哈耶克：《个人主义：真与假》读书笔记

引托克维尔，18世纪和大革命是巨流的共同源泉：自由制度和绝对权力【2】

【提供基本且一般的社会秩序原则的政治哲学】这篇论文旨在考察明确的社会秩序原则。[我不仅打算捍卫一项有关组织的一般性原则，而且还将努力证明，我们的社会里正在进行着一场“注定会一点一点地”把我们从一个以人们普遍承认某些原则为基础的社会秩序带回到一个由直接命令创造秩序的系统中去的运动，而人们对一般性原则的厌恶和对就事论事之行事方式的偏爱，则正是这场倒退运动的产物。]【2】（I propose not only to undertake to defend a general principle of social organization but shall also try to show that the aversion to general principles, and the preference for proceeding from particular instance to particular instance, is the product of the movement which with the "inevitability of gradualness" leads us back from a social order resting on the general recognition of certain principles to a system in which order is created by direct commands. p.1.）宗教并不能满足得到普遍接受的社会秩序原则，“我们还迫切需要一种能够超越宗教或道德所提供的那些基本且一般的原则的政治哲学。”在哈耶克看来，“我们的社会中仍然存在着这样一种表现为一套原则的哲学：这些原则实际上就隐含在大多数西方国家或基督教国家的政治传统当中，只是眼下任何易于人们理解的术语都不再能够对它们做出明确无误的描述罢了。因此，在我们确定这些原则能否继续作为我们的实践指南以前，我们有必要先对它们做一番详尽的重述。”【3】（We still should require a political philosophy which goes beyond the fundamental but general precepts which religion or morals provide. … The title which I have chosen for this chapter shows that to me there still seems to exist such a philosophy-a set of principles which, indeed, is implicit in most of Western or Christian political tradition but which can no longer be unambiguously described by any readily understood term. p.2.）两个困难：政治术语的含混不清；以及“同一个语词好像还常常把那些实际上信奉彼此对立且不可调和的理想的人归为了一类人”，如自由主义、民主、资本主义或社会主义。【3-4】特别指出“个人自由”被歪曲得面目全非。

【真个人主义所属的知识传统】哈耶克首先回顾了真个人主义所属的知识传统，始于洛克，尤其是孟德斯鸠和休谟，又经过塔克、弗格森和斯密以及柏克的努力达到鼎盛时期。19世纪有托克维尔和阿克顿，二者“最为成功地发展了苏格兰哲学家、柏克以及英格兰辉格党人的政治哲学之精华”；但19世纪的古典经济学家，至少是他们中的边沁主义者却受另一种不同起源的个人主义影响，其根源在笛卡尔式唯理主义的支配作用，隐含着演变为个人主义敌对面的趋向，如社会主义或集体主义。在哈耶克看来，与前者具有内在一致性的是真个人主义，后者则是现代社会主义的思想渊源【5】造成个人主义含义混乱的两个事实：把柏克看作卢梭所谓“个人主义”的坚决反对者；托克维尔在《论美国的民主》中以“个人主义”描述他所痛恨并坚决反对的态度。但无论是柏克还是托克维尔，基本问题上都更接近斯密（Yet there can no doubt that both Burke and De Tocqueville stand in all essentials close to Adam Smith, to whom nobody will deny the title of individualist, and that the "individualism" to which they are opposed is something altogether different from that of Smith. p.5.）

【真个人主义的本质特征】哈耶克认为：（1）真个人主义首先是一种社会理论，亦即一种旨在理解各种决定着人类社会生活力量的努力；其次，它才是一套从这种社会观念中衍生出来的政治准则。【6】（it is primarily a theory of society, an attempt to understand the forces which determine the social life of man, and only in the second instance a set of political maxims derived from this view of society. p.6.）认为个人主义是以孤立的或自主的个人的存在位于社，而非一种以人的整个性质和特征都取决于他们存在于社会这样一个事实作为出发点的观点是错误的。“真个人主义的基本主张却与这种观点相去甚远，因为它认为，我们唯有通过理解那些指向其他人并受其与其行为所指导的个人行动，方能达致对社会现象的理解。”反对集体主义的社会理论。【6】[This fact should by itself be sufficient to refute the silliest of the common misunderstandings: the belief that individualism postulates (or bases its arguments on the assumption of) the existence of isolated or self-contained individuals, instead of starting from men whose whole nature and character is determined by their existence in society. If that were true, it would indeed have nothing to contribute to our understanding of society. But its basic contention is quite a different one; it is that there is no other way toward an understanding of social phenomena but through our understanding of individual actions directed toward other people and guided by their expected behavior. p.6.] （2）区别于唯理主义的伪个人主义，后者在实践中也会导向集体主义。哈耶克提出，[真个人主义的基本主张认为，通过对个人行动之综合影响的探究，我们发现：第一，人类赖以取得成就的许多制度乃是在心智未加设计和指导的情况下逐渐形成并正在发挥作用的；第二，套用亚当·弗格森的话来说，“民族或国家乃是因偶然缘故而形成的，但是它们的制度则实实在在是人之行动的结果，而非人之设计的结果”；第三，自由人经由自生自发的合作而创造的成就，往往要比他们个人的心智所能充分理解的更伟大。] 就区别于唯理主义的个人主义【7】[It is the contention that, by tracing the combined effects of individual actions, we discover that many of the institutions on which human achievements rest have arisen and are functioning without a designing and directing mind; that, as Adam Ferguson expressed it, "nations stumble upon establishments, which are indeed the result of human action but not the result of human design"; and that the spontaneous collaboration of free men often creates things which are greater than their individual minds can ever fully comprehend. pp.6-7.] 英国和法国传统【8-9】在哈耶克看来，二者的两个关键差别在于伪个人主义 [即“对于任何把个人视作出发点，并且假定个人乃是经由一种形式契约的方式把自己的特定意志与其他人的意志统合在一起而形成社会的哲学家来说，信奉自生自发的社会产物的做法从逻辑上讲乃是不可能的”；而真个人主义则是唯一一种旨在阐明自生自发社会产物的形成现象并使之得到人们理解的理论。其次，各种设计理论必定会得出这样一种结论，即只有当社会过程受个人理性控制的时候，它们才能够服务于人的目的，因此，这些设计理论也就会直接导向社会主义；而真个人主义则与之相反，因为它坚信：如果让人们享有自由，那么他们取得的成就往往会多于个人理性所能设计或预见到的成就。] 拎出穆勒和斯宾塞受法国和英国传统相差无几，二者的混淆【9】（While it is perfectly true of this pseudo-individualism that "belief in spontaneous social products was logically impossible to any philosophers who regarded individual man as the starting point and supposed him to form societies by the union of his particular will with another in a formal contract,"true individualism is the only theory which can claim to make the formation of spontaneous social products intelligible. And, while the design theories necessarily lead to the conclusion that social processes can be made to serve human ends only if they are subjected to the control of individual human reason, and thus lead directly to socialism, true individualism believes on the contrary that, if left free, men will often achieve more than individual human reason could design or foresee. pp.10-1.）哈耶克批评了如下误解，即斯密等人发明了“经济人”概念；其结论是由于唯理主义心理观点得到的，因此站不住脚。哈耶克强调，[斯密主要关注的并不是人们处于最佳境遇时有可能偶尔取得的成就，而毋宁是在人们处于最糟境遇时如何才可以尽可能地减少他们做损害他人之事的机会。斯密及其同时代人所倡导的个人主义的主要价值就在于它是一种能够把坏人造成的损害减少到最低限度的制度；我认为，不论人们如何强调斯密等人所主张的个人主义所具有的这种价值，都是极为恰当的。这样一种社会制度之所以能够发挥有效的作用，并不取决于我们是否能够找到一些好人来运作这种制度，也不取决于所有的人是否能够变得比他们现在更好；相反，这种社会制度乃是经由多样且复杂的人而发挥作用的：这些人时好时坏，有时聪明，但更多的时候却愚蠢。斯密及其信徒的目标就是要建立一种有可能把自由赋予所有的人的制度，而不是要建立一种把自由仅仅赋予“好人和聪明人”的制度——而后者恰恰是他们的法国同时代人所希望建立的那种制度。]【10】（However that may be, the main point about which there can be little doubt is that Smith's chief concern was not so much with what man might occasionally achieve when he was at his best but that he should have as little opportunity as possible to do harm when he was at his worst. It would scarcely be too much to claim that the main merit of the individualism which he and his contemporaries advocated is that it is a system under which bad men can do least harm. It is a social system which does not depend for its functioning on our finding good men for running it, or on all men becoming better than they now are, but which makes use of men in all their given variety and complexity, sometimes good and sometimes bad, sometimes intelligent and more often stupid. Their aim was a system under which it should be possible to grant freedom to all, instead of restricting it, as their French contemporaries wished, to "the good and the wise." pp.11-2.）个人主义论者关注的是如何发现一套激励制度，激励人们根据选择和依从日常行为动机尽可能为满足所有其他人的需要贡献自己的力量；私有财产权制度正是这样的激励制度。【11】

【个人主义与自私】哈耶克希望澄清二者的关系。18世纪伟大思想家所使用“自爱”或“自私利益”，并非是指狭义的“利己主义”，也就是只关注一个人自身的即时性需要【11-2】从知识论的角度，个人主义的基础在于：[人在知识和利益方面所具有的那种构成性局限；换言之，这个事实就是人们所能够知道的知识整个社会中的极小一部分事情，因此构成他们行动之旨趣或动机的也只是他们的行动在他们所知道的范围中所具有的那些即时性结果而已。与人之心智只能够有效理解他处于中心位置的狭小圈子中的事情这个事实相比较，人们在道德态度方面有可能存在的各种区别，就它们对社会组织的重要性而言，实乃是微不足道的；再者，不论一个人是十足的自私者还是最完美的利他者，他所能够有效关注到的人的需要也只是所有社会成员之需要当中微不足道的一部分而已。因此，真正的问题并不在于人是否（或者是否应当）由自私的动机所指导，而在于我们是否能够让他在他的行动过程中接受他所能够知道的和加以关注的那些即时性结果的指导，或者我们是否应当要求他去做那些被某个其他人——亦即被认为对那些行动之于整个社会的重要意义有着一种更为深刻理解的某个其他人——视作是合适的事情。]【12】（This is the constitutional limitation of man's knowledge and interests, the fact that he cannot know more than a tiny part of the whole of society and that therefore all that can enter into his motives are the immediate effects which his actions will have in the sphere he knows. All the possible differences in men's moral attitudes amount to little, so far as their significance for social organization is concerned, compared with the fact that all man's mind can effectively comprehend are the facts of the narrow circle of which he is the center; that, whether he is completely selfish or the most perfect altruist, the human needs for which he can effectively care are an almost negligible fraction of the needs, of all members of society. The real question, therefore, is not whether man is, or ought to be, guided by selfish motives but whether we can allow him to be guided in his actions by those immediate consequences which he can know and care for or whether he ought to be made to do what seems appropriate to somebody else who is supposed to possess a fuller comprehension of the significance of these actionsto society as a whole. p.14.）基督教传统的良知自由，经济学家进一步指出，“如果人想尽其所能为共同的社会目的作出一己的重大贡献，那么他就应当享有一种充分使用他自己的知识和技艺的自由，亦即我们必须允许他按照他对自己所知道的和所关心的特定事物的关注去行事。”【12】（he should be free to make full use of his knowledge and skill, that he must be allowed to be guided by his concern for the particular things of which he knows and for which he cares, if he is to make as great a contribution to the common purposes of society as he is capable of making. p.14.）经济学家发现市场。哈耶克反对两种误导性说法：人只受或应当只受个人需要或自我利益的指导（应当允许人们去追求他们认为可欲的任何目的）；每个人都清楚知道自己的利益所在（个人主义的真正基础在于，任何人都不可能知道谁知道得最清楚，我们能够据以发现这一点的唯一途径是一种社会过程，而在这个过程中，每个人都可以自由地去尝试和发现他自己所能够做的事情）物质的状态，人的理性并非单数形式存在而是人与人之间相互作用的过程【13】The true basis of his argument is that nobody can know who knows best and that the only way by which we can find out is through a social process in which everybody is allowed to try and see what he can do. The fundamental assumption, here as elsewhere, is the unlimited variety of human gifts and skills and the consequent ignorance of any single individual of most of what is known to all the other members of society taken together. Or, to put this fundamental contention differently, human Reason, with a capital R, does not exist in the singular, as given or available to any particular person, as the rationalist approach seems to assume, but must be conceived as an interpersonal process in which anyone's contribution is tested and corrected by others. This argument does not assume that all men are equal in their natural endowments and ca.pacities but only that no man is qualified to pass final judgment on the capacities which another possesses or is to be allowed to exercise. p,15, 平等问题，区分平等地对待人们和试图使他们变得平等，前者是自由社会的前提条件，后者是新的奴役形式。哈耶克认为，“正是因为人们事实上是不平等的或不相同的，所有我们才能够平等地对待他们。如果所有人所有的人在天赋和倾向方面都是完全相同的，那么为了实现任何一种社会组织，我们就必须区别对待他们。所幸的是，人们并不是平等的或相同的；而且也正是出于这个缘故，人们在职能上的分化才毋需由某种组织化的意志予以武断地决定，相反，唯有在我们确立了可以按照相同的方式适用于所有人的规则这种形式平等以后，我们才能够确使每个个人找到适合他自己的位置。”【14】（Here I may perhaps mention that only because men are in fact unequal can we treat them equally. If all men were completely equal in their gifts and inclinations, we should have to treat them differently in order to achieve any sort of social organization. Fortunately, they are not equal; and it is only owing to this that the differentiation of functions need not be determined by the arbitrary decision of some organizing will but that, after creating formal equality of the rules applying in the same manner to all, we can leave each individual to find his own level. … There is all the difference in the world between treating people equally and attempting to make them equal. While the first is the condition of a free society, the second means, as De Tocqueville described it, "a new form of servitude." pp.15-16.）

【对强制性权力的严格限制】对个人知识局限的认识，以及任何个人或小群人都不可能知道某个其他人所指导的所有事情的事实，个人主义者得出如下结论：[要求对所有的强制性权力或一切排他性权力都施以严格的限制。但是需要指出的是，它所旨在反对的知识那种运用强制手段去建构组织或促成结社的做法，而不是结社本身。] 个人之间自生自发和自愿达成的合作。【14】（From the awareness of the limitations of individual knowledge and from the fact that no person or small group of persons can know all that is known to somebody, individualism also derives its main practical conclusion: its demand for a strict limitation of all coercive or exclusive power. Its opposition, however, is directed only against the use of coercion to bring about organization or association, and not against association as such. Far from being opposed to voluntary association, the case of the individualist rests, on the contrary, on the contention that much of what in the opinion of many can be brought about only by conscious direction, can be better achieved by the voluntary and spontaneous collaboration of individuals. p.16.）不过真个人主义并非无政府主义，哈耶克把无政府主义看作唯理主义的伪个人主义的产物。[真个人主义并不否认强制性权力的必要性，而是希望对这种权力施以限制——亦即把这种权力局限在那些必须凭靠其他人来阻止强制的领域之中，并且期望把强制现象减少到最低限度。] 批评“自由放任”和“保护生命、自由和财产”这两种说法根本没有告诉我们什么是和不是政府活动的可欲和必要领域。【15】（It does not deny the necessity of coercive power but wishes to limit it-to limit it to those fields where it is indispensable to prevent coercion by others and in order to reduce the total of coercion to a minimum. pp.16-7.）哈耶克讨论了责任范围的确定问题。为保有充分运用自己知识或技艺的自由，区分了两种治理方式：依据规则，规则告知个人什么是他必须在其间进行活动的责任范围；依据强行设定具体义务的命令展开；这组区别无异于“法律下的自由”和运用立法机器取消自由的分别。“这里的关键并不在于政府治理活动应当以某种指导原则为基础，而毋宁在于政府应当仅限于要求个人遵循他们所知道的并且能够在他们进行决策的时候加以考虑的那些原则。”个体的行动不取决于其行动可能产生的遥远且间接的后果，而取决于他知道的即时性情势。【16】“个人主义制度赖以为基础的乃是这样一项最为一般性的原则，即它把人们对一般性原则的普遍接受视作是它在社会事务中创造秩序的一种手段。”【17】

【一般性规则与法律框架】在指出“个人主义的秩序必须以抽象原则的实施为基础，而不得以具体命令的实施为基础”后，哈耶克首先做出如下推论，“由于规则在个人制定自己计划的时候会起到指导的作用，所以它们就应当旨在成为长期有效的规则。从本质上讲，自由主义的或个人主义的政策一定是长期性质的政策。”【18】（There is; in the first instance, one important corollary of what has already been said, namely, that the rules, because they are to serve as signposts to the individuals in making their own plans, should be designed to remain valid for long periods. Liberal or individualist policy must be essentially long-run policy; the present fashion to concentrate on short-run effects, and to justify this by the argument that "in the long run we are all dead," leads inevitably to the reliance on orders adjusted to the particular circumstances of the moment in the place of rules couched in terms of typical situations. p.20.）他进一步讨论了法律制度的建构。“私有财产权”问题【18-9】强调政府除了实施那些根据个人主义原则完全可以被证明为正当的私法和刑法以外，还可以发挥许多其他的（但不是强制的）作用。[there are further (and noncoercive!) functions of government beyond the mere enforcement of civil and criminal law which can be fully justified on individualist principles. p.21.]哈耶克最后提出，“任何行之有效的个人主义秩序都必须是按照下述两种方式加以型构的：第一，个人对其能力和资源的不同用途所能够预期的性对报酬乃是与他努力的结果对于其他人所具有的相对效用相一致的；第二，个人所能够预期的这种相对酬报也是与他努力的客观结果而不是与人们对他的努力所作的主观评价是相一致的。一个有效的竞争性市场必须满足上述两个条件。”【19】（It is that any workable individualist order must be so framed not only that the relative remunerations the individual can expect from the different uses of his abilities and resources correspond to the relative utility of the result of his efforts to others but also that these remunerations correspond to the objective results of his efforts rather than to their subjective merits. An effectively competitive market satisfies both these conditions. ）并强调“个人自由的保有乃是与彻底实现我们有关分配正义的理念不相融合的。”（But it is in connection with the second that our personal sense of justice so frequently revolts against the impersonal decisions of the market. Yet, if the individual is to be free to choose, it is inevitable that he should bear the risk attaching to that choice and that in consequence he be rewarded, not according to the goodness or badness of his intentions, but solely on the basis of the value of the results to others. We must face the fact that the preservation of individual freedom is incompatible with a full satisfaction of our views of distributi ve justice. pp.21-2.）

【国家与社会】个人主义理论强调，能够或应当被视作人之理性刻意型构之物的那部分社会秩序只是全部社会力量当中的一小部分而已。换言之，国家作为对刻意组织起来的和有意识指导的力量的体现，应当只是我们所谓的“社会”这一极为丰富的有机体当中的一个很小的部分；此外，国家所应当提供的也只是一种能够使人们自由地（因而不是“有意识指导”地）进行最大限度之合作的框架而已。【20】[While the theory of individualism has thus a definite contribution to make to the technique of constructing a suitable legal framework and of improving the institutions which have grown up spontaneously, its emphasis, of course, is on the fact that the part of our social order which can or ought to be made a conscious product of human reason is only a small part of all the forces of society. In other words, that the state, the embodiment of deliberately organized and consciously directed power, ought to be only a small part of the much richer organism which we call "society," and that the former ought to provide merely a framework within which free (and therefore not "consciously directed") collaboration of men has the maximum of scope. p.22.] 进一步，哈耶克提出两项推论，这也可以看到真假个人主义的对立：（1）法国大革命旨在实现的目标主张应当用可以的方式压制所有居间性安排和结社，并把刻意组织起来的国家视作一方而把个人视作另一方，但真个人主义者却不认为这是现实的真实情况，因为社会交往过程中的非强制惯例或约定也是继续人类社会有序运行的基本要素；（2）个人在参与社会进程的时候必须做好准备并自愿根据日益发生的变化调整自己的行动，而且还必须做好准备并自愿遵循那些并非智性设计之结果的惯例或约定，尽管这些惯例或约定的正当性在特定的情形中很可能无法辨识，而且这些惯例或约定对于个人来说也常常是难以理解和理性不及的。【20】（The first is that the deliberately organized state on the one side, and the individual on the other, far from being regarded as the only realities, while all the intermediate formations and associations are to be deliberately suppressed, as was the aim of the French Revolution, the noncompulsory conventions of social intercourse are considered as essential factors in preserving the orderly working of human society. The second is that the individual, in participating in the social processes, must be ready and willing to adj ust himself to changes and to submit to conventions which are not the result of intelligent design, whose justification in the particular instance may not be recognizable, and which to him will often appear unintelligible and irrational. p.22.）第一项推论强调传统和惯例的重要性，【21】第二项推论则强调容忍或尊重无法被视作智性设计之产物的社会力量。“尽管摧毁作为一个自由文明不可或缺之基础的那些自生自发的制度安排也许并不困难，但是这些基础一旦被摧毁，那么我们根本就不可能通过一种刻意的方式再重新构造出这样一种自由的文明了。”【21-2】（Indeed, the great lesson which the individualist philosophy teaches us on this score is that, while it may not be difficult to destroy the spontaneous formations which are the indispensable bases of a free civilization, it may be beyond our power deliberately to reconstruct such a civilization once these foundations are destroyed. p.25.）以德国个人主义为例，不仅与真个人主义毫无关系，而且是阻碍个人主义制度顺利云心的严重障碍，并因此认为德国人只能以创建集权主义国家告终【24】中央集权化趋势【25】民族主义只是社会主义的孪生概念。19世纪英语世界自由主义与欧陆所谓自由主义的根本区别与真个人主义与唯理主义的伪个人主义的继承紧密关联；密尔既可以归属于英国也可以归属于欧陆。【26】

【个人主义与民主】“真个人主义不仅信奉民主，而且还坚持认为民主的理想渊源于个人主义的基本原则。”不过并不相信决策全知全能。【26】“强制性命令的英语应当被限制在一个确定的范围之内。”以及，反对多数观点正确。哈耶克写道：“尽管民主是以多数观点决定共同行动这一原则为基础的，但是这却并不意味着今天的多数观点就应当成为人们普遍接受的观点（即使这种看法对于实现大多数人的目标来说是必要的）。相反，民主的全部正当性都是以这样一个事实为基础的，即随着时间的流逝，今天的少数人观点也许会在日后成为多数人的观点。”这个说法很有意思。【27】（While democracy is founded on the convention that the majority view decides on common action, it does not mean that what is today the majority view ought to become the generally accepted view-even if that were necessary to achieve the aims of the majority. On the contrary, the whole justification of democracy rests on the fact that in course of time what is today the view of a small minority may become the majority view. p.29.）哈耶克政治理论必须在两类领域找到分界线：多数人的观点对所有人都具有约束力；以及少数人观点能够产生某些可以更好满足公众需求的结果，那么人们就应当允许这些少数人的观点占据支配地位。【27】（I believe, indeed, that one of the most important questions on which political theory will have to discover an answer in the near future is that of finding a line of demarcation between the fields in which the majority views must be binding for all and the fields in which, on the contrary, the minority view ought to be allowed to prevail if it can produce results which better satisfy a demand of the public. pp.29-30.）引用阿克顿。转型平等问题，指出真个人主义并非现代意义上的平均主义，重申以平等的方式对待人们，而没有理由采取其他办法把人们变得平等。【27-8】（When we turn to equality, however, it should be said at once that true individualism is not equalitarian in the modern sense of the word. It can see no reason for trying to make people equal as distinct from treating them equally. While individualism is profoundly opposed to all prescriptive privilege, to all protection, by law or force, of any rights not based on rules equally applicable to all persons, it also denies government the right to limit what the able or fortunate may achieve. It is equally opposed to any rigid limitation of the position individuals may achieve, whether this power is used to perpetuate inequality or to create equality. Its main principle is that no man or group of men should have power to decide what another man's status ought to be, and it regards this as a condition of freedom so essential that it must not be sacrificed to the gratification of our sense of justice or of our envy. p.30. … From the point of view of individualism there would not appear to exist even any justification for making all individuals start on the same level by preventing them from profiting by advantages which they have in no way earned, such as being born to parents who are more intelligent or more conscientious than the average. p.31.）

【总结】重申开篇的观点：“人类经由一些过程而达致了并非任何个人所设计的亦非任何个人所理解的各种成就，而且这些成就的伟大程度也确实是个人心智所无力企及的；因此，真个人主义的基本态度就是对这一一些过程表示前辈的态度。此时此刻，重要的乃是这样一个问题，即人的心智是否应当继续作为这种过程的一部分而发展下去；换言之，人之理性是否应当把自己严格置于它自己所设定的约束之中。”【3】（that the fundamental attitude of true individualism is one of humility toward the processes by which mankind has achieved things which have not been designed or understood by any individual and are indeed greater than individual minds. The great question at this moment is whether man's mind will be allowed to continue to grow as part of this process or whether human reason is to place itself in chains of its own making. p.32.）哈耶克强调，“只有当社会是自由的时候，社会才会比个人更伟大；换言之，只要社会受到控制或指导，那么社会的发展就会受到控制或指导它的个人心智所具有的力量的限制。”并以柏克的节制结尾。【29】（What individualism teaches us is that society is greater than the individual only in so far as it is free. In so far as it is controlled or directed, it is limited to the powers of the individual minds which control or direct it. If the presumption of the modern mind, which will not respect anything that is not consciously controlled by individual reason, does not learn in time where to stop, we may, as Edmund Burke warned us, "be well assured that everything about us will dwindle by degrees, until at length our concerns are shrunk to the dimensions of our minds." p.32.）