我們看一些統計數字，可以用來檢驗佛教的模型。首先是宏觀，全球性的結果：
(a)世界上最富有的 1/5人口享用了 86％的生產品和勞務；最貧窮的1/5人口只享用了1.3％。最富有的1/5人口使用了全部食物的一半，能源近60％，紙張84％，電話74％，車輛87％。（如同Nagler教授所指出，令人吃驚的不僅是這種兩極分化，而且我們有限的資源正在無窮盡地用來維持這一擴張過程。）
(b)自然資源在銳減：自1970年起，世界森林已經減少了一半；水、魚等關鍵性的資源在減少，許多已經消耗殆盡。美國人每年花80億美元在化妝品上，這比為全世界所有人提供基本教育所需要的花費還要多出20億美元；歐洲每年花110億美元在冰淇淋上，這比為全世界人口提供清潔水、排水系統所需要的花費還要多出20億美元；美國人和歐洲人每年花170億美元為寵物買食物，這比為全世界所有人提供基本衛生營養條件所需要的附加花費還要多出40億美元。
(c)三位世界上最富有的人，其資產超過了48個最不發達國家的國民生產總合。225位世界上最富有的人，其資產超過了世界最貧窮的47％人口的年收入總合。據估計，每年再花費大約400億美元，就可以為全世界所有人提供基本的教育、衛生條件、婦女生育的醫療條件，為所有人提供適當的食物、清潔水、排水系統條件，所有這些花費還不到225位世界上最富有的人資產總合的4％。（聯合國秘書長的報告〈紐約時代〉，1998年9月27日）
如果看一下微觀、個人的情況，我們發現也是問題重重。探討到這一層次很重要，因為人們不知不覺地將市場觀念融入到道德生活當中來。判斷是非，越來越多的人不是憑直心，而是憑一時的權宜。就是說靠狹窄的私心，而非大家的共同利益來做決定。以上怵目驚心的統計數字，即使廣為人知，也不見得會轉變為糾正這巨大偏失的行動。這就是「不相信」，「共同價值觀」衰退的後果之一。如果沒有更深的價值系統來支持這種覺察，單純的覺察很容易淪為漠不關心。即使從早期倫理的世界觀中，我們在良心上有種模糊的同情心，在現代的市場宗教中，這種神聖的激情往往會化為「慈悲勞損」。它也不能變成慈悲智慧的行動。所以個人的層面比全球更加引起人們的注意。然而二者都反映了同一現象，在我看來，都在強調佛教模型總體上的有效性。
據世界衛生組織估計，發達國家80％的死亡是由生活方式引起的。比如，奢侈、放縱、過量消費。大多數死亡都是因為我們奢侈、暴食、「食用過量」引起的疾病。「營養過度」產生的過度緊張之類的問題，缺乏活動的肥胖症。諸多疾病是我們死亡的主因，其中包括冠心病，中風，糖尿病和數種癌症（估計所有癌症中1/3與飲食有關）。心臟病是美國人的第一殺手。（每25秒一次突發，每45秒一次死亡）。所有的這些（高品質）的生活卻在被普遍地嚮往著，這也是我們對全世界推銷最有力的東西。
相比之下，發展中國家的死亡主要是由貧窮所引起。缺乏食物，人們就容易得瘧疾、肺結核、小兒痲痺、痲疹、營養不良、饑餓、痢疾，和許多與貧窮相關的病。比如壞血病、腳氣病、駝背、低蛋白。每年兩千萬人餓死。這相當於：
每天四萬人；
每小時1667人；
每分鐘28人；
每2.3秒一人。
待續 |
|
Let's look at some of the statistics or outcomes that could be used to test this Buddhist model or hypothesis; first at the macro and global level:
(a) The richest one-fifth of the world's people consumes 86% ofall goods and services, while the poorest one-fifth consumes just1.3%. The richest one-fifth consumes half the food, nearly 60% ofall the energy, 84% of all the paper, 74% of all the telephone lines, and 87% of all the vehicles.
(This absurd disparity is fed by an equally absurd notion that we have a finite supply of resources to sustain this endless expansion, as Professor Nagler has pointed out).
(b) Natural resources are plummeting: since 1970 the world's forests have been halved; water, fish, and other vital resources are diminishing and in some areas already depleted. Americans spend $8 billion annually on cosmetics—$2 billion more than the amountestimated to provide basic education for everyone in the world. Europeans spend $11 billion a year on ice cream—$2 billion more than the estimated amount needed to provide clean water and safesewers for the world's population. Americans and Europeans spend $17 billion a year on pet food—$4 billion more than the estimated annual additional total needed to provide basic health and nutritionfor everyone in the world.
(c) The three richest people in the world have combined assets that exceed the combined domestic product of the 48 least developed countries. The world's 225 richest individuals have combined wealth exceeding the annual income of the poorest 47% of the entire world's population. It is estimated that the additional cost of achieving and maintaining universal access to basic education for all, basic health care for all, reproductive health care for women,adequate food for all, and clean water and safe sewers for all isroughly $40 billion a year—or less than 4% of the combined wealthof the 225 richest people in the world, according to the United
Nations Secretary General's Report, in the New York Times, Sept. 27, 1998.
If we look at the micro and more personal level, we find equally troubling inconsistencies. And it is important to bring the discussion down to this level, because one of the more insidious aspects of infusing market values into our moral life, is that more and more people calculate right and wrong by the standard of narrow self-interest, not the larger common good. Thus, even though the above statistics, shocking as they may be, are widely known, that knowledge in itself does not necessarily translate into action that could correct such egregious wrongs. This is one of the problems of "unbelief," or the decline in "shared values." Awareness alone, unless underpinned by some deeper abiding and overarching value system that informs that awareness, easily turns into apathy and indifference. And even when our conscience is pricked by some vague sense of empathy derived from an earlier ethical worldview, in the current market-religion this noble impulse often peters out into "compassion-fatigue." It doesn't by itself lead to compassionate and wise action. Thus, the personal level often stirs more concern than the global. Regardless, both reflect the same phenomenon and reinforce the overall validity, it seems to me, of the Buddhist model. Let's look at some statistics concerning the individual:
The World Health Organization estimates that over 80% of the deaths in the developed world ("over-developed") are the result of lifestyle; i.e. excess, indulgence, over-consumption. Most of our mortality comes from luxury and glut, from "over-eating diseases" and the corresponding growing problems associated with "over-nutrition," such as hypertension, and obesity due to under-exercise and inactivity. Coronary heart disease, strokes, diabetes, and some forms of cancer (an estimated one-third of all cancer deaths are related to diet) make up the majority of our deaths. Heart attack is the leading cause of death in the U.S. (one strikes every 25 seconds; one kills every 45 seconds). And all of this "good life" is held up as worthy of universal aspiration; it is marketed globally and constitutes our most influential export.
By contrast, death in the "under-developed" world is primarily caused by deficiency. Lack of food makes people prone to malaria, TB, polio, measles, malnutrition, starvation, dysentery, and diseases associated with deficiency, such as scurvy, beriberi, rickets, kwashiorkor (low protein). 20 million children starve to death each year. That translates into:
40,000 every day
1,667 per hour
28 per minute
1 every 2.3 seconds
To be continued
To be continued
|
