Skip to content

“奢华”为中性词,指的是一种生活态度

March 11, 2013

百度百科: 奢华即表示“奢侈”、“华丽”。现在多形容有钱人的生活,也形容爱慕虚荣的人所渴望的生活。很多地方看作贬义词。
但是,按目前现在的消费观和社会观来看,“奢华”其实是一个中性词,它指的是一种生活态度。一种品位和格调的象征。在西方社会,被普遍认为是一种生活方式,且是值得鼓励的。他们认为,这是一种积极的处世态度,通过自己的不懈努力,取得辉煌成就的同时,也对社会起到了推进作用,其追求个人生活品质的提高也是理所应该的。而这种做法也对社会其他人群造成影响,使更多人知道个人奋斗的重要。从而,从侧面促成了良性的循环。从经济学(特别是营销学)来看,这属于市场细分的结果,是一部分人的消费需求所衍生出来的,所谓上流社会生活态度的形容词。

SL

David Hume on #Luxury

February 25, 2013

From Hume’s Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary, Part II, Essay II, Of Refinement in the Arts:

Luxury is a word of an uncertain signification, and may be taken in a good as well as in a bad sense. In general, it means great refinement in the gratification of the senses; and any degree of it may be innocent or blameable, according to the age, or country, or condition of the person. The bounds between the virtue and the vice cannot here be exactly fixed, more than in other moral subjects. [...]

Since luxury may be considered either as innocent or blameable, one may be surprized at those preposterous opinions, which have been entertained concerning it; while men of libertine principles bestow praises even on vicious luxury, and represent it as highly advantageous to society; and on the other hand, men of severe morals blame even the most innocent luxury, and represent it as the source of all the corruptions, disorders, and factions, incident to civil government. We shall here endeavour to correct both these extremes, by proving, first, that the ages of refinement are both the happiest and most virtuous; secondly, that wherever luxury ceases to be innocent, it also ceases to be beneficial; and when carried a degree too far, is a quality pernicious, though perhaps not the most pernicious, to political society. [...]

The encrease and consumption of all the commodities, which serve to the ornament and pleasure of life, are advantageous to society; because, at the same time that they multiply those innocent gratifications to individuals, they are a kind of storehouse of labour, which, in the exigencies of state, may be turned to the public service. In a nation, where there is no demand for such superfluities, men sink into indolence, lose all enjoyment of life, and are useless to the public, which cannot maintain or support its fleets and armies, from the industry of such slothful members. [...]

Luxury, when excessive, is the source of many ills; but is in general preferable to sloth and idleness, which would commonly succeed in its place, and are more hurtful both to private persons and to the public. When sloth reigns, a mean uncultivated way of life prevails amongst individuals, without society, without enjoyment.

SL

Le luxe : une problématique philosophique au XVIIIe siècle

February 24, 2013

Rousseau : « ou le luxe est l’effet des richesses, ou il les rend nécessaires ; il corrompt à la fois le riche et le pauvre, l’un par la possession, l’autre par la convoitise ».
Voltaire : « Si l’on entend par luxe tout ce qui est au-delà du nécessaire, le luxe est une suite naturelle des progrès de l’espèce humaine ».

SL

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.