|
|
马上注册,结交更多好友,享用更多功能,让你轻松玩转社区。
您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有账号?注册
×
Living standards have soared during the twentieth century, and 3 W: V* f0 G* k5 U% _7 S( l2 K. S
; u4 c* b9 V- Leconomists expect them to continue rising in the decades ahead. Does
# e' l+ x5 \, X) _8 ]7 H% K8 A# `8 E' a: g x/ |0 X
that mean that we humans can look forward to increasing happiness?
?4 j" x( i# @- c0 K4 q' E+ ]6 t/ L% H8 F5 S9 Y6 o3 g7 v- h
9 B/ C8 ~" ~- R. w2 }! \& UNot necessarily, warns Richard A. Easterlin, an economist at the
7 j& m3 \6 ^4 O. d& n5 W* H- d+ Z$ f, O
University of Southern California, in his new book, Growth Triumphant: , ^0 X' T _1 n' A. x
9 q3 h8 v9 \- }* Y/ z7 M
The Twenty-first Century in Historical Perspective. Easterlin concedes ' Q; e$ m, X! P! F) t
" z9 o. \' ]! {5 X( Sthat richer people are more likely to report themselves as being happy
1 X( A) A' g$ Q+ t4 v6 r; L
, \1 B. }9 r. Qthan poorer people are. But steady improvements in the American economy . c4 B( _ d! N% b+ d
- x! u# c/ c& ^0 Chave not been accompanied by steady increases in people‘s self-
7 k, T! T. z" i! o
& D# z* |0 X- h0 G; c4 Oassessments of their own happiness. "There has been not improvement in 1 i; _+ x* ?2 h! o
" T) ?* g* C9 s, _) h2 p
average happiness in the United States over almost a half century----a
$ b0 o" L( J/ e! Q$ q% w% S* v
/ Z! @9 N. ~9 P6 Dperiod in which real GDP per capita more than doubled," Easterlin / u$ \( X1 y' x; d. X. Z
, @; N4 S8 \1 \reports.
8 |' o, }5 J- w0 ]5 q$ v, |" h( c7 l2 a2 I
The explanation for this paradox may be that people become less
n2 o4 v5 [2 t2 e3 p c F; `2 s; F9 {3 G, g
satisfied over time with a given level of income. In Easterlin‘s word:
9 p/ X4 e) C( [- b& }
+ z0 C$ f' @# o5 Z4 B V G y"As incomes rise, the aspiration level does too, and the effect of this
3 i) s7 y0 N& p
2 v" ?1 Q8 G, K1 eincrease in aspirations is to vitiate the expected growth in happiness " l* B6 v. d! ^! K+ {; N7 o+ D
7 P7 C' y0 ~5 K9 a& \ r
due to higher income." / J3 t* i( L* ], J
3 @* P+ a9 P5 Y8 dMoney can buy happiness, Easterlin seems to be saying, but only if & ?' x1 w7 R8 E$ d) X* U" u/ i
d2 n8 o5 i8 a% Xone‘s amounts get bigger and other people aren‘t getting more. His - M+ S% b: o2 F) L$ E3 `$ c
" F4 B( P( H# N) N/ j$ {* Nanalysis helps to explain sociologist Lee Rainwater‘s finding that 1 h- q2 I0 l; i+ b; ~
4 ]5 c( S1 K: V8 c& |
Americans‘ perception of the income "necessary to get along" rose
' r/ N# c7 N" Y4 _
/ {" \! x/ z* h+ N6 s$ ~6 jbetween 1950 and 1986 in the same proportion as actual per capita . i5 X) F$ x! W! d- t7 O
8 _& O4 D, T& N2 m3 S
income. We feel rich if we have more than our neighbors, poor if we
h& O* X1 i3 w/ V- _$ s+ ^4 Z$ G
0 A% _* k1 X. {have less, and feeling relatively well off is equated with being happy.
4 J% Z- X5 X3 H" }+ D+ w" y* a5 X$ K' B
Easterlin‘s findings, challenge psychologist Abraham Maslow‘s
9 }5 ^0 l( }: q) j# R' z
5 d* Q) A$ I% s! m, i" K9 F V% M"hierarchy of wants" as a reliable guide to future human motivation. ) w E8 x% J3 R9 N* I& ~2 }3 }8 y# l* h
! t, l# E. @8 B6 X: v( `" Q9 E ^Maslow suggested that as people‘s basic material wants are satisfied
2 v- n) O9 }( c4 \' l2 }$ N6 c+ i
they seek to achieve nonmaterial or spiritual goals. But Easterlin‘s 9 X9 R. ?9 I g! w
3 C% {$ A. |4 G$ G9 ]
evidence points to the persistence of materialism.
' E4 _; p; g: E* z
# Z- o% q! e# m" { u"Despite a general level of affluence never before realized in the
( N4 X9 `# a( @, i( x
! g! h! e) \4 X; S6 Yhistory of the world." Easterlin observes, "Material concerns in the
I- o, }5 c4 R
' ?. Z3 K+ h: k, E5 ]wealthiest nations today are as pressing as ever and the pursuit of
( x# F; Q4 W' Q- o; E- M7 Q! O' X( K& T) \( |; u$ j
material need as intense." The evidence suggests there is no evolution & s* C6 Q" N" m. I+ q/ X
& i! F# U9 \9 t: c& V N7 ttoward higher order goals. Rather, each step upward on the ladder of
8 W7 L, x$ m* a7 j" H# ?6 G! `
% a" c% Z& }1 M; r- T' reconomic development merely stimulates new economic desires that lead
, \. F' n* }( [3 H% b
+ [0 ~( f1 k; J* i% ], Y4 m, Sthe chase ever onward. Economists are accustomed to deflating the money
/ w% g0 h, T6 e9 {6 O) l. S
9 _! x) q) _9 `$ lvalue of national income by the average level of prices to obtain
% l( G& E% C7 |4 z. Q0 R$ I& ^ p: C+ d2 F0 @9 B( L. ]0 e% e* S
"real" income. The process here is similar----real income is being # m0 H+ d [' a9 H5 K" i& H' o
$ L8 b- z" v: ~) f$ { `) `; Y# Adeflated by rising material aspiration, in this case to yield ; Y- K6 R# L8 k- E1 f; B
+ o5 F) a# l7 v) Q9 lessentially constant subjective economic well-being. While it would be
5 M7 G( x& U7 a
8 i. J3 w+ p0 A! J! `9 G8 Tpleasant to envisage a world free from the pressure of material want, a : ^8 }; b0 \ c/ w4 V( h( y
( }# h+ _) b: N0 u- r5 A" kmore realistic projection, based on the evidence, is of a world in 2 Q+ D/ F7 A9 w! R/ t" y. K
& ]7 j$ x1 E+ e+ r( Pwhich generation after generation thinks it needs only another 10% to * a, q5 x6 |8 ~9 e7 o$ i
% J- R% K9 a( @6 u
20% more income to be perfectly happy.
* `$ V3 J: {9 Z9 L C4 o
9 p: `4 r# U+ K- ?0 |- gNeeds are limited, but not greeds. Science has developed no cure for 5 ?) a7 C& Q7 B6 X4 c
" \2 l, z d9 j, k
envy, so our wealth boosts our happiness only briefly while shrinking
4 J6 W5 y- q% | U3 G$ w4 K0 I6 m( w ^7 ?/ j; n
that of our neighbors. Thus the outlook for the future is gloomy in / o" U7 O# |2 f0 }$ |3 @
' V. O+ B6 C, v3 ^1 M7 {Easterlin‘s view.
& Z. j; y% z" A( j- }" a9 N! }+ l0 u% s4 {
"The future, then, to which the epoch of modern economic growth is ' _# n* o- k3 K! q+ m0 H2 P1 b
/ [1 ~7 r; V, T; D' g, I
leading is one of never ending economic growth, a world in which ever ) Y2 S0 \" _1 O( ?
& Z+ p4 H' m* k5 d6 K( jgrowing abundance is matched by ever rising aspirations, a world in ' D- }* ?5 {! x3 p& F9 {' K
: w6 Q: h9 ?) ]# swhich cultural difference is leveled in the constant race to achieve
5 v2 ?- c) n/ n* n; I) _5 G% |
5 w8 J P Y! ^$ ~# {! ^the goods life of material plenty, it is a world founded on belief in : I& S; K; G; N
: z# N Q7 x; }6 \. ?% Y9 d2 A
science and the power of rational inquiry and in the ultimate capacity
" Q3 J& w+ r+ L" }
1 w3 z+ l, i3 b5 S& C. O. oof humanity to shape its own destiny. The irony is that in this last $ s7 Q8 _- L& S
: i a J/ P1 F0 |
respect the lesson of history appears to be otherwise: that there is no
- W) `$ Q! G8 l# B: F
/ K* t, i( o" c+ x$ Achoice. In the end, the triumph of economic growth is not a triumph of 0 K4 I- [" N$ ^ R$ W7 H
! e+ e9 b+ N" x) D: W8 v6 ^8 [humanity over material wants; rather, it is the triumph of material
# `2 U, H6 Q% B7 K- J: A- i5 G. Q; Q1 D
wants over humanity." |
评分
-
1
查看全部评分
-
|