生活的沉思与沉思的生活——亚里士多德善与德性概念之探析

本通过考察善与德性概念的意义变迁,揭示柏拉图的知识道德论和亚里士多德的目的论的“行动伦理学”的内在区别和联系,从而使我们更深刻地理解亚里士多德的善与德性概念的含义。     

A range of kindness activities boost happiness

This experiment investigates the effects of a seven-day kindness activities intervention on changes in subjective happiness. The study was designed to test whether performing different types of kindness activities had differential effects on happiness. Our recent systematic review and meta-analysis of the psychological effects of kindness (Curry, et al. 2018) revealed that performing acts of kindness boosts happiness and well-being. However, we noted in that review that rarely had researchers specifically compared the effects of kindness to different recipients, such as to friends or to strangers. Thus in a single factorial design (n=683) we compare acts of kindness to strong social ties, weak social ties, novel acts of self kindness, and observing acts of kindness, against a no acts control group. The results indicate that performing kindness activities for seven days increases happiness. In addition, we report a positive correlation between the number of kind acts and increases in happiness. Neither effect differed across the experimental the groups, suggesting that kindness to strong ties, to weak ties, and to self, as well as observing acts of kindness, have equally positive effects on happiness.     

物质主义都是有害的吗?——来自实证和概念的挑战

物质主义指的是一种强调拥有物质财富对于个人生活重要性的价值观念。过往研究多强调其消极效应,但此观点日益面临挑战。实证研究表明物质主义在某些条件下能提升幸福感,也可以作为不安全感的补偿策略。在概念层面,有研究者基于动机的视角指出工具性物质主义是无害的,并且物质主义作为一种身份目标追求,能够建构和维持自我身份。未来研究需进一步为动机取向的物质主义概念提供实证研究的支持、评估物质主义补偿不安全感和提升幸福感的效果、基于认知和动机的整合视角考察物质主义对幸福感的积极影响。     

The Enjoyment of the Sage and the Common People: A New Perspective on the Cosmology of the Laozi

The Laozi laughs at the joy of those who violate the Dao and praises the suffering of those who attain it,yet this does not mean that the political philosophy of the Laozi does not encompass a notion of happiness,a notion that is grounded in the "enjoyment of something together" (gong le共樂) by the sag and the common people.The philosophical foundation of the Laozi's view of happiness is its cosmology,of which there are two sequences:one is generation and the other is growth.With the influences of Wei/Jin-era metaphysics and Western philosophy,Chinese scholars used to overemphasize generation,tracing only the origin.But in the cosmology of the Laozi,both generation and growth are indispensable,and this is part of the reason why the Dao and the De are equally important in the Laozi.The happiness of the common people does not come from a psychological dependence on or attachment to certain form of domination,but from the full development of each individual's initiative and action affected by Mysterious De.     

What triggers prosocial effort? A positive feedback loop between positive activities,kindness, and well-being

Across two studies, we found evidence supporting a positive feedback loop between positive activities, kindness and well-being. In Study 1, participants were randomly assigned to one of four distinct positive activities (versus a neutral writing activity) before spending three weeks engaging in kind acts. We found that the positive activities served as triggers – that is, they predicted greater prosocial effort, which in turn predicted greater well-being immediately following the intervention and at a two-week follow-up. In Study 2, we explored the specific effects of a gratitude trigger, and extended the intervention period to six weeks. Although, we did not replicate the direct effect of the gratitude trigger on prosocial effort, people who wrote gratitude letters (versus writing about their week) reported relatively greater elevation, which predicted greater prosocial effort during the six weeks. In turn, replicating Study 1, greater effort predicted higher well-being immediately following the study.     

Objective Explanations of Individual Well-being

Empirical research on questions pertaining to individual well-being is informed by the researchers' philosophical conception of the nature of well-being and, consequently, the adequacy of such research is partly determined by the plausibility of this conception. Philosophical theories of human well-being divide into subjective and objective. Subjective theories make our well-being dependent on our attitudes of favour and disfavour. Objective theories deny this dependency. This article discusses objective theories of individual well-being from the point of view of their explanatory power and argues that these theories are unable to provide an acceptable account of the prudential goodness of what they consider to be good for human beings. The article concludes by discussing some implications of its main argument to empirical research on questions pertaining to individual well-being. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Gain face,but lose happiness? It depends on how much money you have

The purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of face consciousness on happiness and the moderating role of financial situation on this relationship. We first examined our hypotheses in study 1 in a particular setting of consumption, and replicated our findings in study 2 in a more generalized setting of interpersonal situations. The two studies produced essentially consistent results. We found individuals high on face consciousness tend to be less happy, and the negative association between face consciousness and happiness is ameliorated by their financial situation. These results revealed the importance of face consciousness as an individual difference in predicting happiness. The implications of these findings for future research are discussed.     

Why are maximizers less happy than satisficers? Because they maximize positive and negative outcomes

Although extant research suggests maximizing is related to objectively positive outcomes (e.g., job offers), I propose maximizing may be simultaneously and positively related to objectively negative outcomes (e.g., job rejections). Specifically, I argue maximizers bear more instances of positive and negative outcomes than satisficers, and that in spite of their positive outcomes—yet because of their negative outcomes—maximizers are less happy than satisficers. In Study 1, participants took the alternate uses test; as expected, maximizing was related to seeking alternatives, yet, maximizing was also related to seeking low‐quality alternatives. Moreover, the number of low‐quality alternatives partially mediated the relationship between maximizing and negative affect. In Study 2, the impact of maximizing on experiencing negative affect was further assessed by examining whether maximizing is related to seeking and choosing low‐quality alternatives. Participants played the Iowa Gambling Task; it was found maximizing was related to alternating among decks, and in particular, sampling bad decks; ultimately, maximizing was related to winning less money, and experiencing more negative affect. Finally, in Study 3, participants responded to questionnaires about positive and negative life outcomes; it was found that maximizing was simultaneously related to experiencing more positive and more negative outcomes, and that negative outcomes predicted happiness to a greater degree than positive outcomes. These findings suggest an irony of maximizing: It produces both positive and negative outcomes, contributing to literature explaining why maximizers are less happy than satisficers, and ultimately whether happiness is a matter of choice. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.