People seem to be indifferent regarding the philosophical significance of economic activity. This is because they are con-cerned only that the economy makes a country strong and the people wealthy, whereas philosophy is generally taken as speculative metaphysics. While people are busy with all kinds of economic activities, who would be concerned about philosophy? Even when education is considered as an important element of economic development so that colleges and universities prosper, the department of philosophy is a lonely place -- according to the Chinese saying: a deserted place where one can even catch a sparrow in front of one’s door. Should philosophy vanish from the social life after it had completed its mission as vanguard when people needed to liberate their thinking? Actually, this is not the case of philosophy alone; it is the same for the so-called fine arts, such as classical music, ballet and even basic science which do not make money directly. This phenomenon itself is what philosophy should investigate.

People might think that existence comes first, and that then there can be other development. On the basis of the development of the economy, one could expect prosperity for the fine arts. But though living conditions are better than ever before, we do not have a better culture today, especially in such fields as philosophy, literature, etc. We must conclude that we are now in a period in which economic activity prevails in social life more than ever before, whereas the other aspects of social life are all secondary.

It might be supposed that the above is the case only in the developing countries and that in order to catch up with the developed countries it is necessary to take economy as the main target, while temporarily neglecting the rest of the social life. But when we look at the developed countries, the situation is no better than in the developing countries. What we see is that culture is seriously commercialized so that art collecting is taken as an investment. There even comes a new word: economic animals, to describe some people who are totally absorbed by economic activity.

We do not intend to neglect the importance of economic activity in social life. On the contrary, we are fully aware of Aristotle: "When all such inventions (art and technique directed to the necessities of life and recreation) were already established, science (philosophy) which does not aim at giving pleasure or at the necessities of life was discovered, and first of all in the place where men first began to have leisure." It has been more than 200 years since Aristotle, but we seem not to have the leisure to do philo-sophy today. Instead, we are even more busy than ever before in doing business, so that we have a new conception of the human as an economic animal instead of the classical definition of "rational animal".

People may not be happy to accept the te economic animal, but is there any reason to improve on the above situation; can philosophy show us the way out? To the best of my knowledge, philosophy has never had the power to do so. What philosophy can do is to observe economic activity and try to find out where it will lead us in terms of human life. This task falls on philosophy because, being excluded from economic activity, it has the leisure to do so. This paper will focus on the following aspects: the impact of economic activity on the relationship between the human being and nature, the impact of economic activity on the essence of man, and the impact of economic activity on the meaning of human life.

Human beings come from, and are a part of, nature. Through economic activity human beings become superior to all other animals and the masters of nature. This activity includes as its basic aspects: production, consumption, commerce and finance. Among them, production is fundamental as it provides for human beings the necessities of life, whereas finance is a somewhat formalized economic activity which prevails especially in our days. The relationship between man and nature changes along with the development of economic activity.

The primitive means of living for human beings were hunting and gathering collecting. At that time human beings were in a totally natural state. They obtained their food from the abundance of nature, that is, the existence of the plants and animals which human beings took as food in the last analysis depended on climactic and geographic conditions. The survival of carnivorous animals depended upon there being a sufficiency of herbivorous animals; the survival of herbivorous animals depended, in turn, depends on there being sufficient plants. Human beings obviously did not then occupy a superior position among the animals. Though they caught and killed animals, at times they could also be killed by beasts. Their power against natural disasters was rather weak. All of these limited the population and the life span of human beings.

It was by agriculture and animal husbandry that human beings first in a sense escaped the limitation set by nature. Human beings began to produce their food instead of it being given by nature. This not only improved the security of their conditions, but also increased their population and life-span. Given enough food, some people had more free time to develop all kinds of skills, mental and physical, which in turn promoted production, so that gradually there emerged all walks of life. The division of work requires an exchange of products. Today we cannot count the walks of life had by human beings.

By economic activity, the relation between human beings and nature has been greatly changed. Nowadays, people produce enough food for a population of 5.6 billion, which would be im-possible in the natural state. Some deadly diseases are controlled; the average life-span of people in most areas of the world reaches the 60s or above. The fierce beasts which threatened human beings before can survive now only under the special protection of the human beings. By the late 1960s people went to the moon, showing that human beings can even survive outside the earth’s ecosystem. People make use of all sorts of natural resources and compose many new materials; by changing genetic factors, they even create new species. People are proud of their achievements, which makes them think that they are the lords of the earth.

Human beings cannot achieve such great things without economic activity. Of course, science and technology play a very important role in the above process, but only as a means. When human beings are content with their achievement perhaps we should consider what happened to nature itself: How will a changed nature influence human beings? Nature has been changed in many aspects. Ever more forest is destroyed and its land is being ploughed; intensive fishing extends to ever further seas so that the number of natural species is being rapidly reduced. The reduction of vegetation is a very serious problem for the oxygen which is essential to all living things. Although seed selection makes for high-yielding crops, the purification of the plant in turn makes it less robust as a species and more susceptible to infectious disease. The use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides has badly polluted the environment, and the harmful elements accumulate in the human body. Although the earth is a huge store of natural resources and there are still great hidden resources, most cannot be renewed so the human beings’ use of them must stop. With the use of energy, there comes more and more wasted gas and water. The earth is not as it was before. To live under such a new environment, the human being must change itself physically.

The essence of the human being, or what a person is, also changes as economic activity develops. One of the most obvious changes of the human being is in his physical body. For instance, man’s hands are very nimble. When we enjoy beautiful music as fingers attack the keys of a piano, when we observe a micro-carving under a microscope we cannot but be proud of the function of human hands. But in some other aspects, the human physical body has become relatively weaker than in the natural state. We live in ease and comfort: we have a house to shelter us from sun and rain, clothes to keep us warm, means of communication to go everywhere, and machines to do difficult work so that the human body becomes tender and fragile. We wonder whether one can still live in the natural state. The human being is the only animal in need of physical training in order to keep healthy, while women feel great pain in giving birth to a child. Besides, human beings may have some special diseases which cannot be found in the natural state, such as various professional diseases. Ironically, some people may even have diseases caused by over nutrition (though, not everyone gets enough to eat). Still there come mental or psychiatric sicknesses which we may call civilization sicknesses.

The essential change of human beings through economic activity is that they become totally civilized and are informed by culture. Since in economic activity social organization becomes more and more complex, only civilized people can live modern social life. The civilizing influence is carried out through education which includes two basic aspects: professional training and education in the norms of social conduct. Professional training may help a person find a job, especially in developed countries, while the norms of social conduct are needed for maintaining social order and stability.

In daily life the influence of civilization can be observed everywhere. When we are introduced to a new friend, we would say only our occupation and degree. But as a person everyone knows that one also has one’s own character, disposition, feeling, wisdom, desires and so on. The situation is even more serious in the highest and most formalized level of economic activity, finance. As a type of economic activity this developed relatively later, but soon has come to occupy the leading position in economic activity. Through credit and investment, it controls production, consumption and commerce. It formalizes economic activity by directing the flow of money. One can own an enterprise without being a specialist if one has enough money. All is simplified according to numbers: the account number, the credit card number, etc. The amount of money in the account and credit card represents one’s ability and position; in contrast one’s occupation and degree are reduced to a level of secondary significance.

Social norms usually include custom, morality and law. But when economic activity prevails over social life, law comes to play the most important role, for the principle of justice is necessary in exchange and finance. As a result, the human being now is ex-pressed by a new term: the legal person.

The above discussion shows that economic activity has both positive and negative effects. People might say that what we gain in economic activity is more than what we lose, and that we need not talk about its negative side? But what is meant by more or less in these matters. Not everything can be measured by counting. For instance, if the pollution of water and air is not controlled but continues, the earth will not be fit for living things in the future. So what is more important, a better life or life itself? One might say again that human beings have the ability to invent some new technological means to solve the problems, but if we do not lend adequate attention to the problems they cannot be solved. According to a Chinese proverb: One suffers in the future if one does not care sufficiently in the present. People have not paid enough attention to the above problems; even though they understand the seriousness of the problems theoretically, they still do not attend adequately to them.

The negative side of civilization is not easily neglected because people usually think an educated person is a cultivated person, in contrast to a savage. Though in the process of civili-zation the person might be alienated, still we do not know what the human being might have been like if not alienated. Perhaps here we need to compare a moral with a legal person. When conducting oneself according to law one’s acts are clearly and exactly defined. Hence, we can know what a legal person would be like even before he or she acts, but there is no room for originality. In contrast, for the moral person the good is the supreme aim, but up to now there seems no convincing definition of the good. At best, we read in Kant that the good is not a concern or interest, but is the absolute command or categorical imperative. But because the good cannot be clearly defined it leaves plenty of room for a moral person to create beautiful deeds in his or her life. Seeking the good, a moral person is free and open, and creates oneself as a perfect person. Nothing is more beautiful than a perfect person though not every-one know this. One might feel sad about a defective work one produces, but if one is not aware that each person is one’s own pro-duct, one would not feel sorry about oneself.

The life of a human being has many aspects, of which economic activity is but one -- though a very important one. All these aspects join in constituting an integrated life. Hence, we must not neglect any aspect, for should any parts of life be neglected then the life itself would be defective.

women’s personality development. A modernized economy will enrich the female subject’s personality and open the possibilities for women to rediscover their self and improve their personality.

Almost every nation has undergone a time when they worshiped female goddesses and had beautiful legends concerning their authority. Female goddesses could not only repair heaven and make the earth, but could also create and multiply human beings. The worship of female goddesses reflects the authoritive position of female in material things and in producing human beings during primitive economic times. With respect to material production, their level then was very low. Women collected natural fruit, while men hunted for animals, but because of poor instruments men often came back with nothing, whereas the collection of fruit by women was the main source of food. In their state of group marriage, everyone knew his or her mother without knowing the father; child bearing was considered the business of women alone. In both material and human production women occupied a dominant position and were respected by everybody. With men they worked hard for the development of humankind, but did not ride roughshod over people by means of their position. Hence, their personalities were sound and beneficial. In such a time women had both position and personality, but they could not be said to have had independent individual personalities. They were conscious of a heavy dependence upon nature and human beings; there was no place for a sense of independent personality.

Progress in productive tools changed the natural division of labor. The rise of agriculture and livestock provided a new productive force. In addition, individual marriage replaced group marriage so that people knew their own parents. Child bearing was no longer a holy affair, but a burden binding women in the family. Men came to occupy the authoritive position in society originally held by women. With the establishment of the system of private property, women no longer had an independent personality, but became an exploited and oppressed part of men’s property.

The development of economy and the progress of the marriage relation need not have led to the loss of women’s personality, but the fact is just the contrary. We have seen several antinomies above: first, women invented primitive agriculture, contributed to the invention of fire and livestock farming, and helped to bring about the development of the economy and progress in history. At the same time, women showed themselves less competent than men in such productive activities as agriculture and livestock farming, which made them subordinate to men; second, women contributed to the continuation of the human race, but child bearing bound them in families and deprived them of the opportunity to take part in social activities; third, males created the culture and value system and made themselves subjects of the society, while treating females as object and tools. Although these are historical antinomies, they were inevitable for human beings in their efforts to free themselves for the bonds of nature. In a society of low productive power, it is an axiom that the weak are prey to the strong. The backwardness of production and its corresponding feudal system and culture could not provide room for an equality of both sexes. Therefore, for the progress of the economy it was unavoidable that women’s personality would be sacrificed. In the dark ages in China as well as in the West women could not participate in politics and the praiseworthy characters of the female were also distorted: women become jealous due to living together with their husband’s concubines; they became self effacing due to being subject to maltreatment; and they became narrow-minded through living for a long time in the boudoir without going out. In the meantime, the distortion of the male personality was manifested in another way. Many men were subordinate to other men due to the social system which gave primary to the father’s rights so that they had no personality of their own. In the family, marriage for the sole purpose of child bearing and expression of the sexual impulse without love alienated the human essence of males.

The industrial economy destroyed the natural sense of the family as the basic unit. Great quantities of labor were needed by large industry. This created opportunities for women to enter social life, to participate in economic activities, to earn salaries, and hence no longer to be the property of others. This provided a good basis for their positions as social subjects. In addition, the democratic system, corresponding to the industrial economy, promoted such ideas as "all are equal in terms of money"; "all are equal before the law", "all are equal before God". This gave rise to public opinion favorable to the independence of women as regards their personality. All this was helpful in awakening women’s personalities as subjects. In industrial society women actively fulfilled their obligations while seeking their legitimate rights and interests in activities which constantly improve their personality. However, the following elements in industrial society frustrated the development of women’s personality or even subjected it to certain deviations.

First, industrial production places the machine at the center; it aims at producing material objects and is determined by the investment of human power and other resources; it emphasizes physical labor and operational technology, and the proportion of physical labor is much greater than that of mental work. This situation is unfavorable to women; they suffer sexual discrimination in seeking a job, which hinders the establishment of women’s personalties as subjects.

Second, due to the backwardness of ideas in comparison to the progress of the economy, certain feudal ideas such as "the male has dignity while the female is humble" and "a woman should be subordinate to a man" still fetter women, and influence social expectations regarding their role and value. This gives rise to certain dilemmas for women in seeking their rights and fulfilling their obligations. Many women feel a tension between their role in society and in their family, and in seeking a position in social life while feeling a sense of obligation to be a good wife and mother.

Third, the male culture inclines women to be masculine: as society has long been dominated by men the behavior of successful men in social life is taken as the pattern for all people. As women have not created their own pattern of behavior, they must conform to the pattern of man’s behavior so that their role in social life will more easily be accepted. This stage cannot be surmounted until women fully participate as subjects in society. Although the slogans such as "equality for both sexes" play a great role in freeing women from the fetters of family to become subjects in society, they are harmful to the maintenance of the distinctively female personality. In China, a trend toward the masculinization of women was strong after the 1950s, and reach its height in the 1970s. The "Iron Young Woman" in the 1950s was very similar to the male physique; in the 1970s the dress, even the style of women’s hair, was masculinized. Coming into 1980s, people exclaimed with surprising that "there are no woman in this country"; they began to doubt whether the "strong woman" was perfect in personality. Women refused to be masculinized.

However, people have no answer to the question what is the ideal personality for women? They sink into puzzlement and inertia. Men are afraid of their wives being "strong women", and women themselves fear being "strong women". In order to be thought of as tender, many women do not dare to show their talent, but then they worry about being too feminine; they do not know how to mould their personalities. The solution to the problem requires further development in the economy as well as constant progress in ideology; one is complementary to the other.

The modernized economy is a great revolution over the traditional one and will bring about change in all facets of society. The female personality will be developed and improved in the process of the modernization of society and its ideal will be realized.

First, the productive mode of the modernized economy helps manifest the personality of women as subjects. In modern industry, what determines the production is no longer physical human strength, but the application of a high level of technology, which increases the proportion of mental work. Now in some developed countries, the proportion of mental work versus physical labor approximates 1:1, while the value created by the former far exceeds that created by the latter. Therefore, the application of high level technology will reduce or eliminate the physical inferiority of women in production, and enable women to give play to their superiority in patience, carefulness and nimbleness. This is obviously indicated in developed countries: in the U.K. women have more job opportunities than men.

Second, the operational mode of a modernized economy enables women to choose the job suited to them. The open, dynamic pattern of the economy enables women to find positions of their own in a wider range of social activity. In developed countries, women are exploring molding ideal personalities. They are not the traditional good mothers and wives who sacrifice themselves in a closed family context, nor are they the so-called strong women of industrial times. They develop their own standard and hope to get a valuable job with flexible hours and a good location; they hope to take account of both family and career. Some women give up work and become housewives while bring up their children, but their return to the family is for the purpose of educating their children and giving their children the natural love of a mother so that the children can grow soundly. In the meantime, they engage in further studies to give play to their potentialities or to develop their interests, so that they will be more competitive when they take up a career after their children have grown up. Such exploration is praiseworthy under the conditions of a modernized economy; it advances the civilization of the whole society.

Third, the high educational level of society, the high degree of democracy and the modernization and socialization of house work due to the modernization of the economy will enable women to elevate their quality as human beings, to demonstrate their personality, to strengthen their competitive power in social life, and to realize a sound personality. There will be a day when we need no longer emphasize that the male and the female differ and recognize that there is something common to both sexes. Then the peculiar and varied beauty of the character and personality of the female will demonstrate itself naturally in the world.

Of course, molding the female personality depends not merely on the progress of economy and is not merely a matter for women alone. It depends on the consistent efforts of the whole society; this requires theoretical work by scholars to find the incompatibilities and in time eliminate them.