Walau ateis pemikirannya tetap layak dipelajari Salam
Danardono --- In [email protected], "Kartono Mohamad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sekadar menambah rujukan: Peter Singer ini guru besar Etika dan Moral, > seorang ateis (ia jelas mengaku demikian), dan vegetarian (karena tidak mau > ikut merusak keseimbangan hayati). Yah, untuk dijadikan bahan renungan saja > (bahwa seorang ateis dapat juga memiliki integritas moral). Kita akan lihat > apakah setelah tahu bahwa ia seorang ateis, pandangan tentangnya akan > berubah. > KM > > -------Original Message------- > > From: [email protected] > Date: 07/31/06 09:57:19 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [ppiindia] Happiness, Money, and Giving It Away (Peter Singer) > > Happiness, Money, and Giving It Away > Peter Singer > > Would you be happier if you were richer? Many people believe that they would > be. But research conducted over many years suggests that greater wealth > implies greater happiness only at quite low levels of income. People in the > United States, for example, are, on average, richer than New Zealanders, but > they are not happier. More dramatically, people in Austria, France, Japan, > and Germany appear to be no happier than people in much poorer countries, > like Brazil, Colombia, and the Philippines. > Comparisons between countries with different cultures are difficult, but the > same effect appears within countries, except at very low income levels, such > as below $12,000 annually for the US. Beyond that point, an increase in > income doesn't make a lot of difference to people's happiness. Americans are > richer than they were in the 1950's, but they are not happier. Americans in > the middle-income range today that is, a family income of $50,000-$90,000 > have a level of happiness that is almost identical to well-off Americans, > with a family income of more than $90,000. > Most surveys of happiness simply ask people how satisfied they are with > their lives. We cannot place great confidence in such studies, because this > kind of overall "life satisfaction" judgment may not reflect how much people > really enjoy the way they spend their time. > My Princeton University colleague Daniel Kahneman and several co- researchers > tried to measure people's subjective well-being by asking them about their > mood at frequent intervals during a day. In an article published in Science > on June 30, they report that their data confirm that there is little > correlation between income and happiness. On the contrary, Kahneman and his > colleagues found that people with higher incomes spent more time in > activities that are associated with negative feelings, such as tension and > stress. Instead of having more time for leisure, they spent more time at and > commuting to work. They were more often in moods that they described as > hostile, angry, anxious, and tense. > Of course, there is nothing new in the idea that money does not buy > happiness. Many religions instruct us that attachment to material > possessions makes us unhappy. The Beatles reminded us that money can't buy > us love. Even Adam Smith, who told us that it is not from the butcher's > benevolence that we get our dinner, but from his regard for his > self-interest, described the imagined pleasures of wealth as "a deception" > (though one that "rouses and keeps in continual motion the industry of > mankind"). > Nevertheless, there is something paradoxical about this. Why do governments > all focus on increasing per capita national income? Why do so many of us > strive to obtain more money, if it won't make us happier? > Perhaps the answer lies in our nature as purposive beings. We evolved from > beings who had to work hard to feed themselves, find a mate, and raise > children. For nomadic societies, there was no point in owning anything that > one could not carry, but once humans settled down and developed a system of > money, that limit to acquisition disappeared. > Accumulating money up to a certain amount provides a safeguard against lean > times, but today it has become an end in itself, a way of measuring one's > status or success, and a goal to fall back on when we can think of no other > reason for doing anything, but would be bored doing nothing. Making money > gives us something to do that feels worthwhile, as long as we do not reflect > too much on why we are doing it. > Consider, in this light, the life of the American investor Warren Buffett. > For 50 years, Buffett, now 75, has worked at accumulating a vast fortune. > According to Forbes magazine , he is the second wealthiest person in the > world, after Bill Gates, with assets of $42 billion. Yet his frugal > lifestyle shows that he does not particularly enjoy spending large amounts > of money. Even if his tastes were more lavish, he would be hard- pressed to > spend more than a tiny fraction of his wealth. > From this perspective, once Buffett earned his first few millions in the > 1960's, his efforts to accumulate more money can easily seem completely > pointless. Is Buffett a victim of the "deception" that Adam Smith described, > and that Kahneman and his colleagues have studied in more depth? > Coincidentally, Kahneman's article appeared the same week that Buffett > announced the largest philanthropic donation in US history $30 billion to > the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and another $7 billion to other > charitable foundations. Even when the donations made by Andrew Carnegie and > John D. Rockefeller are adjusted for inflation, Buffett's is greater. > At a single stroke, Buffett has given purpose to his life. Since he is an > agnostic, his gift is not motivated by any belief that it will benefit him > in an afterlife. What, then, does Buffett's life tell us about the nature of > happiness? > Perhaps, as Kahneman's research would lead us to expect, Buffett spent less > of his life in a positive mood than he would have if, at some point in the > 1960's, he had quit working, lived on his assets, and played a lot more > bridge. But, in that case, he surely would not have experienced the > satisfaction that he can now rightly feel at the thought that his hard work > and remarkable investment skills will, through the Gates Foundation, help to > cure diseases that cause death and disability to billions of the world's > poorest people. Buffett reminds us that there is more to happiness than > being in a good mood. > ** Peter Singer is Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University and the > author, with Jim Mason, of The Way We Eat: Why Our Food Choices Matter. > Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2006. http://www.project-syndicate > org/commentary/singer13 > > > --------------------------------- > Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > *************************************************************************** Berdikusi dg Santun & Elegan, dg Semangat Persahabatan. Menuju Indonesia yg Lebih Baik, in Commonality & Shared Destiny. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia *************************************************************************** __________________________________________________________________________ Mohon Perhatian: 1. Harap tdk. memposting/reply yg menyinggung SARA (kecuali sbg otokritik) 2. Pesan yg akan direply harap dihapus, kecuali yg akan dikomentari. 3. Reading only, http://dear.to/ppi 4. Satu email perhari: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5. No-email/web only: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6. kembali menerima email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
