黃宗羲的經世思想，在清末與文革之後，備受重視，廣為討論，以其名著《明夷待訪錄》作為探討中心，分析黃宗羲對於傳統政治結構與君主制度的批判。儒家思想，本來就以關懷群眾的入世精神為根本，強調經世應務、化民成俗，改造現實世界的缺點，使之趨向圓滿。但是經世的要件，除了理想的宣導外，亦包括實務的處理，即「道」與「術」的兼顧，兩者之間的關係，能否相互配合，有效改變世界，關係著思想家經世的能力，不可偏廢。但是關於黃宗羲經世之「術」的討論，多半在於介紹而少分析，或者被分割討論而無法窺見全貌，以致於黃宗羲在這方面的評價，經常出現兩極化的看法。 黃宗羲強調君主養民的職責，衍生出相關民生議題的經濟言論，不獨出現於《明夷待訪錄》，亦出現於黃宗羲其他的政論文章當中，換言之，黃宗羲對於民生有相當之關注，值得進一步地完整探討他的經濟思想，從中檢視黃宗羲是否具備經世的才幹。 黃宗羲的經濟思想可大致分為養民觀與富民論兩大方向。強調君主養民的職責，反對剝奪民生，從而衍生出黃宗羲的養民思想，認為君主理當授田養民，才有資格向百姓徵調賦役，反對一條鞭法將賦役合併、徵收白銀，主張恢復實物稅與親身應役，要求君主減少對民眾的剝削。君主盡到養民之責後，必須以守成的方式來達到富民的效果，黃宗羲認為應當廢用白銀，避免造成物價波動與經濟蕭條，造成民眾生產的損失，另外反對不當的奢侈消費，要求禁止不切民生日用的經濟活動與宗教斂財行為，以免百姓浪費錢財。 黃宗羲以三代的社會作為他的理想國度，對於經濟問題的解決，傾向於自然經濟的維護，以為土地是最適合人民的生存方式，雖然觀察到百姓最為關切的問題，但是因為崇古的心態，使得黃宗羲無法看到問題的癥結，提出真正有益於民的解決之道，而且仍就訴諸道德手段，因而使得黃宗羲的意見反與現實脫勾。在其經濟思想中，黃宗羲希望建立制度來預防問題的發生，並以士人作為輿論中心，教導君民正確的價值觀念，換言之，黃宗羲的經濟思想，與其政治理念是互有關聯的，雖然黃宗羲的經世能力不足，但是在「道」與「術」之間，黃宗羲還是能夠維持一貫的邏輯思考，分析其經濟思想的內涵，對於黃宗羲經世思想的了解，仍有一定的幫助。

司馬遷的經濟思想是反對漢武帝中央集權下「與民爭利」的對撞產物。武帝為政時期，發動頻繁的漢匈戰役，致使國庫空虛，財政大臣桑弘羊便開設一系列增稅、鹽鐵官營、均輸平準與幣制改革等相關政策來因應。然這些措施，短時間內能增豐國庫，但長期執行時會減弱國家的競爭力，因此司馬遷提出「善者因之，其次利道之，其次教誨之，其次整齊之，最下者與之爭」的善因論，即自由經濟主張。 司馬遷認為追求利益是人之本性，也是亂源的開始，唯有讓人民的趨利性合理化，同時以禮義教化人民，才能營造一個富而好禮的社會，故富裕是穩定社會秩序的基礎。唯有讓經濟領導政治，才是長期保有國家競爭力的良策。至於該如何提倡自由經濟？司馬遷認為應從重視商業活動開始，讓商業探測市場需求，來帶動其他產業的產能。他對政治家范蠡與民間企業家白圭兩人相當推崇，佩服他們治國或是治家的本領。他認同白圭所說，治生有方的人需具備「智、勇、仁、彊」的人格特質，故將春秋戰國與西漢前期，一些具有這些特質的富商大賈，選入〈貨殖列傳〉，給予「素封」的封號，認為這群貨殖人物，不靠爵位、仕途，憑自己的巧智與努力，享有不輸君王般的富貴與尊榮。 司馬遷因遭遇李陵之禍，在「家貧，貨賂不足以自贖」的窘境下，被處以宮刑。他省思當朝的財經政策，諸多策略是應戰爭需求而籌措的經費，而他遭遇宮刑不就是因為漢匈對戰，才引發的連鎖效應嗎？這層層的思考，啟動他對政治、經濟議題的敏銳思維，他把這些歷史寫入〈平準書〉中，大談武帝在位期間的重要財政改革，又在《史記》之末書寫〈貨殖列傳〉，將治生有方的良賈事蹟，寫入史書，樹立貨殖人物的典範，以供後世參考，期許每人都能用財自衛不被侵犯。 司馬遷是中國史上第一個將民間企業的活動寫入史書的史學家，從他撰寫的角度可知他見證到國家在寬鬆制度下的市場活力，當國家對財經制度的掌控越低，越能產生一些優秀的貨殖家。 司馬遷身處西漢時代，他已嗅到戰國時期商業興盛的氣息，藉著早年遊走大江南北的旅遊經歷，對秦時已開發的水利工程，促進區域經濟的發展，感觸甚深。他體悟到都會地區的經營能帶動文化事業的發展，故好好經營城市，讓文明的輻射源，從城市往外拓展，便能提升人的精神層次。 綜觀司馬遷談經濟議題，其終極目標是想推行仁政，他感受到國家執行的每一財經措施，無不影響人民的生活品質，認為經濟是民生大事也是國家大事，施政者需體會到唯有民富才能國富。 / Sima Qian's economic thought was the product of the collision which the country competed with the people for the interest. It was also the product that opposed to Han Dynasty’s centralization. During his reign of Emperor Wu-ti, he launched frequent campaigns and resulted in the void of the state treasury. The Minister of the Finance, Sang Hong Yang, set up a series of polices related to tax increases, government-run salt, public procurement and stabilizing prices to cope with it. However, these measures could only increase the nation’s wealth in a short time, they would weaken the country's competitiveness in a long-term. So, Sima Qian put forward “The Economic theory of Shan Yin.” The best way to improve the economic was to follow the free market; the second was to guide the people; the third was to teach them; the forth was to restrict them with the law; and the fifth was to compete the profit with people. Sima Qian thought that the pursuit of interest was human’s nature, but it also was the source of society’s chaos in the beginning. Only when people made the profit to be rationalized, and people be taught with the manner and rituals did government make a rich, propriety society, and ethical society. Therefore, richness was the foundation for a stable society and country. The best policy for the country to maintain the long-term national competition was to let the economics lead the politics. As for how to promote the free economy? He thought that the government could attach importance to business activities to let commerce explore the market demand and boost the production capacity of other industries. He highly praised both two people (politicians, Fan Li and private entrepreneur, Bai Gui). He admired them for their abilities of statecraft and managing the household. He agreed what Bai Gui said, “The one who maintained livelihood in the right way needed to has wisdom, courage, benevolence, and perseverance personality.” By choosing some wealthy merchants who met with these genius as the paradigm in Spring and Autumn Period Warring States and early Western Han Dynasty, he booked them into the “Huo Zhi Biography” in Shihchi ; and gave them the title of Su-Feng ( powerful person without the title of nobility). According to Sima Qian’s opinion, they didn’t rely on the birth of nobility and official career. They depended on their own ingenuity and hard work to obtain the upper position of dignitary and wealth as kings. Sima Qian suffered implication by vindicating for Li Ling who had surrendered in the war ,and was punished to be castrated because he couldn’t afford to pay for the ransom. After that, He stated to make the reflection about the country’s finical policy and found out that a lot of tactics of fund-raising were merely for the war. His personal suffering (being castrated) was the best evidence to prove one of the Chain Reaction of results that caused by launching the campaign with its enemy-Hsiungnu in Western Han Dynasty . These clues helped him to light up his keen thought about politics and economic issues ,and record these history in the “Book of Stabilized Prize” in Shihchi. He discussed about the importance of fiscal reform during the reign of the Emperor Wu-ti in Western Han-Dynasty and put the“ Huo Zhi Biography” in Shihchi. He wrote down the stories of the Business men who held livelihood in the right way in the history ,and set up the pattern of “Huo Zhi Biography” for the reference of the latter generation. He hoped that each person could use the wealth as the self-defense weapon and not to be encroached by other people or countries. Sima Qian was the first Historian who had recorded the activities of the private enterprises of the ancient China on the book in the official history. From his point of view, we might learn that he had witnessed the market vitality under loose system. When a country takes the loose policies to the finance and economics system, some outstanding entrepreneurs will be developed. Though, Sima Qian was born in Western Han Dynasty, he had become aware of the messages of commercial prosperity in the Warring States period. By taking the trips around, he gained some travel experiences ,and had a great stirring of emotion about the Hydraulic engineering that had been constructed in former Qin Dynasty. For it could promote regional economic development. He figured out that if the government managed the Metropolitan areas well, it could prosper cultural establishment. Therefore, to operate the city well is the good way to let the source of the civilized radiation explore everywhere and upgrade the level of human’s spirit. To sum up, the goal of Sima Qian’s economics issues is trying to carry out the policy of benevolence and good administration. He thought that the implementation of financial measures would all affect people's quality of life. In addition, the economics was a great event for both people and the country. It not only influenced people’s livelihood but power of a nation. The governor needed to understand that only when people were rich, the country could be powerful.

帝制中國的士人菁英與政府組織，其對民間商業活動的觀感究竟如何？關於這個大問題一個簡單的答覆，是學界使用了很久的「重農抑商」（或稱「重本抑末」）一詞。它由於散見於官員言論、政府詔令，因此說官員「有重農抑商的觀念」是一種很安全的講法，但卻也含糊不清，究竟這類詞彙想要表達的是什麼意思？具體的特徵為何？它和我們習慣上說的以農為本、農本主義（本文統稱為「農本商末」）又有什麼不同？學界一般不會去區別古時的「重農抑商」和「農本商末」觀念有什麼不同，或者認為，「重農抑商」根源於以農為本、以工商為末的偏頗思維，是比「農本商末」更為激進、視商業更負面的態度。但筆者以為不是如此，透過考察一個筆者心目中的關鍵環節──對於客觀上農業依賴商業的情形，官員有多少認識，我希望能說服讀者能重新考慮一些不同的可能性。 學界對古代「抑商」觀念的想像並不一致，彼此間對史料上的「抑末類用詞」想要表達的意涵為何，也缺乏有效的標準，至於這類用語本身在古文中的使用，亦不夠統一、明確。然而這些用語卻成了古人「抑商」、「輕商」的主要證據。首先，如果古人只是把「本末」的思維套到農商關係上，則並無輕視商業的意涵；此外，宋代官員認為商業不如農業重要，同時卻也十分在乎商業的好壞。這兩點先確認之後，筆者想釐清「抑末類用詞」的宋代語意，以及新法「抑末」的性質，勾勒出一個和今天重商觀念全然不同的重視商業模式，並解釋它的原因。 論文內容可以分作兩個層次。就古人對現實的認知情形進行評估，構成了本文的第一層內容。希望對於這些評估的討論，能讓我們對宋人的商業觀念有較「抑商」、「輕商」、「重商」這類概括性用語更為細膩的理解。此外，綜合這些討論，筆者也發展了一個推論，構成本文較為激進的第二層內容：「農本商末」的思維方式，它自身已是宋代重商傾向充分必要的原因（necessary and sufficient condition），雖然還可能有其他因素促成了對商業的重視，但這些解釋策略在知識上都是多餘的。 / What was the perspective of the government and the elite on commercial activities in imperial china? An simple answer to this big question is the term “Chung nung I shang”(重農抑商)(literal translation “emphasize agriculture and restrain commerce”), or “Chung Pen I Mo”(重本抑末)(“emphasize the root and restrain the branches”). Due to the widespread use of such terms in edicts or statesmen’s discourses, it is safe to assume that the statesmen held the belief of “Chung nung I shang”. However, the saying itself is an ambiguous statement—what is the precise meaning of this linguistic practice? What are its concrete traits? What is the difference between “Chung nung I shang” and the more commonly used “Agricultural Foundation” ideology(以農為本、農本主義)? In general, the two terms are not distinguished within academia. Some scholars that perceive the two as different believe the former to have originated from the latter. The latter views agriculture as root and industry or commerce as branches, whereas the former is a more radical idea that discriminates against commerce. The author would like to offer a different interpretation by examining a crucial question—how did those statesmen understand the dependence of agriculture on the commodity economy—one may realize the possibility of a different interpretation. In academia, the term “I-Shang”(抑商) can be interpreted quite differently. The actual meaning of “I-Mo(抑末) type terms” in historical materials is also very ambiguous in academic texts as there lacks an effective standard to examine the word’s usage. Nevertheless, such historical linguistic practice constitutes the main evidence that the ancient Chinese believed in “I-Shang”(抑商) or “Ching-Shang”(輕商)( literal translation “disdain commerce”). First, if the ancient Chinese simply applied the “root and branch” analogy to agriculture and commerce, there is no implication of a negative connotation. Secondly, even though statesmen in Song China thought commerce was less important than agriculture, they took the health of commerce seriously. Once these two points are established, the author intend to clarify the meaning of “I-Mo(抑末) type terms” in Song Dynasty and the characteristic of “I-Mo(抑末)” idea in Wang An-shi’s political reform and then depict and explain the pattern to emphasize commerce at that time. This study constitutes two layers. The first estimates the statesmen’s understanding of the economic reality in Song China. Discussions brought forth in this estimate aim to further understanding of their perception towards commerce beyond literal translation of the previously mentioned terms. Furthermore, discussions in the first layer leads to the argument in the second layer—“Agricultural Foundation” ideology(農本主義) itself was a necessary and sufficient condition that prompted the emphasis on commerce in Song china. There may be other factors that resulted in such perspective, but they are redundant explanations. / 謝辭 i 摘要 iii Abstract iv 目錄 vi 緒論 1 第一節、問題意識 1 一、「抑商」爭論產生的背景 1 二、客觀的經濟結構 3 三、「重農抑商」與「農本商末」兩個概念 5 四、本文的論證形式 9 第二節、研究取徑 11 一、定義本文的用詞 11 二、語言造成的問題 13 三、政治語境 14 四、章節架構 14 第三節、文獻回顧 16 一、中國經濟思想史 16 二、大陸其他領域 25 三、大陸以外的學術界 28 第一章 宋代以前人們對商業活動的觀感 32 第一節、先秦 33 一、戰國中期以前 33 二、法家的「抑商」觀念 34 三、儒家 39 四、戰國後期的儒家 40 五、先秦的趨向 44 第二節、西漢的轉折 46 一、對於語詞使用的懷疑論 46 二、漢初的狀態為何 48 三、輕重思想的形成 54 第三節、儒家重農抑商教條的形成 61 一、「抑商教條」的說法 61 二、儒家為何轉變 62 三、鹽鐵會議之後到魏晉 67 四、魏晉到唐代 69 第四節、唐代的變化 71 一、唐代原本的經濟觀念 71 二、中唐官員對商業的重視 72 三、輕重觀念的變化──新輕重論 73 第五節、對開頭問題的回答 76 第二章 宋代官員商業觀感的幾個特徵 78 第一節、「農本商末」的思維是否改變了 78 第二節、宋代官員是否重視商業 83 一、通商惠工之旨 83 二、政策爭辯中的政治語言 84 第三節、抑商說與輕商說的根據為何 89 一、抑商政策的存在 89 二、「抑末類用詞」的存在 94 三、對棄農從工商的反感──「理由A」的探討 108 第四節、宋代輕重政策與新法「抑末」的性質為何 118 一、背景簡述 119 二、新法的「抑末」是否針對的是大商人 121 三、新法與傳統輕重論有何差別──對漢代的歷史記憶 127 四、新法與新輕重論有何差別 131 第五節、「重農抑商」的觀念是否改變了 133 第三章 現實經濟結構對官員價值觀的影響 136 第一節、農業依賴商業的情形為何 136 第二節、官員有何農依賴商的言論 141 第三節、官員對農依賴商的各面向有多少體認 147 一、薄征商稅論 147 二、農村對糧食交易的依賴性 153 三、農村對貨幣交易的依賴性 154 四、政府對農民的購買制度、散錢制度 157 第四節、官員看待市場自由的態度為何 162 一、市場自由的爭議 162 二、商業的平抑價格功能 165 三、對阻礙、壟斷、操弄的觀感 169 四、空間上商品流通的自由度與效率 171 五、「農本商末」與市場自由化的關係 177 第五節、官員重視商業的模式與程度為何 180 一、模式 180 二、程度 182 第六節、一個關於農本主義的推論 187 徵引書目 191