这几天在听“今日简史”，这是Harari继“人类简史”和“未来简史”我听的第三本书，感觉大数据和神灵作用一样，他知道和控制你的一切，而你对他如何运行和在哪里茫然无知，一切都是被安排而我们以为都是自己决定，其实自己决定的只是自己心态，如何迎接一个人工智能的新社会，如何成为5%还配工作的超人类，如何不被养着，带着虚拟设备进入极乐世界！
朋友电话问我2019年resolution是什么，我说提高内观练习，减少multitasking，工作专注一个目标；其实就是一个目标，focus！因为自己如此漫不经心的做所有事，习惯了听着书，同时看着手机上的文字，吃着营养餐，还在运动；自诩大脑可以运作不同维度，其实每件事都没有充分投入！
吃饭就是吃饭，走路就是走路（可以听书）， 看书就是看书，写作就是写作，听别人讲话就全身心听，感同深受，瑜伽就是瑜伽，呼吸就是呼吸，内观就不要运作头脑，珍惜面前一切，不纠结古往今来！真实只有现在。
所以元旦三天一直试图专注DBA的literature review，我对自己论文主题非常感兴趣，关于商业环境下人类wellbeing，中文翻译暂且为“康乐”，实在没找到更贴切词！
看了非常多世界各地大师的研究和实验，总结一下各方意见。
At one extreme, individual well-being can be expressed in physical and biological terms; at the other extreme, it can be viewed as a state of happiness... Between the two extreme notions of individual well-being lies a multitude of other criteria, such as income and wealth, social position, the Maslowian hierarchy of accomplishments, personal power, spiritual or ideological achievement, and many others.
Suranyi-Unger (1981）提到个人康乐分物理和生理两个层面：收入，财富，社会地位，社会保障，自我价值实现，权利，精神理想实现，快乐境界。
我认为这些都是一种划分方法，全部靠外界不确定因素（也就是上面提到的大数据和神灵，你看到链接了吗？），所以无法保障自我康乐，只有康乐来自于自身产生，才可以持续和不会泛滥和缺乏相互作用。如何做到不是现阶段重点，但需要区分外在和内在康乐和它的构成作为基础。
Generally, there are two broad categories of objective definitions of well-being: resource-related and consumption-related. Researchers such as Garfinkel and Haveman (1977) and Weisbrod and Hansen (1977) have focused on resources. On the other hand, researchers such as Fergusson et al. (1981), Lipshitz (1987), Magrabi (1987), Magrabi et al. (1991), Marlowe and Godwin (1988), Monroe (1937), Onn (1989), Squire (1991), and Thomas (1990) have focused on consumption.
70年代经济学家和哲学家把资源作为划分康乐标准，到了80，90年代开始把消费作为标准，我认为也许看来都是进步，因为我们都知道资源控制在少数人手里，而且越来越集中，现在还是政府财团，未来就是大数据，控制者会越来越少数，难道其他人的康乐就会降低吗？或者根本不存在，都活在一个虚拟世界里，被设定好的康乐，按每个人的喜好设定，你自己分不清真实还是虚幻，其实和现在你我也没区别，这个就不说了，投其所好，一切都可以被虚拟但人的灵性成长没有办法外界介入，只能自我演化，所以靠资源和消费决定康乐非常低级和不靠谱！
� Well-being start from satisfaction with, and happiness in, life as a whole, which, of course, could be inferred from satisfaction with various specific domains of life, such as health, housing, and family life (Michalos, 1983)
Michalos, 1983提到康乐怡对生活满意度为标准，包活你对健康，住房，家庭等具体生活重要方面满意；我认为人的满意度都是短暂的，一个点，都不是一个面，是高峰不是高原体验；你为啥满意是因为那一刻你没有更多的需求你很满意，但下一刻马上新的愿望升起你又开始不那么满意，有没有，马上想到我要减肥2公斤，我要去bora bora，我要给学校其他家长show off我的孩子美好生长环境，我要全世界知道我的幸福指数.................爱吗，马上有人泼你冷水，没人在乎你有多满意，重要的是我们很不满意！
�Common consumption-related definitions of well-being include health (Magrabi et al., 1991; Squire, 1991), nutrient intake (Thomas, 1990), health practices (Onn, 1989), durables (Lipshitz, 1987), fertility rate (Onn, 1989), public goods and services (Onn, 1989), educational achievement (Lipshitz, 1987; Onn, 1989; Squire, 1991), and economizing behavior (Fergusson et al., 1981).
消费层次界定康乐喜欢Thomas 1990开始把营养摄入放进去，其实这个很能体现一个社会整体康乐指数，我们都知道美国人对于额外补充营养素痴迷（这点上我很美国，执迷和痴迷），非洲人民都是double burden肥胖和营养不良；中国介于中间，一部分精英健康人士很留意广大群众一部分吃光一部分不知道瓜啥样！所以涉及到个体，营养摄入无法正确体现康乐指数，作为一个宏观社会康乐指标我还是认同的。
� Magrabi (1987) stated that well-being describes a desired state of affairs, the state of being well, happy, and prosperous.
M提到渴望状态，快乐和繁荣，一切都不错。
� Some studies used satisfaction as an indicator of well-being. Among them are studies by Headey et al. (1985), Michalos (1983), and Wilkening and McGranahan (1978). Michalos (1983) analyzed how satisfaction within a dozen domains of life contributes to global satisfaction and happiness with life as a whole. The twelve domains studied were health, finances, family, job, friends, housing, area of residence, recreation, religion, self-esteem, transportation, and government services in terms of happiness with life as a whole, the most influential variables for males were financial security, health, and self-esteem, whereas satisfaction with self-esteem, housing, and financial security were the most influential variables for females.
这里提到康乐12项指标是：健康，财务，家庭，工作，朋友，住房，居住取悦，娱乐，宗教，自尊，交通，政府服务；对于男性最重要是财务安全，健康和自尊；女性是自尊，住房和财务安全。关于是否合理我之前提了就不废话，这里有意思是男性和女性对待康乐重要指数排序，男人很实际，女人把自尊摆在第一位，当然都是很盖棺定论，但不乏真实反应。理性和感性有区别。
Ellis (1984) provided a model that considered the nature of well-being by examining its "causal basis". "Causal basis" refers to conditions the act as a barrier between people and the goals important to them. The basic idea is that the causal level determines the well-being of a group of people. The basic level (level zero) is the State of Welfare, which represents a state of the group at a particular point in time. The first level is the Level of Living. This level concerns the deployment, of the available flow of resources and amenities to maintain and improve the State of Welfare.The second level of well-being specifies the quantity of Resources Available to the group. This level concerns the "stock" rather than the "flow" of available resources. The resource availability is determined by the group's access to the Power structure in the society. Access to power is the third level of well-being. It leads to allocation of new resources to the group's benefit. Each of the three higher levels controls the level below it and determines the state of well-being. The final level is the Level of Pressure, which is a negative level that lies below the State of Welfare. The level of pressure manifests the results either of a good state of, or a lack of well-being.
Ellis观点有些意思，强调的是条件障碍，在对人重要事物和实际之间差距，可以关乎资源配备，条件达成和静态库存和动态流动，我蛮喜欢这个概念，因为突破了某种状态描述更多是动态间隙。但同样说明没有永久康乐，一切都在对比中产生区别和快乐，你不求自己过得如何，一定要比闺蜜，同事，邻居或者儿子同学家过得好，否则就不够康乐。
学习继续，以上只是DBA冰山一个闪光点原子构成，作为2019年开端，更多了解康乐，获得可持续的康乐，与朋友们同康乐。
�
