|
Abstract Alfred Marshall’s representative work Principles of Economics contains many discussions of ″normal″ and relative concepts. Marshall defines ″normal″ activities in economic studies, and uses this concept extensively in theoretical research. In the theoretical category, the discussion of ″normal″ has a static characteristic, because the condition of the ″normal″ state is an abstraction representing the most enduring and frequent causality in certain situations. However, the ″normal″ state defined by Marshall comes from the real world and is specific and contextualized and therefore has the ability to accommodate more realistic conditions. ″Normal″ is also part of the dynamic analysis. Using the non-fixed meaning of the word ″normal″ and the ″flexibility″ of the economic term itself, Marshall tries to build a bridge between economic theory and economic reality. This article examines Marshall’s connotation of ″normal″ in the Principles of Economics as follows: (1) Marshall attaches great importance to the use of economic terms. He spends a lot of time explaining that economic terminology should not be divorced from daily experience. His definition of ″normal″ has undergone a shift. In 1879, he equated the ″normal condition″ with ″the state brought about by uninterrupted actions in free competition″. But after the publication of Principles of Economics, he turned to emphasize that the normal state should be a tendency in specific situations. Therefore, normal motives may include altruistic motives, and there is no so-called ″economic man″ who is not constrained by moral power. (2) ″Normal″ is abstracted from real conditions and is related to a specific time, place, and economic agent. This article gives two examples to illustrate this point. First, Marshall defines ″normal″ enterprise, that is, ″representative firm″, which is a controversial concept in Marshall’s economic system. If we consider it from a static perspective, we will have doubts about the nature and role of representative firm. If we consider it in the context of the development of industry and the change in the internal and external economies, we will find that ″normal″ enterprise has a realistic basis. Second, according to different lengths of time, Marshall gives the term ″normal″ different meanings. The standard of distinction is not clock time, but the operating time of economic forces. Choosing ″normal″ conditions relies on the common sense and intuition of economist and entrepreneur, which include both judgments of empirical reality and logical deductions. (3) The concept of ″normal″ is an attempt made by Marshall to reconcile the conflicts of different methodologies. Marshall believes that the study of the ″normal state″ of modern life is derived from the abstraction of specific situations, is both realistic and abstract, and contains both static and dynamic meanings. Through this device, Marshall tries to construct an economic analysis system in Principles of Economics that is not excessively deductive but of practical significance. With the rapid development of economic science, mainstream economic theory has become more and more formalized and modeled. Marshall’s economic thought has been reduced to a static model assuming perfect competition. To truly understand Marshall’s thought, we should return to the specific text.
|
|
|
|
|
|
