当前位置: X-MOL 学术Social Philosophy and Policy › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
“SHINING BITS OF METAL”: MONEY, PROPERTY, AND THE IMAGINATION IN HUME’S POLITICAL ECONOMY
Social Philosophy and Policy ( IF 0.264 ) Pub Date : 2021-01-07 , DOI: 10.1017/s0265052520000126
Timothy M. Costelloe

This essay examines Hume’s treatment of money in light of his view of the imagination. It begins with his claim that money is distinct from wealth, the latter arising, according to vulgar reasoning, from the power of acquisition that it represents, or, understood philosophically, from the labor that produces it. The salient features that Hume identifies with the imagination are then put forth, namely its power to combine ideas creatively and the principle of easy transition that characterizes its movement among them. Two issues that these features explain are then discussed: first, why people take value to lie in the material of which money is made, and, second, why they assign value to what they take money to represent, namely, wealth. In both cases, the imagination creates a new relation, an illusion or fiction, that cannot be traced directly to experience. In the case of money, the faculty conjoins what is intangible (the power of acquisition) with the physical qualities of specie; in the case of property it produces a causal relation that connects persons with objects to constitute stable possession that constitutes ownership. Hume also appeals to the imagination to explain the rules of property that subsequently develop (present possession, occupation, prescription, and transference). The essay concludes by emphasizing that being based on the imagination is not in itself indicative of any instability in either money or property and the practices they enshrine, a feature they share with other phenomena (such as the self and continued existence) that Hume also traces to the same faculty.

中文翻译:

“闪亮的金属碎片”:金钱、财产和休谟政治经济学中的想象力

这篇文章根据他的想象观来考察休谟对金钱的处理。首先是他声称货币与财富不同,后者根据庸俗的推理来自它所代表的获取能力,或者从哲学上理解为来自生产它的劳动。然后提出了休谟认为想象力的显着特征,即它创造性地结合思想的能力和表征其在思想之间运动的容易过渡的原则。然后讨论了这些特征解释的两个问题:第一,为什么人们认为价值在于赚钱的材料,第二,为什么他们将价值赋予他们用金钱来代表的东西,即财富。在这两种情况下,想象力都创造了一种新的关系,一种幻觉或虚构,不能直接追溯到经验。就金钱而言,这种能力将无形的东西(获得的力量)与物质的物理特性结合在一起。就财产而言,它产生了一种因果关系,将人与物联系起来,构成了构成所有权的稳定占有。休谟还利用想象力来解释随后发展的财产规则(现在的占有、占用、规定和转让)。文章最后强调,基于想象力本身并不表示金钱或财产及其所奉行的实践存在任何不稳定,休谟也追溯了与其他现象(例如自我和持续存在)共同的特征到同一个系。这种能力将无形的东西(获得的力量)与物质的物理特性结合起来;就财产而言,它产生了一种因果关系,将人与物联系起来,构成了构成所有权的稳定占有。休谟还利用想象力来解释随后发展的财产规则(现在的占有、占用、规定和转让)。文章最后强调,基于想象力本身并不表示金钱或财产及其所奉行的实践存在任何不稳定,休谟也追溯了与其他现象(例如自我和持续存在)共同的特征到同一个系。这种能力将无形的东西(获得的力量)与物质的物理特性结合起来;就财产而言,它产生了一种因果关系,将人与物联系起来,构成了构成所有权的稳定占有。休谟还利用想象力来解释随后发展的财产规则(现在的占有、占用、规定和转让)。文章最后强调,基于想象力本身并不表示金钱或财产及其所奉行的实践存在任何不稳定,休谟也追溯了与其他现象(例如自我和持续存在)共同的特征到同一个系。就财产而言,它产生了一种因果关系,将人与物联系起来,构成了构成所有权的稳定占有。休谟还利用想象力来解释随后发展的财产规则(现在的占有、占用、规定和转让)。文章最后强调,基于想象力本身并不表示金钱或财产及其所奉行的实践存在任何不稳定,休谟也追溯了与其他现象(例如自我和持续存在)共同的特征到同一个系。就财产而言,它产生了一种因果关系,将人与物联系起来,构成了构成所有权的稳定占有。休谟还利用想象力来解释随后发展的财产规则(现在的占有、占用、规定和转让)。文章最后强调,基于想象力本身并不表示金钱或财产及其所奉行的实践存在任何不稳定性,这是它们与休谟所追踪的其他现象(例如自我和持续存在)共有的特征到同一个系。和转移)。文章最后强调,基于想象力本身并不表示金钱或财产及其所奉行的实践存在任何不稳定,休谟也追溯了与其他现象(例如自我和持续存在)共同的特征到同一个系。和转移)。文章最后强调,基于想象力本身并不表示金钱或财产及其所奉行的实践存在任何不稳定,休谟也追溯了与其他现象(例如自我和持续存在)共同的特征到同一个系。
更新日期:2021-01-07
down
wechat
bug