You hear the refrain all the time: the U. S. economy looks good statistically, but it doesn't fed good. Why doesn't ever-greater wealth promote ever-greater happiness.'？ It is a quest, ion that dales at least to the appearance in 1958 of The affluent(富裕的)Society by John Kenneth Galbraith, who died recently at 97.
The Affluent Society is a modem classic because it helped define a new moment in the human condition. For most of history," hunger, sickness, and cold" threatened nearly everyone, Galbraith wrote. "Poverty was found everywhere in that world. Obviously it is not of ours. "After World War Il, the dread of another Great Depression gave way to an economic boom. In the 1930s unemployment had averaged 18. 2 percent; in the 1950s it was 4. 5 percent.
To Galbraith, materialism had gone mad and would breed discontent. Through advertising, companies conditioned consumers to buy things they didn't really want or need. Because so much spending was artificial, it would be unfulfilling. Meanwhile, government spending that would make everyone better off was being cut down because people instinctively-and wrongly-labeled government only as "a necessary evil".
It's often said that only the rich are getting ahead; everyone else is standing still or falling behind. Well, there are many undeserving rich--overpaid chief executives, for instance. But over any meaningful period, most people's incomes are increasing. From 1995 to 2004, inflation-adjusted average family income rose 14. 3 percent, to $ 43,200. People feel, "squeezed" because their rising incomes often don't satisfy their rising wants--for bigger homes, more health care, more education, faster Internet connections.
The other great frustration is that it has not eliminated insecurity. People regard job stability as part of their standard of living. As corporate layoffs increased, that part has eroded. More workers fear they've be- come "the disposable American" ,as Louis Uchitelle puts it in his book by the same name.
Because so much previous suffering and social-conflict stemmed from poverty ,the arrival of widespread affluence suggested utopian(乌托邦式的)possibilities. Up to a point, affluence succeeds. There is much less physical misery than before. People are better off. Unfortunately, affluence also creates new complaints and contradictions.
Advanced societies need economic growth to satisfy the multiplying wants of their citizens. But the quest for growth lets loose new anxieties and economic conflicts that disturb the social order. Affluence liberates the individual ,promising that everyone can choose a unique way to self-fulfillment. But the promise is so extravagant that it predestines many disappointments and sometimes inspires choices that have anti-social consequences, including family breakdown and obesity (肥胖症). Statistical indicators of happiness have not risen with incomes.
Should we be surprised？ Not really. We've simply reaffirmed an old truth: the pursuit of affluence does not always end with happiness.
What question does John Kenneth Galbraith raise in his book The Affluent Society？
A．Why statistics don't tell the truth about the economy.
B．Why affluence doesn't guarantee happiness.
C．How happiness can be promoted today.
D．What lies behind an economic boom.
Pain is easier to endure if you know you can end it. Speakers at a session on pain at the British Association's psychology section have new evidence to support this idea for two common experiences of pain: in childbirth and at the dentist's. On the other side of the coin, their inability to control pain may explain why some people with continual pain have psychological problems as well.
Dr. J. Robinson found out about the phenomenon of self-controlled pain almost by accident. He was studying the effects of analgesics used to control pain during childbirth and as part of the experiment made it possible for women having their child to press a button which gave an automatic injection—instead of having all injections made by the doctor. Afterwards these women did not say that they had less pain than other women in childbirth, but they did use considerable less of the drug.
J. Atkins, a dental surgeon, has observed a similar phenomenon. As part of their efforts to make dentistry painless, Atkins and researchers at Aston University in Birmingham offered patients a switch they could flip to turn off the dentist's drill whenever they chose. But, after trying the switch on 50 patients Atkins gave up; none of the patients had ever flipped the switch.
Perhaps the extra endurance was because the Aston team also use other methods to make dentistry painless. Apparently few other dentists are so considerate. The end result, according to the Birmingham survey, is that British people avoid going to the dentist, with the consequence that almost 30% of people in England and Wales have lost all their teeth, and more than seven out of ten have lost at least six teeth. Less than half of the public pay regular visits to the dentist. To find out why, Atkins and psychologist Cumberbatch interviewed a sample of patients attending a dental hospital. The most common reason people gave for not having dental check-ups were fear and pain.
By using a little care and taking time to explain what will happen, Atkins feels, dentists could overcome these fears. There are techniques for giving injections without pain, and a "calm unhurried approach" to drilling can make that painless, too.
Sadly, few dentists seem to take much trouble with their patients. "I am not nervous when I go to the dentist, and I do not have any pronounced sympathy for those who are, " said one dentist. "I tend to take the point of view that they are being unreasonable at my expense."
The passage most possibly comes from______.
A．a medical textbook
B．a psychology textbook
C．a popular magazine
D．a serious magazine
