|
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
; S8 }- _- s/ J H3 C3 `9 J- F% T: D
economists expect them to continue rising in the decades ahead. Does
, E+ }% f2 v2 C) o1 N* ~ x2 O. g! O% H
that mean that we humans can look forward to increasing happiness?
; S8 M% f1 R* m3 j1 O
: a# L& q! m. V; E- g0 Z5 U$ [" W4 S% h) E/ V) N
Not necessarily, warns Richard A. Easterlin, an economist at the
# o/ N. b% d& \2 p. Y: n8 W$ R! Q$ U) M S: i
University of Southern California, in his new book, Growth Triumphant:
# ?9 d) I* Z' @- ~( G
! U! \6 h& M5 u9 W+ G! h: _9 xThe Twenty-first Century in Historical Perspective. Easterlin concedes
+ r( K" ^/ s. i: Q6 i! X: y d5 `+ ]' c V1 L
that richer people are more likely to report themselves as being happy
6 ]1 { [/ T8 L7 _$ B& ^8 N' b8 m7 [' C
than poorer people are. But steady improvements in the American economy & E i% I3 A; i: N0 D/ t
- ]. K/ |0 M8 U$ q" A8 Z
have not been accompanied by steady increases in people‘s self-. `3 J5 P& u$ m
5 C. e) F% M" i3 K1 _assessments of their own happiness. "There has been not improvement in
: ?* ]* f4 U/ N% f' ]0 N# m8 y: J8 z5 P* K+ s( Q$ Z& Z
average happiness in the United States over almost a half century----a
$ C# `% v7 I% U' r0 K" W% p
4 f: s1 V% B/ K7 P2 N# Xperiod in which real GDP per capita more than doubled," Easterlin
" s; i" _* f) a8 ]: p2 ?' ^7 [8 o( v. S9 f9 x
reports.' ^! V# G8 d- ]0 F1 B1 J
9 O9 L' d7 e1 f; s. G+ `The explanation for this paradox may be that people become less / t% y+ b; |9 c P
) L9 N9 {. @+ D( b Usatisfied over time with a given level of income. In Easterlin‘s word:
1 x. W$ r( P$ d2 |% Y( M! k3 `2 B3 F& Q+ L2 B
"As incomes rise, the aspiration level does too, and the effect of this
- V: L' w! x/ U" }
: k: Y2 R1 {: q3 |increase in aspirations is to vitiate the expected growth in happiness
. ^% G0 v w3 i9 a/ w5 H7 Y) ?3 v/ k5 L5 B
due to higher income."
+ i" q( [8 W6 _9 g; a
( A+ v7 X/ p, t' y* K2 g( z) k% |Money can buy happiness, Easterlin seems to be saying, but only if
- r& Q+ O3 U0 D" L2 S; K: m5 D) [7 U. u
one‘s amounts get bigger and other people aren‘t getting more. His
& \0 n4 `" ~3 i# g y
- Q9 J( y, @/ _5 Z c0 H, fanalysis helps to explain sociologist Lee Rainwater‘s finding that
9 y. Y ^& y6 E5 I C! g
# |6 l! z6 w3 T8 b% KAmericans‘ perception of the income "necessary to get along" rose " i1 m% E! e3 g$ F- E; M
+ w1 M) s% S, v4 w- H* p* C P
between 1950 and 1986 in the same proportion as actual per capita 4 O" u8 O, U) r! j) O
p$ _2 `5 j* g$ O$ a! Q0 @
income. We feel rich if we have more than our neighbors, poor if we
" l4 V; |" z- A. `
/ b; M- o# S+ G mhave less, and feeling relatively well off is equated with being happy.
' @; w$ U$ c& r+ T( |- L; r0 L# b9 z0 c: Z9 }# t0 k8 A; l9 T
Easterlin‘s findings, challenge psychologist Abraham Maslow‘s
& u! {, q3 P! ~/ Y( M3 K5 t' @6 ~
"hierarchy of wants" as a reliable guide to future human motivation.
1 x# Z+ W+ {) J5 b, \
& X4 f2 p. v o* G8 N( \5 _& VMaslow suggested that as people‘s basic material wants are satisfied
) c8 o% l) \! @2 I7 m8 O$ g
. j3 L5 u( g e; xthey seek to achieve nonmaterial or spiritual goals. But Easterlin‘s
8 K" }' Y1 p7 n- w1 d1 Z( _* ]: l/ r8 z. l4 b9 ]8 y# G0 d
evidence points to the persistence of materialism.
, e- b: \5 v2 ~: P5 l& w
7 N. S6 T: h; H' N"Despite a general level of affluence never before realized in the 8 y1 X3 N4 q( m* o
1 ]1 c# k* ~0 u& d" U
history of the world." Easterlin observes, "Material concerns in the
" L( ?/ q) r6 e: ]
0 @2 I+ X& z4 _% v1 d& ewealthiest nations today are as pressing as ever and the pursuit of ' s5 N8 B) L1 y0 d
. {6 k8 D. J8 p1 }material need as intense." The evidence suggests there is no evolution
5 n$ y; R/ l: T2 u1 Q5 K+ _% t7 N& V1 _% D1 D
toward higher order goals. Rather, each step upward on the ladder of 0 [7 e2 Q$ S; z( Q
$ s; y8 d! o9 {& V2 Leconomic development merely stimulates new economic desires that lead
( ~2 h# v( p& B# B* X# z! e) y3 D& I. j4 e, B* |, G- L
the chase ever onward. Economists are accustomed to deflating the money
4 a( d( l6 D0 |7 ]- K S' w4 u, \. R; n: ^* Z
value of national income by the average level of prices to obtain
3 u/ D8 x4 Q G
: W A2 ~3 p, m"real" income. The process here is similar----real income is being
, O* j5 _) q! X6 O* Z
; C4 f+ O1 q% _* Z8 Y! Ideflated by rising material aspiration, in this case to yield
( Q' |. g! c/ k, |. Z% ]) T" o/ ]/ @. ] z# W6 [
essentially constant subjective economic well-being. While it would be : U' c9 J) x/ x
7 C* a; s. t* I" J3 M0 W7 O: `% Mpleasant to envisage a world free from the pressure of material want, a
3 X, r" S5 q8 @) _* |
8 L( U% f/ f- S) T6 d. S6 qmore realistic projection, based on the evidence, is of a world in
2 M0 n9 q6 W! V6 [8 V
5 I, U! Y* L- h( e* \, J+ E( cwhich generation after generation thinks it needs only another 10% to . ?! _* U7 i6 F! \9 `
7 l B' f; H( b1 L6 n1 ]% n* o20% more income to be perfectly happy. p9 W( w' n! B
* O5 _' k& ^- d S" s( x' a# F2 uNeeds are limited, but not greeds. Science has developed no cure for
3 o' |4 T! J1 c2 R
' M# j, b, o3 j" \3 r; g: zenvy, so our wealth boosts our happiness only briefly while shrinking 5 p, j+ Z1 n+ R( j0 k$ i! O: z
" K5 Y( Z' |7 ithat of our neighbors. Thus the outlook for the future is gloomy in , b5 N" U6 c5 K) W. X: X
& }! Z; I6 K1 p# Z& H; REasterlin‘s view.
+ p5 c0 m5 q# e
5 W( x- t1 d1 @! c"The future, then, to which the epoch of modern economic growth is 0 l/ h6 d/ \; O( ~
. L; h: B+ Y+ d+ ~
leading is one of never ending economic growth, a world in which ever % A, N+ `) N) @, q
# o( h7 u; p, F1 [# v6 W* V( Xgrowing abundance is matched by ever rising aspirations, a world in 6 c9 }' E+ E3 Q3 E" W$ u6 z
% O' Z9 C- u. g2 g; z2 `0 ?
which cultural difference is leveled in the constant race to achieve ! ]' y/ U+ b) H7 }" w
W4 ?$ d2 e0 Xthe goods life of material plenty, it is a world founded on belief in
- X! b8 N4 d1 M' k a" I
6 V* \* b# O% y% D7 p" X$ yscience and the power of rational inquiry and in the ultimate capacity
$ d% w g( X& A7 l4 ^
8 F" V' Q2 B( |; C0 `! xof humanity to shape its own destiny. The irony is that in this last 5 ?/ S& Z) C0 M- o0 Y7 u. y
$ s" Q- E+ F- U4 Q- n9 Q4 hrespect the lesson of history appears to be otherwise: that there is no 3 Z) p# r, P. g: M; v
' Q/ r) Q$ N; [5 j
choice. In the end, the triumph of economic growth is not a triumph of 6 r% d0 W' m* S5 V9 M, J2 m- E
! Z @5 `- @+ p I `) ~! w. L
humanity over material wants; rather, it is the triumph of material
4 F" R* U* h. M: B
; `. V8 j* A0 _ Z7 e" jwants over humanity." |
评分
-
1
查看全部评分
-
|