尊敬的用户您好，这是来自FT中文网的温馨提示：如您对更多FT中文网的内容感兴趣，请在苹果应用商店或谷歌应用市场搜索“FT中文网”，下载FT中文网的官方应用。
Marvel at the unspoilt glory of the highlands while you can. On Tuesday the UK revealed the winners of its latest auction for new wind farms, with all but four of the 22 onshore sites planned for Scotland.
趁现在还来得及，尽情欣赏苏格兰高地未受破坏的美景吧。周二，英国公布了最新一轮新风电场拍卖的获胜者，22个陆上风电场中除4个外，其余均计划在苏格兰建设。
Also this week, Starlink launched another 21 satellites into low Earth orbit. It already has more than 6,000 up there, and the plan is for a “megaconstellation” comprising seven times as many. Your kids will never again see a clear night sky.
本周，星链将又发射了21颗卫星进入低地球轨道。它已经有超过6,000颗卫星在那里，计划是建立一个包含七倍数量的“超级星座”。你的孩子再也看不到清澈的夜空了。
I weep at such announcements — on aesthetic grounds alone. Where I live on the South Downs is one of only 21 designated international dark sky reserves in the world. When Elon Musk’s string of tin cans passes overhead, they almost cast a shadow.
仅从美学角度出发，我对这样的声明感到悲伤。我居住在南唐斯，这是世界上仅有的21个指定的国际黑暗天空保护区之一。当埃隆•马斯克(Elon Musk)的一串锡罐在头顶上方经过时，它们几乎肯定会投下阴影。
It amazes me that no one seems too bothered. My fellow kite surfers on the south coast of England think I’m crazy to moan that the Rampion offshore wind farm ruins my pristine view out to sea. Where are the marches against flashing advertising billboards?
让我惊讶的是，似乎没有人太在意。我在英格兰南海岸的风筝冲浪同伴们认为我抱怨Rampion海上风电场破坏了我对海洋的原始视野是疯了。那些反对闪烁广告牌的游行在哪里呢？
Governments care even less. Labour’s plan to build 1.5mn new homes is necessary, but minimising ugliness will be far down the agenda. Britain does many things well, but designing new houses is not one of them.
政府对此更加不关心。工党计划建造150万套新房是必要的，但将减少丑陋的任务将远远落后于议程。英国在许多方面做得很好，但设计新房不是其中之一。
Aesthetics usually succumbs to economic forces in the end. And against worthy goals such as reducing inequality or net zero, beauty doesn’t stand a chance. Who cares if Sardinia is skewered with thousands of turbines if global warming is reversed?
最终，美学往往会屈服于经济力量。在减少不平等或实现净零排放等值得追求的目标面前，美丽毫无机会。如果全球变暖得到逆转，谁会在意撒丁岛上插满了成千上万的风力涡轮机呢？
I do. And so does Alessandra Todde, the Italian island’s president, who just declared an 18-month moratorium on their construction on the basis they make the place ugly. She is a brave politician who puts aesthetics above everything else, which is odd because non-financial objectives are on the rise elsewhere. As far back as 2011 the UN passed a resolution urging member nations to move “towards a holistic approach to development”. It called happiness “a fundamental human goal”.
我在意。意大利岛屿的总统亚历山德拉•托德(Alessandra Todde)也在意，她刚刚宣布在未来18个月内禁止建设，理由是这些建筑会破坏美丽的环境。她是一位勇敢的政治家，将美学放在首位，这有些奇怪，因为在其他地方，非金融目标正在兴起。早在2011年，联合国就通过了一项决议，敦促会员国采取“综合发展的方式”。它将幸福视为“一项基本的人类目标”。
Likewise, the economist Richard Layard has argued that people’s “wellbeing” should be the ultimate aim of government. Meanwhile companies are desperate to be more ethical.
同样，经济学家理查德•莱亚德(Richard Layard)认为，人民的“福祉”应该是政府的最终目标。与此同时，公司们迫切希望变得更加道德。
However, as the 19th-century German philosopher GWF Hegel wrote, “truth and goodness are only siblings in beauty”. Indeed the link between aesthetics and pursuing a meaningful life goes all the way back to Plato. Even Friedrich Nietzsche admitted that “it is only as an aesthetic phenomenon that existence and the world are eternally justified”.
然而，正如19世纪德国哲学家黑格尔所写的那样，“真理和善良只是美的兄弟姐妹”。事实上，美学与追求有意义的生活之间的联系可以追溯到柏拉图。甚至弗里德里希•尼采(Friedrich Nietzsche)也承认，“只有作为一种审美现象，存在和世界才能永恒地得到证明”。
If chief executives and politicians see the value of diversity, equity and inclusion, or saving spotted newts from development, why then isn’t beauty for beauty’s sake more revered?
如果首席执行官和政治家们看到了多样性、公平和包容的价值，或者保护斑点蝾螈免受开发的重要性，那么为什么不更加推崇为美而美呢？
After all, as John Dobson, a professor of finance at California Polytechnic State University, points out, there are several respects in which aesthetics as a foundation for human activity is superior to economics and even ethics. He argues that economic objectives come with the baggage of wealth accumulation, while ethical goals require moral principles. Aesthetic interests, on the other hand, require “no further justification”.
毕竟，正如加州州立理工大学的金融学教授约翰•多布森(John Dobson)指出的那样，美学作为人类活动的基础在几个方面优于经济学甚至伦理学。他认为，经济目标伴随着财富积累的包袱，而伦理目标需要道德原则。另一方面，审美兴趣则“不需要进一步的理由”。
Second, there are no absolute rules for aesthetic judgment. I may consider white lines on empty country roads an eyesore — but others don’t, and fair enough. In this sense, aesthetics is non-prejudicial and inclusive. All angles can be considered and anyone can exercise judgment, no matter their gender or culture. How narrow and exclusive the profit motive is by comparison.
其次，审美判断没有绝对的规则。我可能认为空旷的乡村道路上的白线是一种眼中钉，但其他人可能不这样认为，这也没关系。从这个意义上说，审美是没有偏见且包容的。所有角度都可以被考虑，任何人都可以行使判断，无论他们的性别或文化如何。相比之下，利润动机是多么狭隘和排他的。
Finally, Dobson notes that beauty is a good we generate in our own heads. Thus it is unlimited in supply and depletes no external resources in its making. Thousands of men can drool over the curves of a Jaguar E-Type yet their appreciation is never in competition.
最后，多布森指出，美是我们自己头脑中产生的一种美好事物。因此，它的供应是无限的，并且在创造过程中不会消耗任何外部资源。成千上万的人可以对捷豹E-Type的曲线垂涎三尺，但他们的欣赏从来不是竞争关系。
And there’s money in it. Apple’s multi-trillion-dollar market cap was born of Steve Jobs’ obsession with beautiful products. The total return of luxury goods maker LVMH is four times that of Bloomberg World index over the past two decades.
而且这其中有巨大的利润。苹果(Apple)公司数万亿美元的市值源于史蒂夫•乔布斯(Steve Jobs)对美丽产品的执着追求。奢侈品制造商路威酩轩(LVMH)在过去二十年的总回报是彭博(Bloomberg)世界指数的四倍。
Am I honestly saying we should prioritise aesthetics over growth and living standards? Yes — and even in developing countries. We’ll be happier for it and there is no trade-off anyway. Human progress thrives on constraints. No one will suffer and what a reason to exist!
我是否真的在说我们应该将美学置于增长和生活水平之上？是的，即使在发展中国家也是如此。我们会因此更加幸福，而且根本没有任何权衡。人类的进步是在约束中茁壮成长的。没有人会受苦，这是存在的一个重要原因！
We can always improve our aesthetic judgment, too. Yet Britain has cut its arts funding by almost a fifth since 2017, while splurging £250mn on athletes for Paris.
我们也可以不断提高我们的审美判断力。然而，自2017年以来，英国削减了近五分之一的艺术资金，却为巴黎的运动员斥资2.5亿英镑。
So more painters and design schools please, and fewer Olympic canoers and spreadsheets. And as voters and shareholders, we must never be embarrassed to say: “That hilltop of solar panels is ugly. Remove them now.”
所以，请多一些画家和设计学校，少一些奥运会划艇运动员和电子表格。作为选民和股东，我们绝不能羞于说：“那座山顶上的太阳能电池板很丑，现在就拆掉它们。”