|
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 - S& ?7 Y1 S9 f, v0 ?2 p7 s
; v6 J! l1 l$ W6 teconomists expect them to continue rising in the decades ahead. Does
' b8 O- z- L1 n* M$ q' S O
( O3 J# T7 ]/ `0 zthat mean that we humans can look forward to increasing happiness? # E- p, s- C% K8 ^# ]
5 M/ G7 }- n2 ?
2 Q$ y+ Q/ }6 g: Q( ? Z3 E
Not necessarily, warns Richard A. Easterlin, an economist at the 7 O8 k7 ]# z: f% E5 f- v
M6 w. d" b& x5 {2 n8 |: ^
University of Southern California, in his new book, Growth Triumphant: _* `: @$ A2 s$ T
: M( l h7 H# ]The Twenty-first Century in Historical Perspective. Easterlin concedes
6 P/ A% s `: _( m) |
0 f" I) M/ p; f; Z. uthat richer people are more likely to report themselves as being happy + ]. F9 a6 j( P
. x# F+ B9 l( C bthan poorer people are. But steady improvements in the American economy
1 Z5 S S9 d) k4 o4 @/ f# e6 O. U, _* U- u; r' p2 g0 ^6 @' S
have not been accompanied by steady increases in people‘s self-
6 {" I1 \- ^3 M+ E3 f% H& ` j
3 e+ ]! D7 t0 N3 ~& wassessments of their own happiness. "There has been not improvement in
r6 D6 `3 Z; [$ `. e. O' b) _) }6 v& P" L
average happiness in the United States over almost a half century----a * B$ J: Y9 [' M7 i# U4 K% t
- v& [1 c' |4 J/ i" |6 D6 H+ R
period in which real GDP per capita more than doubled," Easterlin 1 f- u$ d, I6 {
/ i3 M$ p, b! Z: c% n& a% Ureports.
* v+ |4 a( H0 ]7 a% F1 C6 J1 O3 d1 N4 o0 c( n9 Q
The explanation for this paradox may be that people become less
% M1 _! @% v( m, U* u
8 @' w5 J+ w5 Q5 E! nsatisfied over time with a given level of income. In Easterlin‘s word:
. k8 Q2 N, ?/ J. }2 ~0 P( k* f% X
, o) a* X _' e, P"As incomes rise, the aspiration level does too, and the effect of this $ k9 J( Q' u% @
! T9 R$ ~" T2 J# `
increase in aspirations is to vitiate the expected growth in happiness
& `7 y: w8 f) W4 F) n. I0 d3 Q) f- ]6 R; c) U
due to higher income." - a B r' ]$ Z4 _2 w: K5 u
* e: ?. _' R9 V; T+ I4 d5 \6 `; a
Money can buy happiness, Easterlin seems to be saying, but only if ' o! C2 {3 t4 P1 Q
H% ~$ n/ W3 ?) Z
one‘s amounts get bigger and other people aren‘t getting more. His ! w' t) G, N$ ~3 ^* l: p% k- z
9 H# C& [1 @* N
analysis helps to explain sociologist Lee Rainwater‘s finding that
. Z3 f% q i: K% N4 A& O$ u
9 x- Y' _( u) t% u" t" P. [/ sAmericans‘ perception of the income "necessary to get along" rose
" |! E6 ?" ?, C% S$ l3 Y& i
- y- Z: P; E! R0 w i" h @between 1950 and 1986 in the same proportion as actual per capita
! s8 N$ {( A. N, R6 w% h% V% ~; w" \: t! Q
income. We feel rich if we have more than our neighbors, poor if we ) _3 |4 X/ p4 V8 S. V8 c1 g
# b/ Y% z; u- q+ Vhave less, and feeling relatively well off is equated with being happy.3 n8 x6 _' f9 a
/ d# y. v! b! t K2 BEasterlin‘s findings, challenge psychologist Abraham Maslow‘s 0 h; W) c/ C9 k+ h5 I
( V) B5 Y" U, R5 y"hierarchy of wants" as a reliable guide to future human motivation. 3 T* V- J2 {% ]/ Y- n* h: k% z
3 O! y1 g% p0 j% N. K
Maslow suggested that as people‘s basic material wants are satisfied
5 W' C! R7 R- J
# A+ p* I+ m8 k+ l2 D" gthey seek to achieve nonmaterial or spiritual goals. But Easterlin‘s 4 q5 N7 C& w4 D" M# u0 ^$ Q0 O& K
; L# E. M) N8 c. m/ P# R, e, f- ~: c
evidence points to the persistence of materialism.
% q! o# D F6 `: f0 x" c
\4 B9 S9 ^) D+ C( G: s0 y6 {"Despite a general level of affluence never before realized in the
* z; w) Q$ k. d; f7 O$ N; |" `- w5 h
history of the world." Easterlin observes, "Material concerns in the , S% O" @: F2 K' d
$ ~8 X: e. ~3 b5 }4 Q& M$ ]' k& i
wealthiest nations today are as pressing as ever and the pursuit of ( e! ?4 [! }$ r' D4 {0 k2 ^8 y
' M* @7 w& K' K5 B% s: h/ Amaterial need as intense." The evidence suggests there is no evolution
' x' s% s6 K- M! o+ C# J4 a. j, u# h0 S" z" \
toward higher order goals. Rather, each step upward on the ladder of
- d/ j5 W+ L# D$ s, U4 n
4 {4 c5 Z/ Z/ E j6 h' Neconomic development merely stimulates new economic desires that lead " }0 S* p: ]- p5 H. r `/ K+ z& S
% I" z4 {9 k, f+ z: K; u
the chase ever onward. Economists are accustomed to deflating the money 7 C3 A* d& B" E9 U
% I- t1 S0 n6 g* k: ovalue of national income by the average level of prices to obtain ! a1 H6 {+ s" @8 v
' Y% C: J5 |, x2 u7 b. I: m/ q
"real" income. The process here is similar----real income is being
5 U4 M a8 M( N# x4 J
8 a9 o/ @6 Y( B. U; V+ rdeflated by rising material aspiration, in this case to yield 0 I$ f& G8 h! G7 I# Y; [ m& j: V
& k: r, M* a( u! _essentially constant subjective economic well-being. While it would be ; i4 O h+ c0 H4 ^
$ m+ p( V* y& Z. \1 M2 Npleasant to envisage a world free from the pressure of material want, a ; M; O* P" G: n; p3 j4 n- u
. B6 H1 X* ~; l0 C8 emore realistic projection, based on the evidence, is of a world in
8 y/ e4 A' k( [" m3 t! V; F3 [3 y# P- V: Z: J6 F
which generation after generation thinks it needs only another 10% to , z. Z6 ]. ]; }3 U$ _6 E
" g) \% z3 o0 K! ^. U1 e, M$ `
20% more income to be perfectly happy.
9 a0 Q# E* S6 V& n* b2 g2 H, c& R
) k0 w( k- F+ I& C% `# q+ YNeeds are limited, but not greeds. Science has developed no cure for , F9 L) q$ e0 b/ k0 h/ m
r7 m6 x4 }. C$ V' ^, ^) w
envy, so our wealth boosts our happiness only briefly while shrinking
# y# s) S- x7 t! k( P$ O" h8 @& B" c( S4 v
that of our neighbors. Thus the outlook for the future is gloomy in ) g, G" k* M6 E, s/ s1 x
. {6 t4 k0 a' c$ gEasterlin‘s view.* U1 G7 o6 H+ A4 a
+ o9 l: j' ^/ a) _9 O0 d, T1 n
"The future, then, to which the epoch of modern economic growth is 3 }% o/ i& T& B. |* V9 X1 Q% x
R4 U: [1 X- I: o/ ~5 K% _leading is one of never ending economic growth, a world in which ever
) W! y9 S _8 i$ D; F3 v* z6 L. h
" l4 ?- [" F' ]; A, cgrowing abundance is matched by ever rising aspirations, a world in + b+ h6 T! c0 F y& d
1 A; ]% T" k5 `) `which cultural difference is leveled in the constant race to achieve
1 a) v ^ J* X0 b" Q: n! S% P, I0 n/ o
the goods life of material plenty, it is a world founded on belief in
, r X0 c3 j! R! K
. N1 Y' E W6 f: Vscience and the power of rational inquiry and in the ultimate capacity 5 X- L- X. C# q
5 A3 l8 F$ |: e/ d" C4 f/ M; \
of humanity to shape its own destiny. The irony is that in this last
! r; _8 ~- G: |& }: J4 h' e3 x' x/ m* H: w7 }9 P, J
respect the lesson of history appears to be otherwise: that there is no . [0 O# `! b* v
; ~$ i( j6 ~. }7 S+ W0 B' O8 T/ R p
choice. In the end, the triumph of economic growth is not a triumph of # N4 y8 B% R3 W' D- j" B' F
3 q5 Q# o. s. J& T1 ohumanity over material wants; rather, it is the triumph of material % R, K# Q D, j# z& K- G. t
* i I) x* h3 nwants over humanity." |
评分
-
1
查看全部评分
-
|