读者看题目就知道这是冲着布鲁姆的名著《影响的焦虑》而来。是的,笔者反其道而用之。这缘起于令我纳闷的现象:有的学术著作推论漏洞百出而结论颠扑不易?有的学术著作解释头头是道,结论却十分可疑?前一种例子如马尔萨斯的《人口论》,后一种例子就是布鲁姆这本声名卓著的大作。马尔萨斯研究人口问题,他认定生活资料是以算术级数增长的,而人口是按照几何级数增长的;人类由食物生产所取得的可怜进展最终会被人口更快速的增长“吃掉”。 Readers see the title to know that this is directed at Broome’s famous “anxiety” came. Yes, I use the opposite. This comes from a phenomenon that puzzled me: some academic inferences about the loopholes in the results and difficult to write? Some academic books explain the first word, the conclusion is very suspicious? The first example Malthus’s “theory of population”, the latter example Broome is the famous masterpiece. Malthus studied the problem of population, and he held that the means of subsistence grew in arithmetical progression, and that the population grew in geometric progression; the poor progress humans made from food production eventually rose more rapidly by the population. “Eat” .