【中商原版】法律、立法与自由：正义和政治经济自由原理新述 英文原版 Law, Legislation and Liberty F. A. Hayek F·A·哈 阿里云 kindle 下载 pdf chm 百度云 azw3 umd

暂无相关简介，正在全力查找中！

暂无相关目录，正在全力查找中！

暂无相关内容，正在全力查找中

暂无出版社相关信息，正在全力查找中！

暂无相关书籍摘录，正在全力查找中！

在线阅读地址：【中商原版】法律、立法与自由：正义和政治经济自由原理新述 英文原版 Law, Legislation and Liberty F. A. Hayek F·A·哈在线阅读

在线听书地址：【中商原版】法律、立法与自由：正义和政治经济自由原理新述 英文原版 Law, Legislation and Liberty F. A. Hayek F·A·哈在线收听

在线购买地址：【中商原版】法律、立法与自由：正义和政治经济自由原理新述 英文原版 Law, Legislation and Liberty F. A. Hayek F·A·哈在线购买

Although there was a time when men believed that even language and morals had been ‘invented’ by some genius of the past, everybody recognizes now that they are the outcome of a process of evolution whose results nobody foresaw or designed.

But in other fields many people still treat with suspicion the claim that the patterns of interaction of many men can show an order that is of nobody’s deliberate making; in the economic sphere, in particular, critics still pour uncomprehending ridicule on Adam Smith’s expression of the ‘invisible hand’ by which, in the language of his time, he described how man is led ‘to promote an end which was no part of his intentions’.

If indignant reformers still complain of the chaos of economic affairs, insinuating a complete absence of order, this is partly b...

It is because it was not dependent on organization but grew up as a spontaneous order that the structure of modern society has attained that degree of complexity which it possesses and which far exceeds any that could have been achieved by deliberate organization.

To maintain that we must deliberately plan modern society because it has become so complex is therefore paradoxical, and the result of a complete misunderstanding of these circumstances. The fact is, rather, that we can preserve an order of such complexity not by the method of directing the members, but only indirectly by enforcing and improving the rules conducive to the formation of a spontaneous order.

The understanding that ‘good fences make good neighbours’, that is, that men can use their own knowledge in the pursuit of their own ends without colliding with each other only if clear boundaries can be drawn between their respective domains of free action, is the basis on which all known civilization has grown. Property, in the wide sense in which it is used to include not only material things, but (as John Locke defined it) the ‘life, liberty and estates’ of every individual, is the only solution men have yet discovered to the problem of reconciling individual freedom with the absence of conflict. Law, liberty, and property are an inseparable trinity. There can be no law in the sense of universal rules of conduct which does not determine boundaries of the domains of freedom by laying do...

一切全权主义的教条都属于这种类型，而社会主义也只是其中的一种教条。

就本书所要关注的这些问题而言，可以说自大卫•休谟和伊曼纽尔•康德以降，有关思想似无进展，因而从诸多方面来看，我们还必须在休谟和康德停下来的地方重新展开我们的分析。正是这两位先哲比那时以来的任何论者都更清楚地认识到了这样一个问题，即价值对于所有理性建构来说乃具有独立且指导的地位......我日益认识到，那种以唯科学的谬误（scientific error)来摧毁价值的做法，乃是我们这个时代的大悲剧——它之所以是一个大悲剧，乃是因为唯科学的谬误所趋于否弃的价值，乃是我们的一切文明所不可或缺的基础，也是那些转而反对这些价值的科学研究本身所不可或缺的基础。建构主义趋向于把它所无力解释的那些价值一概当成是取决于人之专断的决策、意志行为或纯粹情绪的东西，而不把它们当成是建构主义阐释者视为当然的那些事实的必要条件。建构主义的这一取向已然在很大程度上动摇了文明的基础和科学的自身，因为科学也同样是建立在科学手段无力证明的价值系统之上的。

Men can be allowed to act on their own knowledge and for their own purposes only if the reward they obtain is dependent in part on circumstances which they can neither control nor foresee. And if they are to be allowed to be guided in their actions by their own moral beliefs, it cannot also be morally required that the aggregate effects of their respective actions on the different people should correspond to some ideal of distributive justice. In this sense freedom is inseparable from rewards which often have no connection with merit and are therefore felt to be unjust.

暂无其它内容！