SAE Cooperation Theory Paper 2: Each for Their Own Ends / SAE 合作论 Paper 2: 各为其事

This paper reads the two people's own purposes in cooperation. The cooperation this series reads is this: two people, each for his own purpose, do together one thing that both avow and in which each has a share; neither party holds the purpose and adjudication of this undertaking alone. Paper 1 read what the thing done together looks like; this paper reads the half that says "each for his own." The two people's purposes are each one's own, and neither examines the other's; what a given person's purpose is, only his own end can confirm. A person's being willing to support the other's purpose can become a share he himself avows, but the word "willing" alone does not prove that it has reached his own cannot-not. A purpose is not avowed by the other on one's behalf; and not examining purposes does not mean that the action a purpose calls for, its grounds and its effects on others are from then on beyond questioning. Cooperation can rest on exchange, but need not. There can be an arrangement of reciprocal exchange; it can be that one end mainly gives conditions, not on condition that the other gives anything back; it can be that both parties give, not on condition of obtaining a return from the other, and neither gets anything. The three are shapes this paper has picked out; they can interweave, and are not an exhaustive classification of purposes and dealings; the kind in which in fact no one benefits is not made over into one that must carry a hidden gain. Cooperation looks at the thing done together, not at what each gets from the other. "Exchange" is read in two ways. An arrangement of reciprocal exchange that both parties avow does not make this undertaking exit scope; what exits scope is treating the other merely as a means. Marriage Theory reads a moment of reciprocal exchange as falling back because marriage has the love between the two as one thing it cannot do without; cooperation does not require love, and this difference can be traced to the kind of relation. Writing one's own giving as an account the other must repay is another matter: it does not change with the kind of relation, and as it is read in marriage, so it is read at the layer between persons in cooperation. Nor is exchange calculation. Where what the two want lies in one place, there are still two shares: each one's value belongings stay as they were, while the arrangement of action falls in one place; a shared goal is not a shared ultimate value. The directions of colonization that can be read on these shapes: in reciprocal exchange, treating the other merely as the condition for getting something, or extending settlement from the side of the contract onto the person; writing one's own giving as an account the other must repay; where one end gives conditions, using one's giving to possess the other, completing the other's step for him, or making him dependent to the point where he cannot say no; where both give, the undertaking itself being raised into a legislator, and one party's law being judged for him under "for the sake of this undertaking" or "for everyone's sake." This paper reads two historical passages, Guan Zhong and Bao Shuya, and Engels and Marx, reading structure only from the words and deeds recorded; and it interfaces with Smith, Aristotle, Kropotkin and the Analects. This paper does not prove that cooperation by reciprocal exchange is lower than other cooperation, does not prove that cooperation in which both give is more genuine, and does not prove that cooperation in which the two have the same purpose is more stable. 这一篇读合作里两个人各自的目的。这个系列读的合作,是两个人各为各的目的,一起做一件两人都认下、各有一份的事;这件事不由任何一方独占其目的与裁断。第一篇读了一起做的那件事是什么样子,这一篇读「各为各的」那一半。两人的目的各是各的,不互相审;某一个人的目的是什么,只有他那一端确认得了。一个人愿意支持对方的目的,可以成为他自己认下的一份,但不由「愿意」二字单独证明已到他自己的不得不。目的不由对方代认;不审目的,也不等于目的所要求的行动、依据与对旁人的作用从此不受询问。 合作可以基于交换,但不必须。可以有互换的安排;可以是一端主要给条件,不以对方回给为条件;可以是双方都付出,不以从对方取得回报为条件,都没有获得什么。三种是这一篇选取的样子,可以交错,不作目的与来往的穷尽分类;实际无人获益的那一种,不补成必有隐性的收益。合作看一起做的那件事,不看各人从对方得到什么。「交换」分两种读。双方认下的互换安排,不使这件事出射程;出射程的,是把对方只当作手段。婚姻论把互换的片刻读作回落,是因为婚姻以两人之间的爱为必要的一件;合作不以爱为必要,这一处不同追得到关系的种类上。把自己的付出写成对方须偿还的账,是另一件:它不随关系的种类变,婚姻里怎样读,合作里人与人之间那一层也怎样读。交换也不等于算计。 两人要的在一处,也是两份:各自的价值归属不变,行动的安排落到同一处;共同目标不等于共同的终极价值。从几种样子上读得到的殖民方向:互换里,把对方只当作得到东西的条件,或把结算从合同那一面延伸到人身上;把自己的付出写成对方须偿还的账;一端给条件时,拿付出占有对方,替对方完成他那一步,或致其依赖到说不了不;都付出时,那件事本身被抬成立法者,以「为了这件事」「为了大家」替一方判他的法。这一篇读两段史料,管仲与鲍叔牙,恩格斯与马克思,只照所记的言行读结构;并与斯密、亚里士多德、克鲁泡特金和《论语》对接。这一篇不证明互换式的合作比别的低,不证明都付出的合作更真,也不证明目的相同的合作更稳。