Through exploring the limitation of the neoclassical theory of economic growth,which classifies growth as a homogenous process,this paper reconciles various theories of economic development and explains the rises and ...Through exploring the limitation of the neoclassical theory of economic growth,which classifies growth as a homogenous process,this paper reconciles various theories of economic development and explains the rises and falls of economic growth under a unified framework,focusing on incentives of the accumulation of physical and human capital.This paper classifies instances of economic growth into four categories—the Malthusian poverty trap,the Lewis dual model of economic development,the Lewis turning point,and Solow neoclassical growth model.This paper conducts empirical analysis of these categories of economic development as they are relevant to Chinese economic growth and discusses policy implications therein.展开更多
Behind what is called ＂Needham＇s Grand Question＂ （why was China overshot by the West in science and technology？） lies a deeper question of how China came to lose the capacity of deeply reflective thought clearly...Behind what is called ＂Needham＇s Grand Question＂ （why was China overshot by the West in science and technology？） lies a deeper question of how China came to lose the capacity of deeply reflective thought clearly present in the ancient Chinese philosophers. This is a loss felt by all Chinese as a psychological sense of hollowness, a loss of identity, made worse by the seeming inaccessibility of the ancient Chinese wisdom to the modern Chinese mind. It is clear that at some historical point China suffered an extreme psychological blow sufficient to traumatise it at the threshold of reflective thought, unable to look inwards any more. The paper identifies that point as the utter devastation wrought by Kublai Khan and the Mongols 750 years ago. What devastates reflective thought is wilfulness, the insistent focusing of all attention and energy on external, material things, and Kublai Khan was wilful in the extreme. What confirms this as the crippling point is that, in response to Kublai Khan＇s Mongol invasion the Chinese, over time, not only completely altered the geography of China itself, moving their capital to the North （Beijing）, but have ever since fought to establish as ＂China＂ all the territory over which Kublai Khan ruled. China is clearly not free of Kublai Khan＇s shadow. But even more precisely, in the process of doing this--and showing their own wilfulness--in building the Forbidden City in Beijing they built it in the shape of the Chinese metaphysical model of the universe, the Chinese version of the Tree of Life metaphysical glyph But it has an error in it. And the error is precisely that in where it places things, it makes what would have been the attributes of reflective thought subservient to wilfulness. The model itself thus shows the hollowness of the Chinese mind from that moment on. The outer form--the ＂appearance＂---of the ancient wisdom was still there. But the content--the ＂substance＂--of it was not. And with no reflective thought, true creativity disappears.展开更多
文摘Through exploring the limitation of the neoclassical theory of economic growth,which classifies growth as a homogenous process,this paper reconciles various theories of economic development and explains the rises and falls of economic growth under a unified framework,focusing on incentives of the accumulation of physical and human capital.This paper classifies instances of economic growth into four categories—the Malthusian poverty trap,the Lewis dual model of economic development,the Lewis turning point,and Solow neoclassical growth model.This paper conducts empirical analysis of these categories of economic development as they are relevant to Chinese economic growth and discusses policy implications therein.
文摘Behind what is called ＂Needham＇s Grand Question＂ （why was China overshot by the West in science and technology？） lies a deeper question of how China came to lose the capacity of deeply reflective thought clearly present in the ancient Chinese philosophers. This is a loss felt by all Chinese as a psychological sense of hollowness, a loss of identity, made worse by the seeming inaccessibility of the ancient Chinese wisdom to the modern Chinese mind. It is clear that at some historical point China suffered an extreme psychological blow sufficient to traumatise it at the threshold of reflective thought, unable to look inwards any more. The paper identifies that point as the utter devastation wrought by Kublai Khan and the Mongols 750 years ago. What devastates reflective thought is wilfulness, the insistent focusing of all attention and energy on external, material things, and Kublai Khan was wilful in the extreme. What confirms this as the crippling point is that, in response to Kublai Khan＇s Mongol invasion the Chinese, over time, not only completely altered the geography of China itself, moving their capital to the North （Beijing）, but have ever since fought to establish as ＂China＂ all the territory over which Kublai Khan ruled. China is clearly not free of Kublai Khan＇s shadow. But even more precisely, in the process of doing this--and showing their own wilfulness--in building the Forbidden City in Beijing they built it in the shape of the Chinese metaphysical model of the universe, the Chinese version of the Tree of Life metaphysical glyph But it has an error in it. And the error is precisely that in where it places things, it makes what would have been the attributes of reflective thought subservient to wilfulness. The model itself thus shows the hollowness of the Chinese mind from that moment on. The outer form--the ＂appearance＂---of the ancient wisdom was still there. But the content--the ＂substance＂--of it was not. And with no reflective thought, true creativity disappears.
