|
|
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 7 m1 ]" h5 S# x; m) }
/ u0 E! ~* U8 h5 u k5 S3 c2 geconomists expect them to continue rising in the decades ahead. Does % y# p$ Y8 P# e2 w
. f+ \. g1 b8 S" d2 K
that mean that we humans can look forward to increasing happiness?
3 }+ b9 O! u, Z. n; H9 x7 C
8 k* x1 y6 v! `. a7 O4 S- }3 R% z5 x4 K: |4 r; `- Z; p
Not necessarily, warns Richard A. Easterlin, an economist at the $ ?. E+ X; H$ ^* g6 i: G+ t, A' S
5 d# Q9 {. Q+ p9 m; q$ N" }1 R% KUniversity of Southern California, in his new book, Growth Triumphant:
2 H! }% r* p! s+ |- ~2 U
/ A/ v2 w! r+ V7 r) ]3 ]! E' m& uThe Twenty-first Century in Historical Perspective. Easterlin concedes 3 J, o! G+ L6 O1 i9 w2 z+ N
7 n$ e: C6 `2 b! f3 F! @- ethat richer people are more likely to report themselves as being happy * e. ]+ p: o& h% ]
- A1 U/ ~, C- i. a& z5 xthan poorer people are. But steady improvements in the American economy & z9 t, Y5 @' L1 Q% H1 @
9 ~; L& Y* J% a- q, [! dhave not been accompanied by steady increases in people‘s self-: ]) g# s- w9 _0 P
, K- j1 {# u3 N. D4 ~+ c
assessments of their own happiness. "There has been not improvement in " z3 C- c: x3 ~2 Y- R% |
! F9 d- q* L6 K2 c- f. G4 Haverage happiness in the United States over almost a half century----a * G0 B. A$ e% B. ~- L
8 F3 O1 U4 Y) E& x/ ^period in which real GDP per capita more than doubled," Easterlin 2 @$ N. b' _# e' c
9 o- W6 e2 _; Z+ J0 [reports.
9 L3 v. ]' m2 V, s; G$ d. o& `) p+ E- R+ R, d, j I
The explanation for this paradox may be that people become less
& S8 M/ s3 {% T; C! p2 B/ @
, P6 R% E8 K F/ r! W6 Isatisfied over time with a given level of income. In Easterlin‘s word:
9 `! X8 f+ Z) o7 t2 j8 @( W
& c* c( N1 o% o& m3 L& h"As incomes rise, the aspiration level does too, and the effect of this
7 ^- G, V2 c# r+ ?; w9 o7 i
( D2 D, z I$ Y' o3 G: H. Rincrease in aspirations is to vitiate the expected growth in happiness
2 K$ ?+ Z A! D2 e8 i
5 @. s8 X) j. Pdue to higher income." * D" A: Y6 C+ m' ^6 O
6 K. z$ d( b$ i# r; F
Money can buy happiness, Easterlin seems to be saying, but only if
7 ]0 u# A r2 C6 C4 ^# a
2 V6 a( [! B. k/ f4 \one‘s amounts get bigger and other people aren‘t getting more. His % G7 I0 v# H0 Q, d; h4 ?; ^
- j8 c+ J9 u6 c7 I9 G
analysis helps to explain sociologist Lee Rainwater‘s finding that + g: `2 u0 `5 j' Z2 ?% p: x
5 U1 Y5 l1 B( q# m$ @' {2 I
Americans‘ perception of the income "necessary to get along" rose
6 G# F( N n! c5 h8 Q1 n
( a& E8 X7 L/ J: Y$ q( `' s/ Kbetween 1950 and 1986 in the same proportion as actual per capita
A. g$ \9 N- T" I' M
( s+ L. c6 e% S7 i) Cincome. We feel rich if we have more than our neighbors, poor if we + O* w( T) M- _- N; w' i
9 t/ \$ i& ? \
have less, and feeling relatively well off is equated with being happy.3 a* w0 u* n' |( R0 g" q
8 ^. y# V) _0 l& q5 ]$ ?8 ?' i; TEasterlin‘s findings, challenge psychologist Abraham Maslow‘s
& J u/ w& C; G, O' X' M' X1 j; I
3 `' @4 N5 ~: t- e"hierarchy of wants" as a reliable guide to future human motivation.
, _. j6 B7 k% j. @
1 B5 d$ w3 y7 B. J' T9 l: j }Maslow suggested that as people‘s basic material wants are satisfied , Y3 Q3 p1 u5 b8 V# G, f
5 A' E: k, J5 k9 s* z1 \, h6 ^
they seek to achieve nonmaterial or spiritual goals. But Easterlin‘s
( [% k' c8 h" G( z3 @1 `4 S6 d! r* b+ e0 t7 n$ W8 ^- x# D
evidence points to the persistence of materialism.4 F4 `% {. o3 Y
# o. f- b! d* L1 k/ o1 L"Despite a general level of affluence never before realized in the
0 j6 j, L5 g; g1 i- F) `% F ~7 O% m# D4 v' J! ^- h a9 C
history of the world." Easterlin observes, "Material concerns in the
1 @+ F' I8 @/ j# j1 y5 v$ S0 W
wealthiest nations today are as pressing as ever and the pursuit of . I, B6 z1 N! X0 ]* \
* A% b: k! l% ^0 l+ b
material need as intense." The evidence suggests there is no evolution
: h3 d% @. s. w8 _0 ]) k3 [1 y2 A% E3 z
toward higher order goals. Rather, each step upward on the ladder of 3 J! w' G: k& H% V4 ]; M
* r: U. ^3 k/ ceconomic development merely stimulates new economic desires that lead
9 s0 D, z0 f9 h0 K( h5 ^6 ]8 U) D# P
the chase ever onward. Economists are accustomed to deflating the money . |: x# C, |- Y8 }
' j; N$ ^! y L2 G' \8 i9 T8 T9 Qvalue of national income by the average level of prices to obtain 5 z+ M; ?; I0 I4 K& p
; f8 T& Q( [; I" \4 \* ?, n"real" income. The process here is similar----real income is being / U! _" l* N* s+ O" a
: V7 V7 c0 ~. @+ J% e% m
deflated by rising material aspiration, in this case to yield
# ^7 Z0 L6 t* r j% J; o9 o# m6 X8 I5 T6 o3 q+ g
essentially constant subjective economic well-being. While it would be
" m7 N8 Z( H$ j) H: E) y2 U! D( s8 V
pleasant to envisage a world free from the pressure of material want, a
7 E* E& H8 V# S2 U$ L- x4 P6 y: T! Z7 [! K
; O0 R. D( [5 o' B2 z& {more realistic projection, based on the evidence, is of a world in 2 O0 L# Y1 F" l+ {" N; {- v
8 S" ]( r; a3 I
which generation after generation thinks it needs only another 10% to 0 k0 R+ M, D* a, k- n9 B: {
0 g' K5 u( y7 T! ?; z) \20% more income to be perfectly happy.
! a) j7 h3 g/ l9 e+ y7 V+ B+ F: D* W4 g+ J
Needs are limited, but not greeds. Science has developed no cure for * h; d( q' l5 [- M
3 u$ e0 O9 s: ^9 b$ G8 J
envy, so our wealth boosts our happiness only briefly while shrinking 6 k& q4 q: C, v- c, W G! Y
5 X0 L6 Q5 S: I, Y$ O$ \that of our neighbors. Thus the outlook for the future is gloomy in
8 G( E" m5 ?8 T/ q4 x
5 w$ X8 n& m: p# Y1 x3 U! GEasterlin‘s view.' L7 f( n- J. u F, X9 O) J3 a k* T1 U
1 {: f8 O- p% ^$ D3 D! Q"The future, then, to which the epoch of modern economic growth is " J* F$ Z3 p0 a" X
! m9 `# c" _( m5 Wleading is one of never ending economic growth, a world in which ever
) d# `- m% r0 `: w5 H" O, l
. n& N% w4 B" c0 O% @# k# Egrowing abundance is matched by ever rising aspirations, a world in ( K3 w9 n* P( l9 y1 p$ @
- }) J0 F: S# W/ A8 R, ]
which cultural difference is leveled in the constant race to achieve
/ R# C- P8 G( L& F. A) K/ y: Y. W2 Q( {
the goods life of material plenty, it is a world founded on belief in
6 |8 T" {' x+ h& W# X; X# M: l: i* v( z& S5 |$ P' C
science and the power of rational inquiry and in the ultimate capacity 1 x1 O; [/ z+ v
: O C: V2 c7 z$ r) h- Yof humanity to shape its own destiny. The irony is that in this last ( O G) |9 _0 j( @+ t: _/ _
4 {0 w' r: z$ ^; Qrespect the lesson of history appears to be otherwise: that there is no
- l' e" z5 U0 e
2 j4 a; {6 B4 P% {" D( tchoice. In the end, the triumph of economic growth is not a triumph of - V0 K5 c8 F* X7 V1 r+ o& G3 `
2 a: \( ~3 h5 W! x# v
humanity over material wants; rather, it is the triumph of material
, i2 _% a* o" f M! b5 m- a
/ D" x6 N+ m6 T5 ] swants over humanity." |
评分
-
1
查看全部评分
-
|