Desire, Self-interest And Commercial Society

In the history of economic thought, Mandeville, Hume, Smith and Veblen constitutes an organic whole. From different sides they touched such problems:when desires and self-interest, that is economic self-interest were released from the bind of traditional ideology and institutions, what figure a decent commercial society demonstrates, how it is possible and how it is constituted?Mandeville was the earliest systematic defenders of human’s possessive passions and desire. He attacked the traditional economic ideology of frugality, luxury and virtues, powerfully points that only the showoff and emulation are the necessary forces of industry, the division of labor, so the necessary forces of economic development and flourishing. On the contrary, the pure ascetic virtues on the one hands aren’t conducive to economic development and wealth creation, on the other hands don’t be natural. In Mandeville’s view, human’ s passions and desire are beyond the reason, so the former but the latter is the basis of society. But Mandeville find the soul of human wouldn’t fall into the anarchic state because the passions and desires prevails the reason. In Mandeville’s view, though all the passions and desire is egoistical, but the combination of two special passions that are pride and avarice provides a new sociality, and make the society possible further. So, under the promise of considering the modern society as the collective of individuals act under the impulses of passions and desire, Mandeville find the mechanism of passions and desire countervail each other and spontaneously coordinate,then the society leads to stability and flourishing.Under the basis of accepting most of Mandeville’s standpoints of commercial modernity and human nature, Hume defended for the commercial society and luxury with more positive attitudes and historical vision. He stressed the positive impact of commerce and luxury as civilizing powers on the improving of morality, economy and polity. But Hume didn’t stay on the level of participating in luxury debates, in The Treatise of Human Nature and other works, Hume captured the two important characters namely strangers and property, and considered the problem of institutional and emotional support of commercial society constructively.On the basis of Hume, Smith dealt with the problem of institutional and emotional support of commercial society more systematically. Smith established a propriety-centered ethics of commercial society. When propriety combines with the special nature of passions, the situations of commercial society, the essential state of human being as human being, a practice system is built, which takes justice but benevolence as the organizing principle and recommends prudence, industry and so on. In many regards, the system responds to and coordinates the two radical ethics systems which were advanced by Hutcheson and Mandeville, and find a middle way between the former’s ethics of anatta and the latter’s ethics of egoism. In Smith’s view, propriety and commutative justice that is propriety’s manifestation in commercial society constitutes the ethical principle of coordinating human’s desires and interests.In the WN Smith transferred to focus on the just and efficient commercial institution that can coordinate and use human’s self-interest and incorporate different interests of individuals and ranks. The institution is the system of natural liberty. The system not only can improve the economic development efficiently, but also can treat different stakeholders with justice. Consequently, Smith restrains human’s desire and self-interest with micro-economic ethics and macro-economic ethics. In Smith’s view, under the restraints of micro-economic ethics and macro system of natural liberty that embodied the principle of justice and equity, a flourishing and harmonious commercial society is possible.But, the aged Smith found the system of natural liberty faces the threat of excessive expanded desire which is an innate possibility in human nature. So, he attempted to propose a practical ethics to counter the new trend of commercial society. But Smith didn’t give a sufficient illustration about the inferior prudence and the superior prudence. After all, Smith’s harmonious commercial society was built on moderate desire and self-interest. But once the desire and self-interest excessively expands, the propriety of commercial society would face threat universally. In fact the old Smith found the firm links between the desire, self-interest and the industry, productive labor, frugality, which was confirmed by enlightenment thinkers universally, is under the attack of excessive expanded desire.Inheriting the aged Smith’s concerns for excessive expanded desire and the emulation of conspicuous consumption, Veblen continued to discuss the troubles in capitalism which are brought by pecuniary emulation and conspicuous consumption. Veblen noticed the universal prevailing of similar practices in capitalism, pushes up the whole level of desire, and causes the invasion of pecuniary culture and corresponding sense of values into other field. Besides, the predatory economic character which taken by the leisure class to obtain the funds for conspicuous consumption, spreading over the whole society through the effect of emulation. Consequently, like Smith, Veblen noticed under the effect of the system of leisure class, the desire of wealth isn’t necessarily in a close link with industry and productive labor. In a word, Veblen noticed all kinds of corruptions in the times of capitalism which he lived in. In this context, he hoped to make an institutional environment friendly for constructive instincts. But in respect of how this transfer can take place, like the old Smith, he didn’t give a constructive answer.In a word, to a great extent Mandeville played the role of releasing the desire and commercial modernity, and caused the desire and self-interest be accepted as necessary elements. Then, Hume, Smith and Veblen tried to channel the desire and self-interest into an ethical system. The works of the four persons constitute an ethical program of commercial modernity. Though not be totally successful, the theoretic efforts still have deep enlightening and instructive meaning for modern society.