哪個國家的人最快樂Submitted by roger 2006-12-11 心理譯作 | 評論(10)
世界上哪個國家的人最快樂?答案不是美國。據一項網絡國際調查(MTVNI)顯示,印度人是所有國家中的人最快樂的,而日本人則是最痛苦的。全球16至34歲的人中,只有43%的人感覺他們生活快樂。在發展中國家,同年齡段的人則對未來的美好生活充滿期待,中國高達84%。發達國家的人對全球化表示出過度悲觀,95%的年輕德國人認為這是毀滅他們的文化,而發展中國家的人更願意接受全球化並且對他們的經濟未來持樂觀態度,對他們的民族也更感到自豪。
According to psychologist Professor Ed Diener there is no one key to happiness but a set of ingredients that are vital.
First, family and friends are crucial- the wider and deeper the relationships with those around you the better. Family based India.
It is even suggested that friendship can ward off germs. Our brains control many of the mechanisms in our bodies which are responsible for disease.
Just as stress can trigger ill health, it is thought that friendship and happiness can have a protective effect.
According to happiness research, friendship has a much bigger effect on average on happiness than a typical person's income itself.
One economist, Professor Oswald at Warwick University, has a formula to work out how much extra cash we would need to make up for not having friends.
The answer is £50,000.
Marriage also seems to be very important. According to research the effect of marriage adds an average seven years to the life of a man and something like four for a woman. Family based India.
The second vital ingredient is having meaning in life, a belief in something bigger than yourself - from religion, spirituality or a philosophy of life.Philosophical Hinduism.
The third element is having goals embedded in your long term values that you're working for, but also that you find enjoyable. Rising GDP. An observed effect since 1600 by Adam Smith (see Wealth of Nation) Smith also predicted a high suicide rate when GDP stop rising, like Hong Kong in last few year.
Psychologists argue that we need to find fulfilment through having goals that are interesting to work on and which use our strengths and abilities.
The “law” of diminishing marginal utility is said to explain the “paradox of water and diamonds”, most commonly associated with Adam Smith[7] (though recognized by earlier thinkers).[8] Human beings cannot even survive without water, whereas diamonds were in Smith's day mere ornamentation. Yet water had a very small price, and diamonds a very large price, by any normal measure. Marginalists explained that it is the marginal usefulness of any given quantity that matters, rather than the usefulness of a class or of a totality. For most people, water was sufficiently abundant that the loss or gain of a gallon would withdraw or add only some very minor use if any; whereas diamonds were in much more restricted supply, so that the lost or gained use were much greater.
-----------------------
“paradox of Hong Kong luxury and India's apple”,
" For most HKer, luxury was sufficiently abundant that the loss or gain of a gallon would withdraw or add only some very minor use if any; whereas India's apple to Indian were in much more restricted supply, so that the lost or gained use were much greater."