Tag Archives: happiness

Robert Skidelski

Leave a reply

Robert Skidelski reminds us that, if a critical mass of people is ever going to enjoy the good life, at least two things have to happen. First, the wealth we are creating has to be shared and not just horded by an elite few. And second, we have to learn to distinguish what we need from what we want, and put some limits on the latter rather than let advertisers and other brainwashers always convince us that we want more and more.

There is little echo in this narrative of the older view that machines offer emancipation from work, opening up a vista of active leisure – a theme going back to the ancient Greeks. Aristotle envisaged a future in which “mechanical slaves” did the work of actual slaves, leaving citizens free for higher pursuits. John Stuart Mill, Karl Marx, and John Maynard Keynes comforted their readers with the thought that capitalism, by generating the income and wealth needed to abolish poverty, would abolish itself, freeing mankind, as Keynes put it, to live “wisely and agreeably and well.”

Likewise, in his essay “The Soul of Man Under Socialism,” Oscar Wilde claimed that with machinery doing all the “ugly, horrible, uninteresting work,” humans will have “delightful leisure in which to devise wonderful and marvelous things for their own joy and the joy of everyone else.” And Bertrand Russell extolled the benefitsof extending leisure from an aristocracy to the whole population…

But the concept of growing abundance, articulated by Keynes and others, has been over-ridden by economists’ commitment to inherent scarcity. People’s wants, they say, are insatiable, so they will never have enough. Supply will always lag behind demand, mandating continuous improvements in efficiency and technology. This will be true even if there is enough to feed, clothe, and house the whole world. Poised between the profusion of their wants and the paucity of their means, humans have no option but to continue to “work for hire” in whatever jobs the market provides. So the day of abundance, when they can choose between work and leisure, will never arrive. They must “race with the machines” forever and ever.

psychedelics, the cure for…everything?

Leave a reply

Serious research suggests psychedelics may be an effective cure for depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and addiction, among other things. This article also compares reported experiences under psychedelics to meditation, which I found interesting.

What is happening when a person meditates? If you meditate in a dedicated way, for long enough, most people say that they start to experience a spiritual change. Why did meditation make people feel they were being changed in a way that was mystical — and what did that even mean? He stumbled across the psychedelics studies from the 1960s, and it seemed to him that the way people described feeling when they took psychedelics was very similar to the way people described when they were in a state of deep meditation. He began to wonder if they were, in some strange sense, two different ways of approaching the same insight. Could investigating one unlock the secrets of the other? …

When you take a psychedelic, most people will have a spiritual experience – you get a sense that your ego-walls have been lowered, and you are deeply connected to the people around you, to our whole species, to the natural world, to existence. But it turns out the intensity of the spiritual experience varies from person to person. For some people, it will be incredibly intense; for some people, mild; and some people have no spiritual experience at all. At Johns Hopkins, the team discovered that many of the positive effects correlate very closely with the intensity of the spiritual experience. So if you had a super-charged spiritual experience, you got the benefits very heavily; and if you had no spiritual experience, you didn’t have many positive effects.

Okay, I don’t usually go here, but let’s say just for the sake of argument that religion is not objectively true. Then these spiritual experiences people tend to have while under the effects of drugs, meditation, and prayer actually come from inside us, are baked into our minds in some way. And maybe people who have more of them really are happier and better off, which would seem to be a good thing maybe even if they are not objectively true.

why buddhism is true

Leave a reply

I learned about Why Buddhism is True: The Science and Philosophy of Meditation and Enlightenment through a Fresh Air podcast (embedded below). The interesting thesis is that mindfulness meditation is the antidote for a lot of what is wrong with the human condition, such as always wanting more than we have, and then not being happy when we get it. You argue that a modern meditation practice could achieve these goals without the religious angle, but the author’s thesis is that the Buddhists correctly diagnosed the human condition thousands of years ago (however old Buddhism is, I was a little too lazy to look it up).

The only thing that makes me wary of Buddhism, but this applies to almost all religions, is that a social elite can use it to encourage people to accept things the way they are rather than envision a better future and be willing to fight for it. Then again, maybe part of the human condition is a fundamental conflict between being happy in the moment and being unsatisfied with the way things are and willing to fight for a better future. Perhaps the middle ground is to take some time each day to reflect on all the things that are good about the moment we find ourselves in. I personally like to also take a little time to nurture that deep down flame of anger about the way certain things are, because it motivates me to want to change them. If everyone just exists peacefully in the moment all the time, nothing will ever change.

Venn Diagram your work-life balance

1 Reply

This is a very simple idea but I like it.

The second good idea is to use a Venn Diagram to improve your practice and/or your life. Basically, the circle on the left is your ideal practice/life. The circle on the right is your current practice/life…

The amount of overlap determines how happy you are. Drummond says if the overlap is 60% or more, you are likely very happy and unlikely to burn out. If it is 20% or less, watch out! You are very likely to burn out very soon.

The first good idea, by the way, is to create a “transition ritual” between your work and personal lives. I like that idea to, and have actually been doing it for many years without having such a good name for what I was doing.

regrets of the dying

Leave a reply

This blog post, which apparently is somewhat famous, is about interviews with people who are dying and what they regret about their lives. Number two on the list caught my eye:

2. I wish I didn’t work so hard.

This came from every male patient that I nursed. They missed their children’s youth and their partner’s companionship. Women also spoke of this regret. But as most were from an older generation, many of the female patients had not been breadwinners. All of the men I nursed deeply regretted spending so much of their lives on the treadmill of a work existence.

By simplifying your lifestyle and making conscious choices along the way, it is possible to not need the income that you think you do. And by creating more space in your life, you become happier and more open to new opportunities, ones more suited to your new lifestyle.

 

equality vs. equal opportunity

1 Reply

Continuing to think about European socialism-style equality vs. the U.S. narrative of equal opportunity and the pursuit of happiness. Our version makes more sense in some ways – everyone starts out equal, but then people who work the hardest, have the best ideas, or are willing to take risks get rewarded. This makes sense as an ideal – combine it with a safety net for those who don’t succeed through no fault of their own, and it could be a nice, practical vision. The main problem is that it is a narrative that can be twisted and co-opted by the rich and powerful to write the rules unfairly in their favor, ultimately creating the opposite of equal opportunity. Even darker, it can lead to a narrative where people who benefit from the rules being unfairly in their favor find ways to rationalize their success, convincing first others and then themselves that they had superior talents to being with. Here’s an article from Shelterforce that makes some of these arguments:

Upon closer scrutiny, however, the meritocratic ideal turns out to be quite pernicious.  Summarizing the conclusion of my recent article on the subject, I find that, while this ideal is highly unlikely to achieve its core objectives (except maybe on the margins), its pursuit nonetheless creates “a competitive individualist ‘rat race’ of a society, fundamentally anti-communal and anti-familial, where group solidarity is uncommon and compassion muted.” And, worst of all, it ends up legitimizing—and thus reinforcing—the very social and economic inequality it purports to rectify…

In particular, much of liberal urban policy focuses on what liberals see as a kind of “unholy trinity” of barriers, as I have labeled it, that stem from inadequate schooling, troubled families, and poverty-impacted neighborhoods. Yet there is a great body of evidence showing that efforts to break down these barriers yield only marginal results in promoting meritocratic social mobility for the urban poor, while at the same time imposing significant costs on the most vulnerable.

Mostly notably, we see various school reforms fail over and over, and even enhanced higher education produces surprisingly limited impacts. As a result, we end up blaming the educational system for the failures of the rest of society, which in turn opens the door to corporate-oriented policies designed to privatize and monetize public schools. At the same time, programs that intervene into family life, unless highly intensive, also produce only minimal results, and when such interventions are intensive, they tend to violate the liberty of poor parents to autonomously direct the development of their children. Likewise, efforts to reduce barriers arising from the effects of poor neighborhoods via housing dispersal policies or the creation of mixed-income communities also have been generally disappointing, while often disconnecting the vulnerable from crucial familial and communal bonds.

I still think we should talk about how to make equal opportunity, with an appropriate safety net, a reality in this country, as an alternative to the European socialist model, which is the main alternative. These are really the only two humane options. What could true equal opportunity look like? For the sake of argument, let’s say we had a 100% inheritance tax, with the proceeds distributed equally to all newborn babies. Universal tax-funded education, up to and including the highest level of education and/or practical skills training needed to succeed in the economy, including continuing education for adults to adapt as technology and economic conditions change. Universal and equal access to health care. Excellent public infrastructure serving and connecting all urban areas. Low barriers to changing jobs or starting a business. Now you have a platform where people can compete and cooperate to build wealth. Some will work harder, innovate more, take more chances and earn more financial rewards. Others will choose to play it safer, devote more time to family and leisure, or just enjoy life’s experiences with less material wealth. You would still need unemployment and disability insurance for those who fall through the cracks through no fault of their own.

happiness and boredom

Leave a reply

In this FInancial Times article, John Kay accuses happy cities of being boring.

Liveability and happiness are complex concepts. The happiest countries identified by the UN are those of “Jante Law”, the stifling conformity described by Danish author Aksel Sandemose: “You are not to think you are anything special, you are not to think you can teach us anything.” Yet there is much that is good about social homogeneity, shared values, peaceful coexistence and honest government. Life in unhappy countries — Myanmar, Syria, Zimbabwe — is not boring, but much of the population desperately wishes it was.

Yet boring is not enough. Security, hygiene, good public transport — the factors that enter the assessment of liveability — are necessary for a fulfilling life, but they are not sufficient for it. That is why so many young people from Melbourne or Toronto go to London or New York in search of the excitement and creativity of the great, rather than the liveable, city. For the technology writer Jonah Lehrer, cities are the knowledge engine of the 21st century. And he wasn’t talking about Düsseldorf.

The most intriguing studies of the determinants of happiness are those of psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. The moments at which people are happiest are when they are in “flow” — when they are engaged in a challenging task and doing it well: the lecture in which you realise the audience is hanging on your ever word, the tennis game in which every shot takes the ball where you want it to go. For many people, bringing up children is a source of endless demands and frustrations, but taken as a whole it is one of the most satisfying experiences of their lives. There is more to the good life than clean water and trains that arrive on time.

I don’t know. I like a little excitement when I travel, but I like a certain calmness and predictability when it comes to the broad strokes of my day in my home city. Then I can enjoy the fun and interesting little happenstances that happen within that larger sea of calmness. Provide some walkable streets, some small-scale commerce, some open space and some contact with nature and I think you can create this atmosphere. And I don’t know why he picks on Myanmar, they might be able to teach us Westerners a thing or two about happiness.