<P>偶然间在另一个经济学的网站上发现的关于一本书的介绍，贝克莱(George Berkeley)的著名经济学著作《问难》（The Querist，1735年），是亚当.斯密最喜欢读的书之一，可惜迄今没有中译本。《问难》是由600余条疑问段句组成，全书不到100页，不超过3万字。看到了楼主的号召是把这本书大家共同翻译过来，可惜没有坚持下来，因此我把这个转贴过来，希望对公共事务感兴趣的朋友们把这项工作继续下去。</P>
<P><STRONG>                                                                 问难The Querist<BR></STRONG>牐<BR>牐燭he Querist containing several Queries proposed to the<BR>牐燾onsideration of the Public<BR>牐牎拔誓选笔且恍┒怨共事务思考引发的疑问。<BR>牐營 the Lord have brought down the high tree, have exalted the low<BR>牐爐ree, have dried up the green tree, and have made the dry tree to<BR>牐爁lourish. -- Ezek. xvii, 24.<BR>牐犔镆暗氖髂径急刂道我耶和华使高树矮小，矮树高大。青树枯乾，枯树发旺。<BR>牐牎兑晕鹘崾,17:24》<BR>牐<BR>牐犖誓<BR>牐1 Whether there ever was, is, or will be, an industrious<BR>牐爊ation poor, or an idle rich?<BR>牐1勤勉的国家贫穷，慵懒的国家富裕，是否真的发生过，或者是否可能发生？<BR>牐2 Whether a people can be called poor, where the common sort are<BR>牐爓ell fed, clothed, and lodged?<BR>牐2如果一个人吃饱了，穿暖了，有地方住，还能被称为穷人吗？<BR>牐3 Whether the drift and aim of every wise State should not be, to<BR>牐爀ncourage industry in its members? And whether those who employ<BR>牐爊either heads nor hands for the common benefit deserve not to be<BR>牐爀xpelled like drones out of a well-governed State?<BR>牐3是否任何一个明智国家的目标和宗旨都不应该是鼓励它的民众勤劳？对于一个良好治理的国家，那些既不动脑也不动手无益于公共利益的人，是否应该象蜜蜂团体中的那样被驱逐？<BR>牐4 Whether the four elements, and man's labour therein, be not the<BR>牐爐rue source of wealth?<BR>牐4四大要素，包括人类劳动，是否是财富的真正来源？<BR>牐5 Whether money be not only so far useful, as it stirreth up<BR>牐爄ndustry, enabling men mutually to participate the fruits of each<BR>牐爋ther's labour?<BR>牐5金钱仅仅是很有用吗？因为它培育了勤劳的品质，使得人们可以互利地分享他人的劳动成果。<BR>牐6 Whether any other means, equally conducing to excite and<BR>牐燾irculate the industry of mankind, may not be as useful as money.<BR>牐6其他一切手段，一样可以激励和保证人类勤奋劳作的手段，是否都不如金钱来得有效？<BR>牐7 Whether the real end and aim of men be not power? And whether<BR>牐爃e who could have everything else at his wish or will would value<BR>牐爉oney?<BR>牐7一个人的真正目的和目标是否就是权力？一个人是否能为他的一切希望或愿望用金钱估价？<BR>牐8 Whether the public aim in every well-governed State be not that<BR>牐爀ach member, according to his just pretensions and industry,<BR>牐爏hould have power?<BR>牐8任何一个治理良好的国家，它的公共目标都不应是使得每个人根据他正当的要求和勤劳程度来获取权力，是这样吗？<BR>牐9 Whether power be not referred to action; and whether action<BR>牐燿oth not follow appetite or will?<BR>牐9权力与行为有关吗？行为是遵循欲望或者意志的吗？<BR>牐10 Whether fashion doth not create appetites; and whether the<BR>牐爌revailing will of a nation is not the fashion?<BR>牐10风尚是否创造欲望？一个国家普遍的意志是否就是风尚？ <BR>这几个是翻译完的，我把下面的几个分几次贴上去，每次贴十个啊。希望大家有兴趣把工作进行下去，版主应该对这个转贴的帖子不陌生，希望你发挥一下作用啊，号召号召大家啊。</P>
<P>11 Whether the current of industry and commerce be not determined<BR>by this prevailing will?</P>
<P>12 Whether it be not owing to custom that the fashions are<BR>agreeable?</P>
<P>13 Whether it may not concern the wisdom of the legislature to<BR>interpose in the making of fashions; and not leave an affair of<BR>so great influence to the management of women and fops, tailors<BR>and vintners?</P>
<P>14 Whether reasonable fashions are a greater restraint on freedom<BR>than those which are unreasonable?</P>
<P>15 Whether a general good taste in a people would not greatly<BR>conduce to their thriving? And whether an uneducated gentry be<BR>not the greatest of national evils?</P>
<P>16 Whether customs and fashions do not supply the place of reason<BR>in the vulgar of all ranks? Whether, therefore, it doth not very<BR>much import that they should be wisely framed?</P>
<P>17 Whether the imitating those neighbours in our fashions, to<BR>whom we bear no likeness in our circumstances, be not one cause<BR>of distress to this nation?</P>
<P>18 Whether frugal fashions in the upper rank, and comfortable<BR>living in the lower, be not the means to multiply inhabitants?</P>
<P>19 Whether the bulk of our Irish natives are not kept from<BR>thriving, by that cynical content in dirt and beggary which they<BR>possess to a degree beyond any other people in Christendom?</P>
<P>20 Whether the creating of wants be not the likeliest way to<BR>produce industry in a people? And whether, if our peasants were<BR>accustomed to eat beef and wear shoes, they would not be more<BR>industrious?</P>