Economics is also part of science, and economic superstition is a part of “scientific superstition”; however, economic superstition has its own distinctive features.
In China, not only is scientific superstition very serious, economic superstition is also especially prominent. There are two reasons for superstition: first, ignorance of the object; second, the object displays some kind of powerful force. This is true of science, and even more so of economics. Since reform and opening up, China’s economic takeoff has displayed what seems to be the tremendous power brought by economics, while the public’s ignorance of economics is no less than its ignorance of science.
Like scientific superstition, the effects of economic superstition are also manifested in two ways: first, “worship”; second, the formation of a set of habitual ways of thinking.
The main objects of “worship” in economic superstition are two: money and the market. This is manifested as money-worship, or money above all else, as well as “market omnipotence” — the belief that the “invisible hand” of market competition can solve all problems, and that anything can be solved simply by introducing a mechanism of elimination. In fact, the country in the world that worships the market economy most is not some country in America or Europe, but precisely the Chinese people themselves (see: It Turns Out the People in the World Who Support Market Economy the Most Are the Chinese). And market worship is not merely the belief that marketization can solve all economic problems; it is also the belief that the market can solve all other problems as well, such as the personnel system at universities, and so on (see: About Zhang Weiying, Reform).
The habitual ways of thinking in economics are mainly two: quantitative mathematical calculation and “cost-benefit analysis.” The quantitative way of thinking is similar to money-worship (using money as a quantitative indicator to measure the value of life), but it is even more widespread, because it also allows quantitative indicators other than money. For example, university professors are evaluated by the number of papers they publish, Party work is evaluated by the number of people absorbed into the Party, and so on; in all evaluations, numbers have the final say. And the habitual way of thinking known as “cost-benefit analysis” has already permeated deeply into ethics; even when discussing the affection within a family, one must calculate how much duty I have given, how many rights you have obtained, and so forth. Teaching one’s own children is called “educational investment,” romance is called “love investment,” and so on. What one gives is investment, what one gets back is return; in doing anything, one first tallies up a “cost-benefit analysis”……
March 18, 2006
Translated from the Chinese original with AI assistance. The original text is authoritative.
Leave a Reply