How to Be Happy

#1

Post by adamzerner » Sun, Jul 20, 2014, 2:19 PM UTC

Re: How to Be Happy

#2

Post by gaelow » Sun, Jul 20, 2014, 2:36 PM UTC

My problem may be laziness. I couldn't bring myself to read more than half of such a long article, so I guess I'll just stay moderately unhappy.

Re: How to Be Happy

#3

Post by hliyan » Sun, Jul 20, 2014, 2:44 PM UTC

I've reduced it to a series of equations:

  Happiness = Perceived Actual Life / Expected Life  --- (1)

where,

  Perceived Actual Life = Perception * Actual Life ----- (2)

and in most cases,

  Expected Life ∝ Perceived Life of Others ------------- (3)

where,

  Perceived Life of Others = Perception * Others' Actual Life -- (4)

and finally,

  Actual Life ∝	(1 / Happiness) * Skill * Circumstance - (5)

The most success I had was in breaking equation (3), and then in upward adjusting Perception in (2). But (5) is the kicker -- it implies that your lack of happiness feeds back into other people's lack of happiness, creating a loop. As long as it holds, everyone will try to one-up each other in trying to improve their lives.

EDIT: corrected error in (1)

Re: How to Be Happy

#4

Post by Deivuh » Sun, Jul 20, 2014, 2:44 PM UTC

As someone was currently suffering of depression, this is going to help me. Nice article and linked resources.

Re: How to Be Happy

#5

Post by kstop » Sun, Jul 20, 2014, 2:49 PM UTC

Pretty sure the last thing the world needs is Less Wrong cross-pollinating with Hacker News.

Re: How to Be Happy

#6

Post by __Joker » Sun, Jul 20, 2014, 2:49 PM UTC

I hardly agree with "Develop the skills and habits associated with extroversion". Why I need to be comfortable with social company if my predisposed nature and comfortableness is to be alone ?

Re: How to Be Happy

#7

Post by dkuebric » Sun, Jul 20, 2014, 2:50 PM UTC

hliyan wrote: post #3

I've reduced it to a series of equations: Happiness = Perceived Actual Life / Expected Life --- (1) where, Perceived Actual Life = Perception * Actual Life ----- (2) and in most cases, Expected Life ∝ Perceived Life of Others ------------- (3) where, Perceived Life of Others = Perception * Others' Actual Life -- (4) and finally, Actual Life ∝ (1 / Happiness) * Skill * Circumstance - (5) The most success I had was in…

Feels like you should invert equation 1.

Re: How to Be Happy

#8

Post by hliyan » Sun, Jul 20, 2014, 2:52 PM UTC

dkuebric wrote: post #7

hliyan wrote: post #3

I've reduced it to a series of equations: Happiness = Perceived Actual Life / Expected Life --- (1) where, Perceived Actual Life = Perception * Actual Life ----- (2) and in most cases, Expected Life ∝ Perceived Life of Others ------------- (3) where, Perceived Life of Others = Perception * Others' Actual Life -- (4) and finally, Actual Life ∝ (1 / Happiness) * Skill * Circumstance - (5) The most success I had was in…

Feels like you should invert equation 1.

I believe you're right!

Re: How to Be Happy

#9

Post by adamzerner » Sun, Jul 20, 2014, 2:54 PM UTC

__Joker wrote: post #6

I hardly agree with "Develop the skills and habits associated with extroversion". Why I need to be comfortable with social company if my predisposed nature and comfortableness is to be alone ?

Because you have a lot to gain by doing so. Humans are capable of deriving a lot of happiness from social matters, so there's a large opportunity cost to being alone.

That said, it obviously depends on the person's situation. I don't think the advice is good for everyone. But it's probably good for most.

Edit: I found http://www.succeedsocially.com/allarticles to be really insightful and useful.

Re: How to Be Happy

#10

Post by Jweb_Guru » Sun, Jul 20, 2014, 2:56 PM UTC

Just for those of you who aren't aware, LessWrong is a site devoted to the cult of the "singularity." The site founder, Eliezer Yudkowsky, is a secular humanist who is probably most well-known for his Harry Potter fanfiction, "Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality." His core beliefs include that the obvious goal of the human race is immortality, that it is justifiable to kill a man if it would remove a spec of dust from the eye of every other person on Earth, and that the most important thing we could possibly be doing right now is devoting all of our time developing a mathematical model of a "safe AI." The site frequently dallies with discredited ideas like Drexlerian nanobots and some on the site take absurd concepts like "Roko's Basilisk" [1] seriously.

All of this is not to discredit this specific article. And there are lots of very intelligent posters there. But I tend to take everything I read there with a massive grain of salt.

[1] http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Roko%27s_basilisk