投资 · 西方古典
托斯丹·凡勃伦：有闲阶级论·摘录 4
托斯丹·凡勃伦《有闲阶级论》· The Theory of the Leisure Class · 投资
This distinction has but little obvious significance in a modern industrial community, and it has, therefore, received but slight attention at the hands of economic writers. When viewed in the light of that modern common sense which has guided economic discussion, it seems formal and insubstantial. But it persists with great tenacity as a commonplace preconception even in modern life, as is shown, for instance, by our habitual aversion to menial employments. It is a distinction of a personal kind--of superiority and inferiority. In the earlier stages of culture, when the personal force of the individual counted more immediately and obviously in shaping the course of events, the element of exploit counted for more in the everyday scheme of life. Interest centred about this fact to a greater degree. Consequently a distinction proceeding on this ground seemed more imperative and more definitive then than is the case to-day. As a fact in the sequence of development, therefore, the distinction is a substantial one and rests on sufficiently valid and cogent grounds.
出处：
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/833
定位：Excerpt 4 · 核对日期：2026-10-19 · 核验：短摘录
白话
这种区分在现代工业社区中明显意义不大，因此经济学者很少注意。用现代常识看，它显得形式化、不实在。但它作为日常成见仍顽固存在，比如我们习惯性厌恶卑贱工作。这是一种人身性的区分——优越与低劣。在文化早期，个人力量更直接明显地影响事件进程，功业因素在日常生活中的分量更重，兴趣更集中于此。因此，基于此的区分当时显得更迫切、更确定。作为发展序列中的事实，这种区分是实质性的，有充分有效且令人信服的基础。
上下文
凡勃伦《有闲阶级论》解释“功业与苦工”区分为何在现代淡化却仍残留。
今日一问
你对某些职业的“厌恶”或“看不起”，有多少是来自这种古老的优越感成见？
公版作品；原文逐字取自 Project Gutenberg，仅摘录段落并附全书链接。
你的邮箱
只用于发送原典。不发广告，不卖名单。
本文本为公版；底本与原文链接见上。 版权