|
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 6 v/ `1 H, Z$ \/ W4 `# Z( r. R# M, t
# ~: Q9 B H! |
economists expect them to continue rising in the decades ahead. Does
0 x# {. n. d; i4 X3 I r( U( ]+ o- Z0 M5 y9 d% V
that mean that we humans can look forward to increasing happiness?
) B/ h5 \/ Q% z8 _& Y
5 } d D; T ^4 i6 W& A" ~5 q1 G! K. t3 Z8 n$ _8 J" k0 w
Not necessarily, warns Richard A. Easterlin, an economist at the
) V2 v! w! N9 g# `7 y. h& G& n6 r- O D, o' p
University of Southern California, in his new book, Growth Triumphant: - s: I& |! h5 s2 {* C
: S- \- e( a, P5 S
The Twenty-first Century in Historical Perspective. Easterlin concedes 1 W% K+ z# p5 L/ E
3 l( R0 A: t+ S* a: {8 ~0 ^
that richer people are more likely to report themselves as being happy
2 }- q; d" a' f' A- ^# ]2 j% @5 L" Y, s
than poorer people are. But steady improvements in the American economy
. r& t* j9 }, q4 Z, I
6 p1 [& @! v' }6 Yhave not been accompanied by steady increases in people‘s self-
. x$ c8 @1 W& w
0 ^, i4 U3 Y& {) P& j: r Xassessments of their own happiness. "There has been not improvement in
- h0 v7 D8 h4 O: v' K' f3 _. a9 [8 _- u2 c7 f
average happiness in the United States over almost a half century----a . O) G; r- i0 V: C C8 E1 l
9 {& v- k9 z' [( }/ Y# hperiod in which real GDP per capita more than doubled," Easterlin
* O: t) o6 }! s7 e, x# B. Q& J9 ?
- z1 t5 J& D. k* \$ `# [reports.2 R1 ~: c: e: U( W+ P- a; ?
2 p' {+ q. n& Y% w) M/ {+ r9 d8 o8 `
The explanation for this paradox may be that people become less
* e, W6 B& }1 M3 q. ^9 l2 O$ p" r' Z2 ]% B
satisfied over time with a given level of income. In Easterlin‘s word: & J/ |* @! ~3 g7 H0 O
, x0 k9 o& G2 }; S' `+ C2 ~) i
"As incomes rise, the aspiration level does too, and the effect of this
( V, Y5 X. v$ `! h
; ^" U5 Q" X" l) yincrease in aspirations is to vitiate the expected growth in happiness 0 T5 W# g1 J4 x4 r& ^
0 M, z) E0 L2 ?+ F! k- Idue to higher income."
3 b0 o- {7 N9 M& Q. t/ O. j) S) r' e4 s2 B6 N6 C
Money can buy happiness, Easterlin seems to be saying, but only if " x5 c( K6 @* D8 N" S7 j$ R
3 f2 _0 c: j# E* _7 A# T
one‘s amounts get bigger and other people aren‘t getting more. His 3 a; `' \: T. U' [# _
, t( j8 X' \) @$ {: wanalysis helps to explain sociologist Lee Rainwater‘s finding that 0 M" I ~' }; e& E4 \
3 r$ p4 A7 o; n0 G
Americans‘ perception of the income "necessary to get along" rose
* [& k4 G( s; t! h% s1 ?9 ]8 N$ H& j0 z- T- M4 i" `5 u
between 1950 and 1986 in the same proportion as actual per capita
- \4 A" a7 [/ x3 |2 w7 k- A/ A) Z8 \4 s* m" D6 w7 [$ v
income. We feel rich if we have more than our neighbors, poor if we
& F% a6 @7 }1 p, b* o! K) ]8 v2 Y3 U# T5 V3 A) I
have less, and feeling relatively well off is equated with being happy.
1 n+ C" G- o: S a
' @7 k2 y Q' |1 C6 e" q: @4 yEasterlin‘s findings, challenge psychologist Abraham Maslow‘s $ H' X+ M# f/ w2 F9 {8 G. I% R0 C
0 h0 e+ x7 |8 D6 e
"hierarchy of wants" as a reliable guide to future human motivation.
; `% F8 H% I/ J9 P- V, G" H
0 N7 N. g8 w) O* B( C6 W. pMaslow suggested that as people‘s basic material wants are satisfied $ U3 q5 w4 u5 z/ A% | C V
+ W8 d0 D$ F( Nthey seek to achieve nonmaterial or spiritual goals. But Easterlin‘s + O3 S ?8 {$ c# c; \
+ g4 J* z% B& Z# L; Devidence points to the persistence of materialism.- ^. Q; \1 f1 D, _
$ z+ A/ m0 r% I% r5 \* ?4 o"Despite a general level of affluence never before realized in the
) x9 F) p; O; }& a* m9 p3 J
! c( k/ p' P, @5 u; @& b. G" t; W4 shistory of the world." Easterlin observes, "Material concerns in the
" |2 q8 t) G! V' b, ]+ i. L
5 w8 R% m$ b. ^ M$ x' U) C6 T' ?wealthiest nations today are as pressing as ever and the pursuit of
9 p' m1 y9 k, k8 c" q2 s
$ M' b" Y/ D) Nmaterial need as intense." The evidence suggests there is no evolution
0 o! `3 J# T! _% f* S' U
) {. C4 d, T* s ^4 Ftoward higher order goals. Rather, each step upward on the ladder of ; H# J F# i5 x+ |0 Z
1 g) R3 S2 ~# b* |7 ]
economic development merely stimulates new economic desires that lead
% P" `, q) M+ ?# |
8 X8 G9 A7 L- E; J/ E- R2 vthe chase ever onward. Economists are accustomed to deflating the money 4 Z7 G _# Q" }( o
8 s' O$ J# A- `6 K$ G
value of national income by the average level of prices to obtain 8 q u6 j3 e0 {/ J$ M
5 z6 @9 L% C5 k0 u/ b6 L3 S" U4 B"real" income. The process here is similar----real income is being + i" P9 Q7 s+ O5 t1 k
! n5 Y* `) a$ m" c2 d5 I
deflated by rising material aspiration, in this case to yield
' J4 ]" i* M0 O, j( R. S9 s5 \/ P
: ^ t. D' n( e) r. f6 G. Xessentially constant subjective economic well-being. While it would be : e6 D0 E. f3 b7 \# G' ?; l3 q
6 U9 l# e( S5 z% E/ ?* O/ z' ?pleasant to envisage a world free from the pressure of material want, a
' M& ` W) o! ~2 B) [* b: {4 O( l3 f) k1 _! y6 i& V
more realistic projection, based on the evidence, is of a world in ( r1 k' ] o" {1 N) J5 e
0 q& D: n2 I% T% ^$ _8 S; z8 E1 l0 pwhich generation after generation thinks it needs only another 10% to ! p5 ^0 k# [9 Y6 G8 d
- T" p# c3 ~* x$ C' Y
20% more income to be perfectly happy.# b, q* c% p% P i* Q) B
1 X& ]6 |& s7 W9 a4 s, UNeeds are limited, but not greeds. Science has developed no cure for
5 q0 @$ c% d5 m8 x" [8 f- a% R! L" v; v$ H+ ], f
envy, so our wealth boosts our happiness only briefly while shrinking
2 m/ j) i. j3 \9 p0 f5 A% [' @: g
2 b* _3 S/ ~9 ?. w6 p, m4 X7 wthat of our neighbors. Thus the outlook for the future is gloomy in - g5 j& |, a& m9 ?: l; G
s" b7 y5 q4 r
Easterlin‘s view.
4 p4 C7 a$ u( i5 c
3 Y$ K8 i0 \1 C X( W"The future, then, to which the epoch of modern economic growth is " _& Z% U9 }% F
) H6 V4 m+ O. i0 V
leading is one of never ending economic growth, a world in which ever
- Y6 \. J( K+ Q" P, L! Y; j
, v1 ]" e5 ^* c* a3 k) @growing abundance is matched by ever rising aspirations, a world in $ R4 i2 |2 F' d- {& K
2 E7 d# v- b( Z* {- G
which cultural difference is leveled in the constant race to achieve
3 _" O( K+ g0 |7 T
, \5 I$ {0 m+ j' y. \the goods life of material plenty, it is a world founded on belief in 2 F+ c- h9 E1 ?6 k. R0 E
( Q7 C0 s( R3 _: yscience and the power of rational inquiry and in the ultimate capacity , }# |* Z& g% A i6 l+ ]6 }" j2 E
4 Y/ g7 v- S" ~3 o" F: |, E% q
of humanity to shape its own destiny. The irony is that in this last
7 B/ B' m+ O( l8 w. D& h+ u9 T& C+ W
respect the lesson of history appears to be otherwise: that there is no
F/ R% b7 F( I' I- C; o# Y7 z! h4 _5 x+ \; F( e
choice. In the end, the triumph of economic growth is not a triumph of : V+ ^# Z0 z) O0 N
' n+ D: L: }4 h) N
humanity over material wants; rather, it is the triumph of material
# o' a8 r" P8 ]' z, n- y& J1 _
5 O) f, g$ X; N0 ]5 w1 B5 N3 ]wants over humanity." |
评分
-
1
查看全部评分
-
|