全面阐释文化思想的同时，在党的十九大报告、党的二十大报告中都提出以文化重大创新带动经济发展的战略，突出强调了以文化赋能经济社会发展的重要内容。由此可见，作为马克思主义中国化时代化理论创新的重要命题，从萌发于对“浙江经验”方略背后“文化经济”的专题审思到把握中国式现代化战略全局的理论主张，人文经济学终于辉煌出场。

II. Practical Consciousness and "People-Centeredness": The Logic Reflecting and Expressing the Essential Requirements and Future Development Direction of Chinese-Path Modernization

二、实践自觉与“以人民为中心”：反映和表达中国式现代化的本质要求和未来发展方向的逻辑

The second focal point for deepening the understanding of theoretical innovation is to adhere to integrating the basic tenets of Marxism with China's specific realities, and to comprehensively elucidate that humanistic economics is the "humanistic return" logic that reflects and expresses the essential requirements of Chinese-path modernization and represents the future development direction.

深化理解理论创新的第二个着力点，即要坚持把马克思主义基本原理同中国具体实际相结合，全面阐明人文经济学是反映和表达中国式现代化的本质要求、代表未来发展方向的“人文回归”逻辑。

The era is the mother of thought; practice is the source of theory. As a brand-new proposition for the theoretical innovation of 21st-century Chinese Marxism, the proposal of the humanistic economy and the new thesis of humanistic economics is an inherent requirement of Chinese-path modernization and represents the future direction of development. The report to the 20th National Congress of the CPC solemnly declared: "From now on, the central task of the Communist Party of China is to unite and lead the people of all ethnic groups across the country to build China into a great modern socialist country in all respects, achieve the Second Centenary Goal, and comprehensively advance the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through Chinese-path modernization." Chinese-path modernization breaks the historical myths of Western modernization, forming "Chinese characteristics" and essential "newness." Objectively, this requires simultaneously breaking the discursive hegemony of Western economics, which reflects and expresses Western modernization, and constructing an independent knowledge system of humanistic economics. Humanistic economics effectively addresses a series of malpractices in Western economics, such as "humanistic deficiency" and "humanistic paradox." It deepens the humanistic logic of Chinese-path modernization, which is "people-centered," follows the path of "common prosperity," and ensures "material civilization and cultural-ethical progress are in harmony." It emphasizes the integrated symbiosis of humanistic prosperity and economic development, unlocking the humanistic code of high-quality development in Chinese-path modernization, and providing a solid material foundation and powerful spiritual strength for advancing Chinese-path modernization and creating a new form of human civilization. This is the practical consciousness of integrating the basic tenets of Marxism with China's specific realities, based on promoting the theoretical innovation of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times. Its important significance is fully reflected in the following aspects.

时代是思想之母，实践是理论之源。作为21世纪中国马克思主义理论创新的全新命题，人文经济与人文经济学新论断的提出是中国式现代化的内在要求，代表未来的发展方向。党的二十大报告庄严宣告：“从现在起，中国共产党的中心任务就是团结带领全国各族人民全面建成社会主义现代化强国、实现第二个百年奋斗目标，以中国式现代化全面推进中华民族伟大复兴。”中国式现代化破除西方现代化的历史迷思，形成“中国特色”与本质之“新”，客观上就要同时打破反映和表达西方现代化的西方经济学的话语霸权，构建人文经济学的自主知识体系。人文经济学有效解决西方经济学“人文缺失”“人文悖论”系列弊端，深化了中国式现代化“以人民为中心”、走“共同富裕”道路、“物质文明和精神文明相协调”的人文逻辑，强调了人文繁荣与经济发展的融合共生，解开了中国式现代化高质量发展的人文密码，为推进中国式现代化、创造人类文明新形态提供了雄厚的物质基础和磅礴的精神力量。这是把马克思主义基本原理同中国具体实际相结合、立足于推动马克思主义中国化时代化理论创新的实践自觉，其重要意义充分体现在以下几个方面。

First, humanistic economics reflects and expresses the essential requirement of Chinese-path modernization to address and transcend a series of malpractices of Western modernization. The major mission shouldered by adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times lies in profoundly exposing the inevitability of a series of collapses caused by the profit-seeking nature and fundamental contradictions of capital in Western modernization, and profoundly elucidating the inevitability of Chinese-path modernization transcending the malpractices of Western modernization by pursuing a "people-centered" approach. The inevitability of a series of collapses caused by the "humanistic deficiency" of Western modernization is manifested in the following: First, the "reification logic" of capital's feast not only severely hinders the development of technological innovation and industrial revolution but also, because capital pursues增殖 (zēngzhí, valorization/expansion), leads to comprehensive conflicts with the fundamental interests of the masses, deepening chasms, and continuously generating crises that cause economic collapse. Second, the logic of capital causes "market failure," periodic economic crises, and the comprehensive alienation and antagonism of economic and social relations, leading to overall social collapse. Third, false democracy leads to "government failure," national division, and political collapse. Fourth, the "self-centered" value priority advocated by capital's profit-seeking leads to social division and cultural crisis, causing the collapse of the humanistic value system. Fifth, the impulse of capital's profit-seeking causes comprehensive conflict and rupture in the relationship between humans and nature, leading to the complete collapse of the natural conditions and metabolic functions necessary for human survival. Sixth, Western countries, led by the United States, advocate unilateralism, hegemonism, imperialism, and neo-imperialism, causing global unrest and leading to the collapse of the global governance system. The root cause of the six major collapses lies in the fundamental contradictions, comprehensive alienation, and humanistic crisis resulting from the profit-seeking nature of capital. The deviation of the "rational man" hypothesis promoted by the logic of capital from humanistic values becomes the main expression of this fundamental contradiction. Addressing the above malpractices and difficulties constitutes the inevitability of the emergence of the "newness" of the path and the "newness" of the essence of Chinese-path modernization. Chinese-path modernization adheres to the people-centered development philosophy, upholds the basic socialist economic system, and uses humanistic economics to stimulate vitality to promote high-quality development, thereby resolving the crisis of Western technological innovation and productive forces development. It takes the "people-centered" approach advocated by humanistic economics as the fundamental value orientation, advocates taking the path of modernization where all people achieve common prosperity to resolve capitalist social crises. It resolves the ecological crisis through modernization featuring harmony between humanity and nature. It resolves the crisis of civilization by taking the path of peaceful development and creating a new form of human civilization to improve the global governance system. In this way, it reverses the trend of the above six major collapses, thereby achieving the transcendence of Western modernization. Chinese-path modernization, through its successful practice of "modernization of people," breaks the hegemonic monopoly of the Western model of "modernization of things" over the practice of modernization, declaring the practical bankruptcy of the unilinear view of history inherent in Western modernization. However, for the success in practice to be transformed into the success of economic theoretical discourse, the main task is to further break the discursive hegemony of Western economics, which is inherently characterized by "humanistic deficiency" and "humanistic paradox," and to construct a humanistic economics that reflects and expresses the essential requirements of Chinese-path modernization and is committed to being "people-centered."

第一，人文经济学反映和表达中国式现代化着力解决和超越西方现代化系列弊端的本质要求。马克思主义中国化时代化肩负的重大使命在于深刻揭露西方现代化资本逐利本性与根本矛盾导致系列崩溃的必然性，深刻阐明中国式现代化以追求“以人民为中心”超越西方现代化弊端的必然性。西方现代化“人文缺失”招致系列崩溃的必然性表现在：一是资本盛宴“物化逻辑”既严重阻碍科技创新和产业革命的发展，又因为资本追求增殖而导致与大众根本利益的全面冲突，鸿沟深筑，不断产生危机而造成经济崩溃；二是资本逻辑造成“市场失灵”、周期性经济危机、经济社会关系的全面异化和对抗，进而导致社会全面崩溃；三是虚假民主导致“政府失灵”、国家分裂和政治崩溃；四是资本逐利倡导的“自我中心”价值优先导致社会分裂和文化危机，造成人文价值体系的崩溃；五是资本逐利冲动造成人与自然关系的全面冲突和断裂，导致人类生存所需自然条件和新陈代谢功能的彻底崩溃；六是以美国为首的西方国家主张单边主义、霸权主义、帝国主义和新帝国主义，搞得世界不得安宁，导致全球治理体系崩溃。六大崩溃的根本原因在于资本逐利本性导致的根本矛盾、全面异化和人文危机，资本逻辑推崇的“理性人”假设与人文价值的根本背离成为这一根本矛盾的主要表达。解决上述弊端和难题成为中国式现代化的道路之“新”和本质之“新”出场的必然性。中国式现代化坚持以人民为中心的发展思想，坚持社会主义基本经济制度，以人文经济学激发活力来促进高质量发展以解决西方技术创新与生产力发展危机；以人文经济学主张的“以人民为中心”为根本价值导向，主张走全体人民共同富裕的现代化道路来解决资本主义社会危机；以人与自然和谐共生的现代化来解决生态危机；以走和平发展道路、创造人类文明新形态的现代化来完善全球治理体系，化解文明危机。以此扭转上述六大崩溃的趋势，从而实现对西方现代化的超越。中国式现代化以“人的现代化”成功实践打破了西方单纯以“物的现代化”模式对现代化实践的霸权垄断，宣告了西方现代化内蕴的单线式历史观在实践上的破产。但是，实践上的成功要转化为经济学理论话语的成功，主要任务就是要进一步打破内在固有“人文缺失”“人文悖论”的西方经济学话语霸权，构建反映和表达中国式现代化的本质要求、致力于“以人民为中心”的人文经济学。

Second, humanistic economics transcends the “humanistic paradox” flaw caused by the “rational man” assumption of mainstream Western economics, which reflects and expresses the logic of capital in Western modernization. The founder of Western economics, Adam Smith, in *An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations*, defined the subject as the “rational man” driven by profit-seeking instincts in the economic sphere, i.e., the “personification of capital.” Contradicting this idea, in *The Theory of Moral Sentiments*, he regarded humans as cultural subjects in social life, holding that human social nature is rich in moral sentiments and humanistic aspirations. However, treating the economic and social spheres as two strictly separated “parallel worlds,” splitting the “rational man” and the “moral man” in two, and excluding humanistic elements from the field of economics—this is the theoretical root of the “humanistic paradox” flaw that Western economics has never been able to shake off. This flaw was termed by [I. G.] Rozenberg in *A History of Political Economy* as “Smith’s dilemma” or “Smith’s problem”; in essence, it is a “humanistic paradox” and “humanistic deficit” caused by the rupture between the humanistic and the economic. Max Weber, in *The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism*, attempted to bridge this split, but his method was to reduce Protestant ethics to the spirit of the “personification of capitalism.” The great split between “humanism” and “instrumental rationality” in the 20th century directly tore apart these two foundations of Western modernity, leading to the desolate scene of Western modern culture degenerating into “late modernity.” Daniel Bell, in *The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism*, displayed this cultural contradiction and social fragmentation. The crisis of Western modernity ultimately led to postmodernity amid the “death of man” and the “collapse of reason.” The global economic crises that erupted repeatedly in the 20th century all proclaimed the “market failure” of pursuing economic equilibrium based on the “rational man” assumption. The international financial crisis that broke out in 2008 once again proclaimed the “fundamental collapse” of attempts to regenerate “market orientation” through the logic of capital innovation.

第二，人文经济学是对反映和表达西方现代化资本逻辑诉求的西方主流经济学“理性人”假设造成的“人文悖论”弊端的超越。西方经济学创始人亚当·斯密在《国民财富的性质和原因的研究》中规定的主体是在经济领域中充满逐利本性的“理性人”，即“资本人格化”。与这一思想相矛盾，他在《道德情操论》中又将人在社会生活中视为文化主体，认为人的社会本性富有道德情怀和人文诉求。然而，将经济领域和社会领域看作壁垒森严的“两个平行世界”，将“理性人”与“道德人”一分为二，将人文要素排斥在经济学领域之外，这就是西方经济学始终无法摆脱“人文悖论”弊端困扰的理论病因。这一弊端被卢森贝在《政治经济学史》中称为“斯密之困”或“斯密问题”，本质上就是人文和经济断裂造成的“人文悖论”“人文缺失”。马克斯·韦伯在《新教伦理与资本主义精神》中企图弥合这一分裂，但是其方法就是将新教伦理归结为“资本主义人格化”精神。20世纪“人本主义”与“工具理性”的大分裂，直接撕裂了西方现代性这两大根基，导致西方现代文化没落为“晚期现代性”的荒凉景象，丹尼尔·贝尔在《资本主义文化矛盾》一书中展示了这一文化矛盾与社会分裂场景。西方现代性危机最终在“人之死”与“理性崩溃”中导向后现代。20世纪历次爆发的世界性经济危机，都宣告了以“理性人”假设追求经济均衡的“市场失灵”。2008年爆发的国际金融危机，再一次宣告企图通过资本创新逻辑再生“市场导向”的“根本崩溃”。

Humanistic economics upholds the fundamental position of being people-centered and the essential requirement of common prosperity in Chinese-path modernization, creating a new people-centered economics that transcends the private-ownership basis and commodity fetishism of the “rational man” assumption in Western economics. It is in this sense that humanistic economics is the economic expression of the essential requirements of Chinese-path modernization, and the innovation and development in the New Era of the historical materialist development thought centered on the people. In the new stage of comprehensively advancing Chinese-path modernization, this connotation has been further innovatively developed into a “people-centered thought on modernization and development,” which advocates that Chinese-path modernization is for the people, relies on the people, and its fruits are shared by the people, ensuring that the achievements of modernization benefit all the people more and more fairly, and taking the path of “common prosperity” where “all the people share in the fruits of modernization.” This is the essential requirement of Chinese-path modernization, and it is also the fundamental purpose of the “humanistic return” of humanistic economics. It can be said that humanistic economics in the New Era is the humanistic logic guiding high-quality development.

人文经济学秉持以人民为中心的根本立场和共同富裕这一中国式现代化的本质要求，创造以人民为中心的新经济学，超越西方经济学“理性人”假设的私有本位与资本拜物教藩篱。正是在上述意义上，人文经济学是中国式现代化的本质要求的经济学表达，是唯物史观以人民为中心的发展思想在新时代的创新和发展。在全面推进中国式现代化的新阶段，这一内涵进一步创新发展为“以人民为中心的现代化发展思想”，主张中国式现代化发展为了人民、发展依靠人民、发展成果由人民共享，让现代化建设成果更多更公平惠及全体人民，走“全体人民共享现代化发展成果”的“共同富裕”道路。这是中国式现代化的本质要求，更是人文经济学“人文回归”的根本宗旨，可以说新时代人文经济学是引领高质量发展的人文逻辑。

Third, humanistic economics unlocks the “humanistic code” of high-quality development and represents the adaptation of Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times. The reasons for this judgment are as follows. First, developing new quality productive forces is the intrinsic requirement and key focus for promoting high-quality development. Historical materialism points out that productive forces are the fundamental driving force of human social development. New quality productive forces are the main driving energy of high-quality development. Promoting high-quality development requires not only seizing the major opportunity of the new round of scientific and technological revolution, using disruptive technologies to drive industrial revolution, but also, more importantly, employing innovative humanistic empowerment—that is, supported by profound humanistic foundations, guided by new humanistic goals, and guaranteed by new humanistic tracks and rules. Innovation is essentially a people-oriented, people-centered undertaking. People are both the initiators of innovation and the practitioners of technological application; they are the most active and decisive dynamic subject in forming new quality productive forces. Without people imbued with the spirit of revering culture and exquisite craftsmanship, without talent possessing innovative qualities, there would be no subject to invent and control new quality productive forces, and all high-quality development would become water without a source and a tree without roots. Cultivate people through culture, invigorate industries through culture; “to promote high-quality development, culture is an important fulcrum.” [5]5 “推动高质量发展，文化是重要支点” (to promote high-quality development, culture is an important fulcrum) — a formulation attributed to Xi Jinping, emphasizing the role of culture as a supporting pillar for economic development. Second, the humanistic-led new driving force is an inevitable requirement of the evolutionary law of total factor productivity. Total Factor Productivity (TFP) refers to the additional production efficiency achieved under given input levels of various factors. This additional production efficiency mainly comes from improvements in factor quality or increases in resource allocation efficiency. Under conditions where other inputs remain relatively stable, resources, management, capital, technological innovation, and humanistic factors may all become the dominant factor driving changes in resource allocation variables. As a dominant factor, new quality productive forces represent a new form and new stage in the evolution of total factor productivity. However, on a global scale, the dominant driving factor in total factor productivity varies across different stages of development. In the first stage of TFP improvement, the driving factor is mainly resources, forming the primary industry and a resource-dominated economy. The driving factor in the second stage is mainly capital, forming a capital-dominated economy that controls diversified industries. The capital-dominated economy inherently possesses a profit-seeking orientation, which inevitably leads to sharp contradictions with the people’s pursuit of common prosperity, and therefore it must exit the stage. The third stage is the stage of new quality productive forces brought about by the industrial revolution from the scientific and technological revolution, forming a pattern led by innovation with resources and capital as subordinate factors. This is the inevitable choice in the era of accelerated innovation driven by the Fourth Industrial Revolution in the 21st century. The technological revolution and new quality productive forces must break free from the anti-human, anti-democratic trend of pure efficiencyism in “capitalism + technological revolution” advocated by the Western right-wing “accelerationism,” effectively addressing this directional and strategic challenge with a new humanistic driving force, and seizing the initiative in leading the technological revolution through humanistic economics. Therefore, the new humanistic driving force inevitably becomes the dominant factor in the fourth development stage of total factor productivity. Third, establishing new humanistic goals is necessary to correctly guide the future direction of high-quality development and create a new humanistic pattern, i.e., a humanistic economic form. The entire chain of the Western scientific and technological revolution and industrial revolution operates under the control of capital, from the strategic layout of R&D to the planning of industrial promotion, all serving capital’s profit-seeking and acting as the latest sharp tool for exploiting the masses. To ensure that the direction of high-quality development in our country does not deviate, that strategies do not err, and that the overall process does not encounter major setbacks, it is necessary to use the new humanistic goal of “people-centeredness” for directional guidance. Closely centering on the goal of meeting the people’s ever-growing needs for a better life, correctly guiding the scientific and technological revolution, driving the strategic layout of the industrial revolution, and pushing the new dominant driving force of total factor productivity toward the new stage of humanistic empowerment—this is the new humanistic pattern advocated by humanistic economics.

第三，人文经济学解开高质量发展的“人文密码”，是马克思主义中国化时代化。之所以如此判断，一是因为发展新质生产力是推动高质量发展的内在要求和重要着力点。唯物史观指明了生产力是推动人类社会发展的根本动力。新质生产力是高质量发展的主要动能。推动高质量发展不仅需要抓住新一轮科技革命重大契机，以颠覆性技术带动产业革命，更需要以创新的人文赋能，即以深厚的人文底蕴为支撑、以人文新目标为引领、以人文新赛道和新规则为保障。创新本质上是以人为本位、以人为中心的事业。人既是创新的发起者，也是技术应用的实践者，是形成新质生产力最活跃、具有决定意义的能动主体。没有饱含崇文精工精神之人，没有具备创新素质的人才，也就没有发明、掌控新质生产力的主体，那么，一切高质量发展就变成无源之水无本之木。以文立人，以文兴业，“推动高质量发展，文化是重要支点”。二是因为人文主导新动能是全要素生产率演化规律的必然要求。全要素生产率（Total Factor Productivity，简称TFP），是指在各种要素投入水平既定条件下，所达到的额外生产效率。这个额外的生产效率主要来自要素质量提升或资源配置效率提高。在其他投入相对稳定的情况下，资源、管理、资本、科技创新、人文等都可能成为促使资源配置变量的主导要素。新质生产力作为主导要素是全要素生产率演化的新形式、新阶段。然而，就全世界范围来看，全要素生产率中的主导驱动要素在不同的发展阶段上呈现不同。在全要素生产率提高的第一阶段上，驱动要素主要是资源，形成第一产业，成为资源主导型经济。第二阶段的驱动要素主要是资本，形成支配多元化产业的资本主导型经济。资本主导型经济先天具有的逐利导向，与大众追求共同富裕目标之间必然发生尖锐矛盾，因此必然被退场。第三阶段为科技革命带来产业革命呈现新质生产力阶段，形成由创新引领、资源和资本要素为从属的格局，这正是21世纪第四次工业革命加速创新时代的必然选择。技术革命和新质生产力必须摆脱西方右翼“加速主义”所主张的反人性、反民主的“资本主义+技术革命”的单纯效率主义潮流，以人文新动能有效应对这一方向性、战略性挑战，以人文经济学掌握领跑科技革命的主动权。因此，人文新动能必然成为全要素生产率第四个发展阶段的主导要素。三是因为确立人文新目标才能正确指引高质量发展的未来方向，创造人文新样态即人文经济形态。西方科技革命和产业革命全链都在资本操控之下，从研发战略布局到产业推广规划，都在为资本逐利服务，充当剥削大众的最新利器。我国要保障高质量发展方向不偏、战略不失误、总体进程不遭遇大挫折，就需要“以人民为中心”的人文新目标加以定向引导。紧紧围绕满足人民美好生活需要这一目标，正确引导科技革命，带动产业革命战略布局，推动全要素生产率主导新动能向人文赋能要素的新阶段迈进。这是人文经济学主张的人文新样态。

Fourth, humanistic economics is the humanistic logic of the “coordination of material and cultural-ethical progress” in Chinese-path modernization. The fundamental reasons for this are, first, that Chinese-path modernization pursues a humanistic return, breaking with the rupture between material and cultural-ethical progress inevitably brought about by Western modernization’s confinement to the profit-seeking nature of capital logic and its exaltation of the “modernization of things,” through its “newness of path” and “newness of essence,” and moving toward the new goal of the “modernization of people.” Second, “culture is an important factor in meeting the people’s ever-growing needs for a better life.” Continuously satisfying the people’s aspiration for a better life is the fundamental purpose of Chinese-path modernization. The people’s better life requires not only material abundance but also spiritual enrichment. Therefore, enriching the people’s spiritual world and achieving common prosperity for all the people are essential requirements of Chinese-path modernization. Material civilization, based on the “modernization of things,” supports the flourishing and development of the cultural-ethical progress contained in the “modernization of people”; the “modernization of people” appeals to cultural-ethical progress, elevating the realm and quality of material civilization. Third, “culture is an important fulcrum for promoting high-quality development.” Culture comprehensively elevates the realm and quality of economic development and is the soul that permeates high-quality economic development. By establishing people through culture, it comprehensively enhances the quality of the most active and key subject within the productive forces, thereby elevating the realm of high-quality development in Chinese-path modernization.

第四，人文经济学是中国式现代化“物质文明和精神文明协调”的人文逻辑。究其根本原因，一是中国式现代化追求人文回归、以“道路之新”和“本质之新”打破西方现代化囿于资本逻辑逐利本性崇尚“物的现代化”必然带来的物质文明和精神文明之间的断裂，走向“人的现代化”新目标的必然要求。二是“满足人民日益增长的美好生活需要，文化是重要因素”。不断满足人民对美好生活的向往是中国式现代化的根本宗旨。人民的美好生活不仅需要物质富足，而且需要精神富有。因此丰富人民精神世界，实现全体人民共同富裕是中国式现代化的本质要求。物质文明以“物的现代化”为基础，支撑“人的现代化”所包含的精神文明的繁荣与发展，“人的现代化”诉诸精神文明，提升物质文明的境界和品质。三是“推动高质量发展，文化是重要支点”。文化全面提升经济发展的境界和品质，更是浸入经济高质量发展的灵魂。以文立人，全面提升作为生产力中最活跃、最关键的主体品质，进而提升中国式现代化高质量发展的境界。

III. “Cultural Integration” and Ideological Resources: The Theoretical Thread for Constructing an Independent Knowledge System of Humanistic Economics in the New Era

三、“文化结合”与思想资源：建构新时代人文经济学自主知识体系的理论脉络

The third focal point for deepening the understanding of theoretical innovation is to comprehensively sort out the theoretical threads and ideological resources for constructing an independent knowledge system of humanistic economics in the New Era. Innovation occurs mainly in three important dimensions: First, humanistic economics possesses the “soul vein” of Marxism, requiring a theoretical positioning of humanistic economics within the systemization and theorization of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times. The reflection and critique of the humanistic deficit in Western economics by humanistic economics originate from Marx’s critique of political economy and the basic theories of historical materialism. We need to “return to Marx” and sort out the thread of critical reflection on Western economics from the *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844* (hereinafter referred to as the *Manuscripts*) to *Capital*. Second, comprehensively sort out the “root vein” of fine traditional Chinese culture, opening up a new domain for humanistic economics through the integration of the basic tenets of Marxism with China’s fine traditional culture, i.e., the Second Integration. Third, combine firm cultural confidence with an open spirit, open up a path for dialogue with the theories and practices of humanistic economics from countries around the world, break down the intellectual barriers of Western economics, absorb reasonable experiences and ideological resources from humanistic economics in various countries with a global vision, and construct a Chinese discourse and narrative system for humanistic economics in the New Era.

深化理解理论创新的第三个着力点，即要为建构新时代人文经济学自主知识体系全面梳理理论脉络与思想资源。其中主要在三个重要维度上创新：一是人文经济学具有马克思主义“魂脉”，需要对人文经济学在马克思主义中国化时代化体系化学理化之中加以理论定位。人文经济学对西方经济学人文缺失的反思批判源于马克思的政治经济学批判和唯物史观的基本理论。我们需要“回到马克思”，梳理从《1844年经济学哲学手稿》（以下简称《手稿》）到《资本论》对西方经济学批判性反思的思想脉络。二是全面梳理中华优秀传统文化的“根脉”，为马克思主义基本原理同中华优秀传统文化相结合，即“第二个结合”开辟人文经济学新论域。三是坚定文化自信与开放精神相结合，开辟与世界各国人文经济学理论与实践的对话路径，破除西方经济学知识藩篱，以世界眼光吸收各国人文经济合理经验和思想资源，以建构新时代人文经济学中国话语和叙事体系。

Humanistic economics in the New Era continues the soul-vein essence of the basic principles of Marxist political economy and historical materialism. This is the fundamental ideological prerequisite for accurately understanding and grasping the essential meaning of humanistic economics in the New Era. Marx’s *Manuscripts* is the pioneering work exploring Marxist humanistic economics, opening the ideological precedent for establishing humanistic economics in the New Era through the critique of political economy and historical materialism, and providing several important ideological fulcrums and contemporary inspirations.

新时代人文经济学是赓续马克思主义政治经济学基本原理与唯物史观的魂脉精髓，这是准确理解和把握新时代人文经济学本质要义的根本思想前提。马克思写作的《手稿》是探索马克思主义人文经济学的开篇之作，为以政治经济学批判和唯物史观创立新时代人文经济学开了思想先河，提供了若干重要的思想支点和当代启迪。

First, reflecting on and critiquing Western economics within an economic context opened an ideological precedent with a high degree of theorization for humanistic economics in the New Era to reflect on, critique, and transcend the “humanistic deficit” shortcomings of Western economics. Without entering the economic context, without reflecting on and critiquing the shortcomings of Western economics, Marx could not have uncovered the secrets of civil society and the logic of capital. Similarly, without contemporary Marxism entering the economic context of the 21st century, without reflecting on and critiquing the shortcomings of 21st-century Western economics, it would be impossible to establish humanistic economics in the New Era. The *Manuscripts*, as Marx’s pioneering work on the path to establishing historical materialism, uses a firm “reflective problematic” and rigorous discourse of critique of national economics to clearly point out the “humanistic deficit” and “humanistic paradox” shortcomings of Western economics, transcending the scope of Feuerbach, Hess, and others’ moral critique of capitalism. The major mission of constructing the discourse of humanistic economics in the New Era is to continue and develop this ideological tradition, retrace Marx’s path of inquiry from that time, and promote the grand emergence of a new form of humanistic economics in the New Era through a dual transcendence of the “humanistic deficit” and narrow intellectual barriers of Western economics.

一是以经济学语境反思批判西方经济学，为新时代人文经济学反思批判和超越西方经济学“人文缺失”弊端开了具有学理化境界高度的思想先河。不入经济学语境，不反思、不批判西方经济学弊端，马克思就不能揭开市民社会和资本逻辑的秘密。同样，当代马克思主义不入21世纪经济学语境，不反思、不批判21世纪的西方经济学弊端，就不能创立新时代人文经济学。《手稿》作为马克思通向创立唯物史观之途的开篇之作，以坚定的“反思的问题学”和严谨的国民经济学批判话语，明确指出西方经济学的“人文缺失”“人文悖论”弊端，超越了费尔巴哈、赫斯等人对资本主义局限于道德化批判的视域。新时代人文经济学话语建构的重大使命，就是要赓续与发展这一思想传统，重走当年马克思的求索之路，在对西方经济学“人文缺失”和狭隘知识藩篱的双重超越之中推动新时代人文经济学新形态隆重出场。

Second, when critically studying the national economics works of Smith, Ricardo, Mill, Say, Skarbek, List, and others, Marx pointed out sharply: the fundamental defect of their theories lies in their “indifference to people,” and the fundamental shortcoming lies in causing the complete loss of the status of the species-essence of people as laborers. Marx reached this conclusion with a high degree of confidence in the theory: “I need not assure the reader who is familiar with national economics that my conclusions are based on a completely empirical analysis, grounded in a serious critical study of national economics.” [6]6 Karl Marx, *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*, in *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 3 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1975), p. 231. [Translator’s note: The English rendering follows the standard English edition; the Chinese original cites a different edition.] Through complete experience, starting from the critical study of national economics and reflection on the “humanistic deficit” shortcomings of Western economics, Marx opened the path of critique of political economy leading to historical materialism, and opened the path of construction leading to humanistic economics in the New Era.

二是马克思在批判地研读斯密、李嘉图、穆勒、萨伊、斯卡尔倍克、李斯特等人的国民经济学著作时一针见血地指出：他们理论的根本缺陷就在于“对人的漠不关心”，根本弊端在于造成了作为劳动者的人的类本质地位的全面丧失。马克思得出这一结论具有高度理论自信：“我用不着向熟悉国民经济学的读者保证，我的结论是通过完全经验的、以对国民经济学进行认真的批判研究为基础的分析得出的。”马克思通过完全经验，从对国民经济学的批判研究，以及对西方经济学“人文缺失”弊端的反思出发，开辟了通向唯物史观的政治经济学批判之路，开辟了通向新时代人文经济学的建构之路。

Third, the *Manuscripts* further attributes the root cause of the “indifference to people,” i.e., the “humanistic deficit” and “humanistic paradox” shortcomings of Western economics, to the “alienation of labor” leading to the separation and opposition between human existence and essence. The reason Marx criticized national economics is that it starts from private property yet cannot reasonably explain a basic “dehumanizing” fact: “the more wealth the worker produces, the greater the influence and scale of his production, the poorer he becomes.” [7]7 Ibid., p. 272. This is a situation where “objectification appears as the loss of the object and its enslavement by it, and appropriation appears as alienation, as externalization.” [8]8 Ibid., p. 272. As a concentrated expression of the rupture and opposition in the relationship between laboring subjects, the profit-seeking “rational man” and the “original man” are essentially “alienated labor.” Marx highly summarized the fourfold determinations manifested by alienated labor: the worker’s alienation from the product of labor (alienated labor I), the alienation of labor itself (alienated labor II), the alienation of the human species-essence, i.e., labor and life (alienated labor III), and the complete inversion and total alienation of human relations (alienated labor IV). Alienated labor creates the separation and opposition between human essence and existence; private property is actually the resultant form of alienated labor. The result of alienated labor makes the worker a “person who has lost himself,” corresponding to “capital is a person who has completely lost himself,” i.e., the “humanistic deficit” and “humanistic paradox” expressed by humanistic economics. Therefore, this essential revelation defines the field of existence for humanistic economics to solve the “humanistic paradox” shortcoming, and thereby points out the direction. [9]9 The original text contains a typographical symbol () which has been omitted as it appears to be a formatting artifact.

三是《手稿》进一步将西方经济学“漠视人”即“人文缺失”和“人文悖论”弊端的根本原因归为“劳动异化”导致人的存在与本质的分离和对立。马克思之所以批判国民经济学，是因为它从私有制出发却无法合理解释一个“反人化”的基本事实：“工人生产的财富越多，他的生产的影响和规模越大，他就越贫穷”。这是一个“对象化表现为对象的丧失和被对象奴役，占有表现为异化、外化”。作为劳动主体之间关系的断裂、对立的集中表现，逐利本性的“理性人”与“原初人”，本质上就是“劳动异化”。马克思高度概括了劳动异化所表现的四重规定性：劳动者对劳动产品的异化（异化劳动Ⅰ）、劳动本身的异化（异化劳动Ⅱ）、人的类本质即劳动及生活的异化（异化劳动Ⅲ）以及人与人关系的全面颠倒与全面异化（异化劳动Ⅳ）。劳动异化造就了人的本质与存在的分离和对立，私有制其实是劳动异化的结果形态。劳动异化的结果使劳动者成为“失去自身的人”，相对应的是“资本是完全失去自身的人”，即人文经济学所表述的“人文缺失”和“人文悖论”。因此，这一本质性揭示为人文经济学解决“人文悖论”弊端界定了存在场域，进而指明了方向。

Fourth, the *Manuscripts* for the first time deeply reflects on and interprets the economic-philosophical logic of alienation and the sublation of alienation using humanistic dialectics, proposing the mission of “humanistic return.” In Marx’s view, sublating alienated labor is the process of removing the separation and alienation between human essence and existence and moving toward the restoration of human essence, thereby pointing out the direction for humanistic economics to explore the path of “humanistic return.”

四是《手稿》第一次以人本学辩证法深度反思和阐释异化和扬弃异化的经济学-哲学逻辑，提出“人文回归”使命。在马克思看来，扬弃劳动异化，就是祛除人的本质与存在的分离、异化和走向人的本质复归过程，从而为人文经济学探寻“人文回归”之路指明了方向。

Following the *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*, Marx further deepened his philosophical revolution. Although his intellectual trajectory shifted from abstract humanist dialectics to historical materialism, he did not thereby abandon his reflection on the two key focal points of humanistic economics (the critical reflection on the “loss of the human” and the exploration of the path to the “return of the human”). Instead, he used historical materialism to deepen his critical reflection on the logic of capital and the deep-seated defects of Western economics, scientifically discovering the path to realizing the “return of the human.” Beginning with the *London Notebooks* and the *Grundrisse*, Marx analyzed and explained the profound causes of the alienation of labor from the perspective of historical materialism, revealing the reified logic of the reproduction of the capitalist mode of production and relations of production. He pointed out that the loss of the human is an inevitable result of the alienation of labor, a manifestation of the reification of living labor, the fetishism of capital, and the personification of capital. Subsequently, in *Capital*, standing at the height of historical materialism, Marx scientifically answered the key questions concerning humanistic economics raised in the *Manuscripts* from four aspects, thereby providing scientific theoretical guidance for the theoretical construction of Marxist humanistic economics.

继《手稿》之后，马克思进一步深化哲学革命。他的思想进程虽然从抽象的人本学辩证法转换为唯物史观，但是他并没有因此而放弃对人文经济学两大关键着力点（对“人文缺失”的反思批判和对“人文回归”道路的探索）的思考，而是以唯物史观深化了对资本逻辑和西方经济学深层内蕴弊端的反思批判，科学发现了实现“人文回归”的道路。从《伦敦笔记》和《1857—1858年经济学手稿》开始，马克思就对劳动异化的深刻原因作了唯物史观的分析和阐释，揭示了资本主义生产方式与生产关系再生产的物化逻辑，指出人文缺失是劳动异化的必然结果，是活劳动物象化、资本拜物教和资本人格化的表现。进而，在《资本论》中，马克思站在唯物史观的高度从四个方面深入科学解答了《手稿》提出的关于人文经济学的关键问题，从而为马克思主义人文经济学的理论建构提供了科学理论指导。

First, through the critique of political economy, he thoroughly completed the philosophical revolution, abandoning the logic of humanist dialectics that advocates the “return to species-being” through the transcendence of alienation by a transcendental “abstract human,” and providing the most solid theoretical foundation of historical materialism for scientifically exposing the roots of the loss of the human caused by the logic of capital and for exploring the real path of the “return of the human.” Second, he further deepened the critique from the critique of the “copy” [*Fubao*] of political economy to the critique of the “original text” [*Zhengben*] of the logic of capital as an economic and social formation. Marx discovered that classical British and French political economy is the economic expression of the logic of capital and is therefore a “copy” form of presence. The critique of the “copy” cleared the ground for entering the critique of the “original text,” but it could not completely replace it. Therefore, Marx changed his original plan, naming the work *Capital* to mark the theme, with the research theme being “the capitalist mode of production and the relations of production and exchange corresponding to it,” and using “Critique of Political Economy” as the subtitle, indicating the primary and secondary relationship between the two. Furthermore, he revealed that the deep real root of the “loss of the human,” i.e., the “original text,” is the logic of capital, and that the defects of the “rational man” hypothesis are merely the “copy” expression in the discourse of classical economics. Therefore, tracing the real root of the “loss of the human” from the critique of the “original text” of the logic of capital and revealing the objective laws of the “return of the human” opened up a scientific path toward the goal of humanistic economics. Third, using the labor theory of value and the theory of surplus value, he comprehensively and thoroughly dissected why the “alienation of labor” in the fetishism of commodities, money, and capital presents an objective and real “logic of reification.” This is not only due to the “intuition” of classical economics but, at a deeper level, because in commodity production, the social relations between people “assume the fantastic form of a relation between things.” This fetishism is inseparable from commodity production and “arises from the peculiar social character of the labor that produces commodities.” The mechanism of the fetishism of capital is the same. Once labor power as a commodity enters the production process under the domination of capital, and once the product of labor becomes a capitalized commodity, then both “living labor” and “dead labor” become objects of capital’s “reification.” “Real people,” whether workers or capitalists, are no longer “people” but are reified into enslaved objects or the “personification of capital,” thereby uncovering the true root of the defects of the personification of capital and the “loss of the human.” Fourth, he profoundly exposed the secret of capitalist exploitation, revealing the law of the “iron necessity” of the withdrawal of the logic of capital and the inevitable emergence of socialism, thereby pointing out the real path to “the emancipation of the proletariat and humanity” and the “return of the human.” It can be seen that Marx’s critique of political economy and historical materialism provided the key theoretical fulcrum for the creation of humanistic economics in the New Era.

一是通过政治经济学批判彻底完成哲学革命，摒弃人本学辩证法崇尚通过先验“抽象的人”的扬弃异化达到“类本质复归”逻辑，为科学揭露资本逻辑导致人文缺失根源、探寻“人文回归”现实道路提供了最坚实的唯物史观的理论基础。二是进一步从政治经济学批判这一“副本”批判深入走向对资本逻辑这一经济社会形态的“正本”批判。马克思发现，英法古典政治经济学是资本逻辑的经济学表达，因而是“副本”形式的在场。对“副本”批判为进入“正本”批判廓清地平，但是不能完全代替“正本”批判。因此，马克思一改初衷，以《资本论》命名标识主题，研究的主题为“资本主义生产方式以及和它相适应的生产关系和交换关系”，将“政治经济学批判”作为副标题，表明了两者的主从关系。进而，揭示了“人的缺失”深层现实根源即“正本”是资本逻辑，“理性人”假设弊端只是在古典经济学话语中的“副本”表达。因此，从对资本逻辑“正本”批判来追溯“人的缺失”现实根源，揭示“人文回归”的客观规律性，开辟了通向人文经济学目标的科学道路。三是以劳动价值论和剩余价值理论全面深刻解剖了商品、货币和资本拜物教等“劳动异化”之所以呈现出客观现实的“物化逻辑”，不仅是因为古典经济学的“直观”所致，在更深层次上是因为在商品生产中人与人的社会关系“在人们面前采取了物与物的关系的虚幻形式”。这一拜物教与商品生产分不开，“来源于生产商品的劳动所特有的社会性质”。资本拜物教机制同样如此。作为商品的劳动力一旦进入资本宰制条件下的生产过程，劳动产品一旦变成资本化的商品，那么“活劳动”和“物化劳动”就都变成资本“物化”的对象，“现实的人”无论劳动者或者资本家都不是“人”，而都被物化为被奴役的客体或“资本的人格化”，从而揭开了资本人格化和“人文缺失”弊端的真正根源。四是深刻揭露资本剥削的秘密，揭示了资本逻辑退场、社会主义必然出场的“铁的必然性”规律，从而指明了“无产阶级和人的解放”和通向“人文回归”的现实道路。可见，马克思政治经济学批判和唯物史观为新时代人文经济学的创立提供了关键的理论支点。

Constructing an independent knowledge system of humanistic economics in the New Era requires a comprehensive sorting out of the roots of the excellent traditional Chinese culture that humanistic economics in the New Era possesses, and opening up new theoretical domains for humanistic economics in the Second Integration. In the over five thousand years of Chinese civilization, the rich excellent traditions of humanistic economics are not only recorded in the vast classics of Confucianism, Buddhism, Daoism, and Mohism over thousands of years but are also embedded in the long-standing and culturally continuous tradition of humanistic industrial and commercial practice. If the original meaning of economics in ancient Greece mainly referred to the wisdom of managing and handling things for profit in “household management,” then, in stark contrast, the excellent Chinese tradition of humanistic economics is a harmony economics that advocates “to elucidate it so as to govern the world” [*qi er ming zhi, zu yi jing ji*] and “observing the patterns of humanity to transform the world” [*guan hu ren wen, yi hua cheng tian xia*]. [10]10 “To elucidate it so as to govern the world” (*qi er ming zhi, zu yi jing ji*) and “observing the patterns of humanity to transform the world” (*guan hu ren wen, yi hua cheng tian xia*) are classical allusions from the *Book of Changes* (*Zhou Yi*), emphasizing the application of humanistic principles to social governance. The “economy” [*jingji*] advocated by harmony economics means “governing the world and relieving the people” [*jingshi jimin*]. Governing the world and relieving the people was the principle of conduct for ancient sages, aiming to bring prosperity to society and peace to the people. This is the essential meaning of “observing the patterns of humanity to transform the world.” This grand ambition aims to practice the gentleman’s way of nurturing life, “establishing destiny for the people” [*wei sheng min li ming*], [11]11 “Establishing destiny for the people” (*wei sheng min li ming*) is a phrase from the Song dynasty Confucian Zhang Zai’s “Western Inscription” (*Xi Ming*), expressing the ideal of a scholar’s responsibility to secure the well-being of the people. and is filled with the great righteousness of seeking abundance for the world, prosperity for society, and well-being for the people. Harmony economics rejects “seeking nothing but profit,” advocates the principle of “righteousness before profit” and “balancing righteousness and profit,” emphasizes creating a business environment of “harmony between heaven and humanity” [*tian ren he yi*] supported by profound humanistic foundations such as “bearing all things with great virtue” [*hou de zai wu*], [12]12 “Bearing all things with great virtue” (*hou de zai wu*) is a phrase from the *Book of Changes*, describing the virtue of the earth, which supports all things, and is used to advocate for moral integrity and tolerance. and builds a development community with a mindset of inclusiveness, such as “the world is for all” [*tian xia wei gong*], “the benevolent love others” [*ren zhe ai ren*], “revere heaven and protect the people” [*jing tian bao min*], “universal love and mutual benefit” [*jian xiang ai, jiao xiang li*], and “all within the four seas are brothers” [*si hai zhi nei jie xiong di*]. [13]13 “The world is for all” (*tian xia wei gong*), “the benevolent love others” (*ren zhe ai ren*), “revere heaven and protect the people” (*jing tian bao min*), “universal love and mutual benefit” (*jian xiang ai, jiao xiang li*), and “all within the four seas are brothers” (*si hai zhi nei jie xiong di*) are classical Confucian and Mohist concepts promoting public-mindedness, benevolence, reverence for the people, universal love, and fraternity. The business purpose of harmony economics is to emphasize comity and harmony, because “harmony brings wealth” [*he qi sheng cai*] and “harmony leads to coexistence” [*he he gong sheng*]. The knowledge transition from harmony economics to humanistic economics in the New Era still needs to undergo the baptism of creative transformation and innovative development, requiring holistic inheritance, historical sorting, and reflective critique, and even more so, the ideological guidance of Marxism.

建构新时代人文经济学自主知识体系需要全面梳理新时代人文经济学所具有的中华优秀传统文化根脉，在“第二个结合”中开辟人文经济学的新论域。在五千多年中华文明史上，丰富的人文经济优秀传统不仅载于数千年儒、释、道、墨的浩浩典籍之中，更内蕴于历史悠久、文脉连续的人文工商实践传统之中。如果说古希腊的经济学原初主要指“家政学”中经营操持逐利物用的智慧，那么，与之迥异，中华优秀人文经济学传统就是主张“起而明之，足以经济”“观乎人文，以化成天下”的和合经济学。和合经济学主张的“经济”即经世济民。经世济民为古代贤士立世准则，旨在使社会繁荣，百姓安居，这是“观乎人文，以化成天下”的题中之义。这一宏大抱负旨在践行“为生民立命”的君子厚生之道，饱含为天下富足、社会繁荣和百姓安康之大义。和合经济学摒弃“唯利是图”，主张“义在利先”“义利兼顾”的原则，强调以“厚德载物”等深厚的人文底蕴为支撑打造“天人合一”的营商环境，以“天下为公”“仁者爱人”“敬天保民”“兼相爱、交相利”“四海之内皆兄弟”等包容天下的胸怀打造发展共同体。和合经济学的营商宗旨就是讲求礼让、以和为贵，因为“和气生财”“和合共生”。和合经济学向新时代人文经济学的知识跃迁依然需要经历创造性转化和创新性发展的洗礼，需要整体性继承、历史性梳理和反思性批判，更需要马克思主义在思想上的引领。

The exploration of humanistic economics is a world-historical undertaking. Adhering to firm cultural confidence and an open spirit to look at the world, actively drawing on the reasonable practices and intellectual resources of humanistic economics explorations in various countries for our own use, is a necessary path for constructing an independent knowledge system of humanistic economics in the New Era and promoting the theoretical innovation of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times. To bridge the “Smithian dilemma,” [14]14 The “Smithian dilemma” refers to the tension in Adam Smith’s work between the self-interested “economic man” of *The Wealth of Nations* and the moral sentiments of sympathy and propriety in *The Theory of Moral Sentiments*. Western non-mainstream economics has also proposed and advocated “humanomics,” but defines it in other senses. First, it refers to the economics of cultural industries. Although this definition has progressed to the field of non-material production, it has not fundamentally escaped the domination of the “rational man” driven by capital’s profit-seeking nature. Second, it refers to “rhetoric,” as Deirdre McCloskey points out: making Western economics speak “sweet words.” Third, it refers to abstract humanist economics, dedicated to discussing how to bridge or close the gap between the “two parallel worlds” of the human and the economic. Although this school of economics also advocates “people-centeredness” and emphasizes reflecting on and criticizing the defect of Western mainstream economics in ignoring people, this understanding does not overturn the premise of the “rational man” hypothesis, but merely emphasizes moral correction of behavioral outcomes in the analysis of economic behavior. In their book *Humanomics: Moral Sentiments and the Wealth of Nations for the Twenty-First Century*, Vernon Smith and Bart Wilson point out that, in order to break free from and transcend selfish utility maximization, starting from the prediction and explanation of human behavior, they explore how people in their behavioral choices move from maximizing utility itself to considering the background and meaning of behavioral choices, and thus toward humanomics. In this sense, the “humanomics” advocated in the West is a corrective plan for the consequences of the “loss of the human” under the premise of not negating the logic of capital and the “rational man” hypothesis. It is a theoretical correction and moral expression of “conscious capitalism.” Although there are some reasonable ideas that can be drawn from it, it cannot fundamentally solve the defect of the “loss of the human.”

人文经济学探索是世界历史性的事业。以坚定文化自信与开放精神放眼世界，积极汲取各国人文经济学探索的合理实践与思想资源为我所用，是建构新时代人文经济学自主知识体系、推动马克思主义中国化时代化理论创新的必要路径。为了弥合“斯密之困”，西方非主流经济学也提出和主张“人文经济学”（Humanomics），但却在其他语义上加以界定。一是指文化产业经济学。这一界定对象虽然进展到非物质生产领域，但并没有从根本上摆脱资本逐利本性的“理性人”宰制。二是指“修辞学”，如迪尔德丽·麦克洛斯基所指出的：让西方经济学诉说“甜言蜜语”。三是指抽象的人本主义经济学，致力于讨论如何跨越或弥合人文和经济“两个平行世界”的鸿沟。虽然这一经济学流派也主张“以人为本”，强调反思和批评西方主流经济学漠视人的弊端，但是，这一理解并未颠覆“理性人”的假设前提，而只是在经济行为分析中强调对行为结果的道德修正。弗农·史密斯和巴特·威尔逊在《人文经济学：21世纪道德情操与国家财富》一书中指出，为了摆脱和超越自私自利的效用最大化，从人的行为预测解释出发，探索人们在行为选择中如何从最大化效用本身通向行为选择的背景和意义考量进而走向人文经济学。在这一意义上，西方主张的“人文经济学”是在不否弃资本逻辑和“理性人”假设前提下对于“人文缺失”后果的修正方案，是一种“自觉的资本主义”的理论修正和道德表达，其中虽然有若干合理思想可以汲取，但在总体上无法根本解决“人文缺失”的弊端。

IV. Innovative Interpretation: The Core Essence and Independent Knowledge System of Humanistic Economics in the New Era

四、创新阐释：新时代人文经济学的核心要义与自主知识体系

Deepen the understanding of the fourth focal point of theoretical innovation, namely, the innovative interpretation of the core essence and independent knowledge system of humanistic economics in the New Era. The reason why an “innovative interpretation” is necessary is that although humanistic economics is supported by the “soul and vein” [15]15 “Soul and vein” (魂脉) refers to Marxism as the guiding theoretical soul of the CPC. and the “root and vein,” [16]16 “Root and vein” (根脉) refers to China’s fine traditional culture as the deep-rooted cultural foundation. from its object domain to its core essence it remains an entirely new proposition; only through innovation can it be interpreted, and this is an important mission for adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times. The so-called core essence refers to the essential connotation and main characteristics, basic functions and inherent laws of humanistic economics in the New Era, as well as the basic principles for constructing an independent knowledge system. To this end, we must innovatively interpret the core essence and independent knowledge system of humanistic economics in the New Era, and compose a new chapter in the theoretical innovation of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times.

深化理解理论创新的第四个着力点，即创新阐释新时代人文经济学的核心要义和自主知识体系。之所以要“创新阐释”，是因为人文经济学虽有“魂脉”“根脉”支持，但是从对象领域到核心要义依然是全新命题，只有创新才能阐释，这是马克思主义中国化时代化的重要使命。所谓核心要义，即关于新时代人文经济学的本质内涵与主要特征、基本功能和内在规律，以及建构自主知识体系的基本原理。为此，我们要创新阐释新时代人文经济学的核心要义与自主知识体系，谱写马克思主义中国化时代化理论创新篇章。

First, innovative interpretation must first accurately grasp the essential connotation and main characteristics of the humanistic economy and humanistic economics. The so-called “humanistic economy” is a benign development mode in which humanistic culture and the economy as a whole blend, interact, and develop in tandem, flying side by side; it is an advanced form in which the cultural economization and economic culturalization, with humanistic values as the soul, are bidirectionally integrated and fused in development. “Humanistic economics,” in turn, is the body of knowledge about the “humanistic economy,” aiming to elucidate the essential connotation, basic characteristics, main functions, and inherent laws of the humanistic economy as an independent knowledge system. Here, to further deepen understanding and innovatively interpret the core essence of humanistic economics in the New Era, we need to follow a five-level principle of interpretation proceeding from the surface to the core: first, the original meaning of the so-called “humanistic economy” is the realistic expression of the state of “places where culture is highly developed, the economy still leads the way,” [17]17 This is a paraphrase of a statement by Xi Jinping, made during an inspection tour, observing that economically developed regions in China often also have a rich cultural heritage. presenting a miracle of the common prosperity of both “strong” elements. A situation where both culture and the economy are weak, or one is strong and the other weak, is clearly not a humanistic economic form. Second, humanistic economics indicates that the “two strong” elements are not isolated from each other but present an integrated relationship of fused symbiosis, interactive blending, and integrated development, creating a new form of humanistic economy, a new development paradigm representing the future direction of Chinese-path modernization. Third, within the relationship of their integrated development, humanistic economics places greater emphasis on how humanistic foundations support the economy, how humanistic elements permeate the economy, how humanistic values guide the economy, and how humanistic rules safeguard the economy. Fourth, humanistic economics more profoundly reveals that the foundation of their integrated development lies in the bidirectional transformation mechanism of “economic culturalization and cultural economization.” Fifth, the fundamental purpose of humanistic economics is to adhere to the people-centered development thought and move toward the new goal of “the modernization of people.”

第一，创新阐释首先要准确把握人文经济和人文经济学的本质内涵与主要特征。所谓“人文经济”就是人文文化与经济在总体上交融互动、融合发展、比翼齐飞的一种良性发展方式，是以人文价值为灵魂的文化经济化、经济文化化双向贯通、融合发展的发达形态。而“人文经济学”，则是关于“人文经济”的学问，旨在阐明人文经济的本质内涵、基本特征、主要功能和内在规律的自主知识体系。在此，为了进一步深化理解和创新阐释新时代人文经济学的核心要义，我们需要遵循由表及里五个层次的阐释原则：一是所谓“人文经济”的原初含义即对“文化很发达的地方，经济照样走在前面”这一呈现“两强”共同繁荣奇迹状态的现实表达。文化与经济两者都弱或“一强一弱”显然都不是人文经济形态。二是人文经济学指明“两强”之间并非各自孤立的，而是呈现融合共生、交融互动、融合发展的一体化关系，创造了人文经济新形态，一种代表中国式现代化未来发展方向的新发展范式。三是在两者融合发展的关系中，人文经济学更强调如何让人文底蕴支撑经济、人文要素浸润经济、人文价值引领经济、人文规则保障经济。四是人文经济学更深刻地揭示出两者融合发展的根基在于“经济文化化、文化经济化”的双向转化机制。五是人文经济学的根本宗旨在于坚持以人民为中心的发展思想，走向“人的现代化”的新目标。

Second, innovative interpretation must pay attention to and grasp the main functions of humanistic economics. The “humanistic economy” possesses functions that have attracted considerable attention: the function of supporting the economic platform with humanistic foundations, the function of guiding with humanistic values, the function of orienting toward new humanistic goals, the function of stimulating with humanistic leadership, the function of setting new humanistic tracks, the function of planning and formulating new humanistic rules, and the function of creating new humanistic forms. Specifically: first, the supporting role of profound humanistic value foundations for the environment and platform of economic development manifests as culture endowing the economy with deep humanistic values; this can be achieved through the penetration of advantageous culture into enterprises, markets, governments, and society, thereby linking them together, resolving institutional contradictions, promoting harmonious coexistence, and ultimately transforming a harmonious cultural environment into modern economic advantages. Second, cultural creativity and cultural realm have the function of enhancing economic quality and value spillover. Third, new humanistic goals have an orienting function for economic development, autonomously guiding the economy toward the optimal development of humanistic economic goals. Fourth, new humanistic driving forces highlight the leading role of humanistic elements in the fourth development stage of total factor productivity. [18]18 Total factor productivity (TFP) is an economic measure of efficiency; the “fourth development stage” here likely refers to a stage where humanistic and creative factors become the primary drivers of TFP growth, beyond capital, labor, and technology. Fifth, the function of laying out new humanistic tracks addresses the drawbacks of tracks governed by the traditional law of the jungle, creating new paradigms for corporate governance, new market paradigms, new paradigms for government public governance, and new paradigms for international tracks. Sixth, the safeguarding function of new humanistic rules allows the economic form to operate on new rule tracks, using institutions to ensure the smooth operation of new humanistic tracks. Seventh, the innovative function of new humanistic forms makes the future new form of the humanistic economy better. In sum, humanistic economics emphasizes using culture to cultivate people, using culture to invigorate industries, and empowering through culture, thereby expanding an open public development space for the economy; at the same time, it leverages the transformative role of economic development in enriching cultural connotations, advancing the comprehensive development of a new form of human civilization.

第二，创新阐释必须关注和把握人文经济学的主要功能。“人文经济”具有颇受人们高度关注的以人文底蕴支撑经济平台的功能、人文价值引领功能、人文新目标定向功能、人文主导激发功能、设置人文新赛道的功能、谋划和制定人文新规则功能和创造人文新样态功能。具体说来，一是深厚的人文价值底蕴对于经济发展的环境和平台的支撑作用表现为文化赋予经济深厚的人文价值，可以通过优势文化对企业、市场、政府和社会的渗透来实现关联携手，解决制度性矛盾，促进和谐共生，最终让和谐的文化环境转化为现代经济优势；二是文化创意、文化境界具有对经济品质的提升和价值溢出功能；三是人文新目标对于经济发展具有定向功能，自主引导经济朝向人文经济目标优化发展；四是人文新动能，凸显出人文要素在全要素生产率第四个发展阶段的主导作用；五是人文新赛道的布局功能，解决传统丛林法则支配下的赛道弊端，打造新的企业治理范式、新的市场范式、新的政府公共治理范式和国际赛道新范式；六是人文新规则的保障功能，可以让经济形态在新的规则轨道上运行，以制度保障人文新赛道的顺畅运行；七是人文新样态的创新功能，让未来的人文经济新形态更美好。总之，人文经济学强调以文化人、以文兴业、文化赋能，为经济拓展开放性的公共发展空间；同时发挥经济发展丰富文化内涵的转化作用，推进人类文明新形态全面发展。

Third, innovative interpretation must profoundly grasp the inherent laws of humanistic economics. Scientifically understanding the inherent laws of humanistic economics and using them to effectively guide the practice of humanistic economics is an inherent requirement for the theoretical innovation of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times. The inherent laws of a sound form of the humanistic economy lie mainly in the need to optimize, normalize, and standardize the mechanism of bidirectional transformation, interactive blending, and integrated development between the humanistic and the economic; otherwise, this form will disintegrate from within. The state of the humanistic economy depends not only on the support of the “dual strong” state of the economy and culture but, even more, on the optimization of the integration mechanism and the mutual transformation mechanism of the dual strong factors. The latter two are isomorphic, isostatic, and synchronous in development with the state of the humanistic economy, mutually reinforcing and advancing or retreating in tandem. In short, developing the humanistic economy requires grasping its inherent laws.

第三，创新阐释要深刻把握人文经济学的内在规律。科学认识人文经济学的内在规律，用以有效指导践行人文经济学，是马克思主义中国化时代化理论创新的内在要求。人文经济的良好形态的内在规律主要在于人文与经济双向转化、交融互动、融合发展的机理要优化、正常化、规范化，否则就会从内部瓦解这一形态。人文经济状况既取决于经济和文化“双强”状态的支撑，更取决于双强因素的融合机制和相互转化机制的优化。后两者与人文经济状况同构、同态、同步发展，双向强化、同步进退。总之，发展人文经济需要把握其内在规律。

Fourth, innovative interpretation must deeply grasp the basic principles for constructing humanistic economics. Composing a new theory of humanistic economics requires original generalizations different from the basic principles of Western economics, focusing on systematic and theoretical construction. Research indicates that the basic principles of humanistic economics may include: the principle of the pre-positioning of humanistic historical foundations, the principle of comprehensive social value exchange rationality, the principle of humanistic soul-imbuing and orientation, the principle of humanistic empowerment in the progressive law of total factor productivity, the principle of track design for harmonious development created by the humanistic, the principle of public rules created by the humanistic, and the principle of creating new forms of the humanistic economy, among others. Due to space limitations, this article cannot elaborate on them in detail; they require separate exposition. Here, we need to emphasize two points. First, each principle precisely targets and transcends the traditional principles of Western economics that give rise to the malady of “humanistic deficiency,” and each strives to become, from one important aspect, a key theoretical fulcrum for theoretically supporting the construction of the edifice of the independent knowledge system of humanistic economics. For example, the first principle, the “principle of the pre-positioning of humanistic historical foundations,” aims to break the ahistoricity in the “rational man” hypothesis of Western economics’ pre-positioned principle, emphasizing that a certain humanistic historical foundation must serve as the pre-condition for the occurrence of a modern economy before one can determine the possibility and uniqueness of that economic occurrence. Second, the various principles together constitute an outline-like organic whole; we must rely on these basic principles to grasp the key points and open up the whole, thereby constructing the independent knowledge system of humanistic economics.

第四，创新阐释要深度把握人文经济学建构的基本原理。谱写人文经济学新理论需要不同于西方经济学基本原理的原创性概括，着力于体系化学理化建构。研究表明，人文经济学基本原理可能包括：人文历史底蕴前置原理，全面社会价值交换理性的原理，人文赋魂定向原理，全要素生产率递进规律中的人文赋能原理，人文创制和谐发展的赛道设计原理，人文创制的公则原理，人文经济新样态创制原理，等等。限于篇幅，本文难以详解，需另文阐释。在此，我们需要强调两点。一是各个原理都精准针对和超越西方经济学产生“人文缺失”弊端的传统原理，都着力于从一个重要方面成为学理化支撑建构人文经济学自主知识体系大厦的关键理论支点，如第一原理即“人文历史底蕴前置原理”，旨在破除西方经济学前置原理“理性人”假设中的非历史性，强调以一定的人文历史底蕴作为现代经济发生的前置条件，然后才能判定这一经济发生的可能性和独特性。二是各个原理之间构成一个纲要性有机整体，我们必须以这些基本原理为依托，才能纲举目张，建构人文经济学自主知识体系。

Source: *Research on Marxism*, Issue 6, 2025

文章来源：《马克思主义研究》2025年第6期

Online Editor: Jing Mu

网络编辑：静穆