|
|
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 2 n% e1 e; K7 T
- c' V. _+ f h
economists expect them to continue rising in the decades ahead. Does
4 W9 _/ W0 |2 _
4 t- V. w7 ^3 p, S& kthat mean that we humans can look forward to increasing happiness?
4 E* q V) I$ B& a8 k3 H
( X! b a) G; `$ ~& J& t& ` e; |! x- w6 N9 t' A/ @' b# F0 Q
Not necessarily, warns Richard A. Easterlin, an economist at the
( V8 i: D- f! d8 D! T
5 {2 Q4 s t; B4 Z/ |2 P9 |/ p& @University of Southern California, in his new book, Growth Triumphant: ; q9 q7 r0 I3 L
7 B/ U: Q" N% D% A4 N: L4 DThe Twenty-first Century in Historical Perspective. Easterlin concedes 1 o$ @6 Y: E5 M' Z1 E
9 @) T4 h, [# G; z9 M
that richer people are more likely to report themselves as being happy 8 ^" C _0 f9 v* W2 z1 d
: }8 h9 T. M4 d' g% T3 i& Athan poorer people are. But steady improvements in the American economy $ q( b9 {5 A( W
+ n( d2 T0 R, S+ n, k3 o3 nhave not been accompanied by steady increases in people‘s self-
9 Z2 b; N7 r% W" V2 C7 s
, t6 g! ~& F% M9 A1 Vassessments of their own happiness. "There has been not improvement in
3 D' }9 p' {) E2 @" Q4 g2 c* R/ V: p! |1 P. B8 u( n- _
average happiness in the United States over almost a half century----a
/ P. ?7 d# C7 g& C8 u
3 C) m. A0 V, yperiod in which real GDP per capita more than doubled," Easterlin
% ]8 O8 {3 G7 O" {% j( {8 I2 {2 p. c" _5 l- }% Z2 A& n
reports. S% B1 H, Y6 |( B3 s1 X; r
1 [* f$ Z: T& _. G$ P$ W$ z$ B& W" O0 d
The explanation for this paradox may be that people become less
$ @8 w. c7 k8 ] F6 W% Y, [# s" c" G+ f+ V- a
satisfied over time with a given level of income. In Easterlin‘s word: 5 J, J J( j1 @6 F1 k/ ?* P
6 t# T0 t: E1 I% L v8 Y
"As incomes rise, the aspiration level does too, and the effect of this
$ W( \2 l/ k/ {" O
6 g$ v- {: Z4 G& Q/ ?4 Yincrease in aspirations is to vitiate the expected growth in happiness
" _/ e- ?0 ]7 X
- f$ _* r# a4 d& R# v8 ^; v3 cdue to higher income." . \! K) P$ `. f6 e
* Z9 y% B8 X. J# m8 V) Y0 J. `
Money can buy happiness, Easterlin seems to be saying, but only if 7 B; x9 d2 [9 U- S j/ A
9 X0 ?% c" o% w$ s6 Zone‘s amounts get bigger and other people aren‘t getting more. His 6 U6 B# h2 e9 z Z9 I6 ?
i$ Y- l A& ^& K
analysis helps to explain sociologist Lee Rainwater‘s finding that * j# Q. k$ H' u8 I( e
( T7 J9 y8 Y5 j) M# |. f* t8 A
Americans‘ perception of the income "necessary to get along" rose
! g) f# A9 R# h
: Z, ~% P0 G" {% \between 1950 and 1986 in the same proportion as actual per capita
1 z7 N+ u% _% h
7 B5 M+ W+ P( Z& w sincome. We feel rich if we have more than our neighbors, poor if we 9 X7 O& h+ g( H, s3 c7 c
& c) {" g8 I5 b$ H* c. c
have less, and feeling relatively well off is equated with being happy.
# x7 u) S/ y3 g! P3 I8 e# M8 x: ]2 [* j( i6 S7 r
Easterlin‘s findings, challenge psychologist Abraham Maslow‘s
% v3 `% @) U) @5 v" ^6 d- z% u$ G5 c' z, W6 @5 M
"hierarchy of wants" as a reliable guide to future human motivation.
* ?) {$ l9 H j A+ K$ D3 ~7 `! Q9 r- S0 g' c# F6 |9 W) E: ]
Maslow suggested that as people‘s basic material wants are satisfied 8 [0 L: P1 l a) H( G( z
! n2 K/ |- `. S1 T: Rthey seek to achieve nonmaterial or spiritual goals. But Easterlin‘s # ^8 W* _9 J5 f/ ?
3 j! _/ {, {- D: H! z( L
evidence points to the persistence of materialism. V. ~0 x+ M3 A
2 @6 s4 v5 m2 Z, _2 M2 s/ J% B1 a/ C
"Despite a general level of affluence never before realized in the
# v1 D4 U8 l+ }- ^# } J B5 u$ { J+ M: d0 z5 g$ F7 K
history of the world." Easterlin observes, "Material concerns in the
3 h2 v( m7 g+ d; c: i/ t* D3 v. q2 U
wealthiest nations today are as pressing as ever and the pursuit of . j2 P2 p! Q: i
. a- p `/ i! K( g, p5 p" ?material need as intense." The evidence suggests there is no evolution
$ I2 |! b8 f" N0 ~" H. S- @( Q$ S* ?5 f
toward higher order goals. Rather, each step upward on the ladder of 2 L; k" w3 l! N$ h$ [0 O
% g) z* d# D3 l1 {0 F2 E) seconomic development merely stimulates new economic desires that lead & Y( Y: } a/ g+ i9 L0 u
( e/ J: s }6 ?
the chase ever onward. Economists are accustomed to deflating the money
4 E9 o# K" t4 ~/ o% R# o
d5 o4 X% {% W1 H+ \value of national income by the average level of prices to obtain
" z! E; `) r' Q4 C
( Q" y7 B3 ]- E3 A6 A"real" income. The process here is similar----real income is being
* `0 ]1 p" D! g& U6 A
7 j/ X2 [: o: E$ T5 K4 z" zdeflated by rising material aspiration, in this case to yield " g: E% ^$ w D: }" {9 u: r
6 g s2 e: L$ H4 P5 i
essentially constant subjective economic well-being. While it would be 2 O- m2 L7 M( r$ J" N7 U
+ O# `! `" h1 p. d% q: H6 mpleasant to envisage a world free from the pressure of material want, a 5 a4 i- [* m9 g( {: {4 D
0 S3 ?3 Q# H# M3 |* C# v, R
more realistic projection, based on the evidence, is of a world in ; D4 ?4 z. p& T, d: M5 o
+ S4 { m4 M% n6 y& i2 _which generation after generation thinks it needs only another 10% to 3 U/ |# m( Q. b# z, }3 h1 f
8 ?7 O: H, }& _7 ?2 V) C. u P20% more income to be perfectly happy., q# C# x9 W' a$ i0 [5 {" }
( _2 l; u2 N) g) e1 g+ I" X( T# i
Needs are limited, but not greeds. Science has developed no cure for
" i: ^$ D: R, I2 b; @5 l. F3 O2 v! R' t5 g
envy, so our wealth boosts our happiness only briefly while shrinking
5 @ k0 _: a F
# Y! r J! r3 ]# E4 Cthat of our neighbors. Thus the outlook for the future is gloomy in 9 T6 z3 U5 m9 ]7 M
& s+ f" y9 U# h8 a4 ^0 n* mEasterlin‘s view.
5 A- q! N2 A- P, y
- k$ ?, Q, A; q2 _$ _+ F2 L' M"The future, then, to which the epoch of modern economic growth is
( k8 q+ ~; l7 R; F V0 z) e C' _. N: ^" q
leading is one of never ending economic growth, a world in which ever
B( p# e$ {+ }8 }7 Q" e. V ~4 [: c/ i( B9 _
growing abundance is matched by ever rising aspirations, a world in
, |4 E9 `) K0 F Y7 u5 S3 P5 _- B3 f3 c0 f' x4 H
which cultural difference is leveled in the constant race to achieve
3 L" A* _. M; G+ Z% L
; c2 p/ y( ~( t" k$ c% xthe goods life of material plenty, it is a world founded on belief in
" M" Z5 O! Q( q& s1 P; u$ W, k' O3 z3 I/ Y' i, {; o
science and the power of rational inquiry and in the ultimate capacity
0 U5 w$ {" D( j& c1 _3 v: J0 p" T. S' t( d- f8 Y# O0 G3 x
of humanity to shape its own destiny. The irony is that in this last
1 p0 G/ ^8 w' O
; `$ i/ T) g' t/ Q1 V% [4 J- Grespect the lesson of history appears to be otherwise: that there is no + g2 {: s5 h9 {% g y
' V( N: s; V z9 Vchoice. In the end, the triumph of economic growth is not a triumph of 2 c: q8 I0 I8 f+ d7 @9 C
+ G7 e5 P3 N( |
humanity over material wants; rather, it is the triumph of material 9 d: I7 y: P6 l0 W# X
$ L4 }1 U# D/ Q' uwants over humanity." |
评分
-
1
查看全部评分
-
|