Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to Be Happy

lesswrong.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 222 posts

Re: How to Be Happy

#121

Post by [deleted] »

davidrusu wrote: post #102
jqm wrote: post #77

My dog is probably one of the happiest creatures I know. But he can't get his own dinner and I have to take him out to poop. If everyone was happy all the time we would probably still live in caves because there wouldn't have been the struggle that brings us to where we are. This in my opinion may be why religion correlates with happiness. For the very same reason lobotomized people might be happy. Do you want to be…

Cynicism is not the driving force of innovation, optimism is. It is possible to be happy and rational.

[deleted]

Re: How to Be Happy

#122

Post by [deleted] »

noname123 wrote: post #115

I'm happiest when I'm seeking out and feeding off all sorts of misery, schadenfreude of others' failures, absurdity, ennui, existential guilt, jealousy of others' success, fear of missing of out, fear of growing old, sexual frustration, impotence of metaphorical and of the limpy kind, the haze and alcohol/drug induced dependency, anxiety of status. I get angry and anxious reading my Facebook updates about weekend adv…

[deleted]

Re: How to Be Happy

#123

Post by rquantz »

washadjeffmad wrote: post #99
rquantz wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is on Less Wrong, a website devoted to rationality. You'll notice several times in the article he is clearly addressing a rationality-focused audience. For instance: Without a magical deity to give you purpose, though, you'll have to find out for yourself what drives you. He's writing for atheists. Telling an atheist "in order to be happy you need to get religion" is like telling a recovering alcoholic "in order…

Instead of a recovering alcoholic, perhaps a teetotaler or other person sober on principle would be a better comparison. I've never believed gods could exist or had religion, and thoughts otherwise wouldn't tempt me.

You may be right. I chose alcoholic because suggesting they try drinking to solve one problem will cause other problems for them. If I were to try attending church in order to make myself happy, I would find myself 1) tortured by the inanity of everything that goes on there and 2) pained by the experience of behaving outwardly in a way that conflicts with my values.

However, there are also plenty of people who were raised religious who are now atheists. I've met many of them who have the same toxic relationship with religion that an alcoholic has with alcohol.

Re: How to Be Happy

#124

Post by JamesArgo »

vertex-four wrote: post #111
JamesArgo wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not understand why there are so many haters of LessWrong. It's not a cult. No one on that site has ever bought into the Roko idea. Also, Roko's post is poorly explained there. However, everyone thought it was nonsense at the time and still does. Imagine if the most inane nonsense posted to hacker news was used to dismiss everyone who posts here. As for nanotechnology. It is possible - biology is a proof of that…

> I do not understand why there are so many haters of LessWrong. A lot of us have ended up in places where they have tried to force their beliefs on us (a huge one being "debate is always the correct way to understand things, and is never inappropriate in any situation ever" - the concept of, say, cooperative discussion, or even caring about people's emotions and sense of self, seems to have never occurred to any of…

>Or even caring about people's emotions and sense of self, seems to have never occurred to any of them that I have met.

But that's not relevant to a community focusing on rational discussion. And it's the exact opposite of what cults do - they try to shower their followers with love. Not caring too much about people's emotional attachments to their beliefs is appropriate on LessWrong. It is inappropriate outside of that context.

Re: How to Be Happy

#125

Post by rquantz »

angersock wrote: post #97
rquantz wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is on Less Wrong, a website devoted to rationality. You'll notice several times in the article he is clearly addressing a rationality-focused audience. For instance: Without a magical deity to give you purpose, though, you'll have to find out for yourself what drives you. He's writing for atheists. Telling an atheist "in order to be happy you need to get religion" is like telling a recovering alcoholic "in order…

That's one of the entire problems with atheism: without a higher power to give your life purpose, it can be very difficult to suffer through yet another day on this earth full of such suffering and sorrow. Nihilism has a similar issue. It's icky.

That's one of the problems with religiosity: you can't imagine a way to find meaning in the world without fooling yourself.

Re: How to Be Happy

#126

Post by mseebach »

onetimeusename wrote: post #103
davidtanner wrote: post #40

I was a lot happier when I stopped reading LessWrong. I'm not even trying to be (overly) snarky - I really did used to read LW and I'm very glad I stopped as it was one of the many small things dragging down my well being.

Would you care to elaborate on this? I have my own criticisms of LW and without mentioning what they are, I want to see if other people's match up with mine.

I see LW as part of the cult of reason - under risk of strawmanning, it's the idea that pretty much everything subject to perfect logical deduction from first principles.

It's important to study and understand human biases and it can be helpful in overcoming many struggles since most of the time, you're your own worst enemy, but the philosophy that you're inherently flawed and you should put up a constant effort to be "less wrong" is a recipe for disaster IMO.

Absolutely, take time every now and then to reflect on life and whether any biases and assumptions about the world is impairing your wellbeing and happiness and whether it might be worth changing that -- but in everyday life, listen to your impulses, intuition and feelings. Don't be blind, don't be stupid, but also don't constantly second-guess yourself.

I should totally write a self help book. Or at least make some inspirational Facebook cover photos.

Re: How to Be Happy

#127

Post by sliverstorm »

onetimeusename wrote: post #114
dominotw wrote: post #79

Can someone tell me how this 'cult of happiness' started in western culture. The obsession with happiness is so pervasive and absurd that people are depressed because they are not happy 24x7 not because of a personal tragedy. Why is some vaguely defined happiness sold as some holy grail that must be achieved at all costs. There are billion dollar industries built around selling happiness ( fashion industry, fitness i…

In the article, the writer mentioned he is rarely unhappy for more than 20 minutes. I don't understand this. Happiness is a result of something that is good and sadness is a result of something being bad. Emotions have a purpose. Emotions are not some sort of primitive remnant from prehistoric times we need to overcome. It's as if because of science we can now see what is good and what is bad and remove the bad emoti…

Emotions have a purpose, but that doesn't mean you need to wallow in your unhappiness.

Re: How to Be Happy

#128

Post by woodchuck64 »

n09n wrote: post #112
woodchuck64 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there an argument to be made why artificial intelligence that surpasses human intelligence is not a problem for the human race?

Probably the same argument that human intelligence that surpasses feline intelligence is not a problem for domestic housecats.

Seriously? Would you want to be neutered without your consent?

Re: How to Be Happy

#129

Post by rwallace »

__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 ?

If you're alone and happy, you don't. If you're alone and unhappy, it's probably worth at least considering whether improving your social life might help.

Re: How to Be Happy

#130

Post by vertex-four »

JamesArgo wrote: post #124
vertex-four wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do not understand why there are so many haters of LessWrong. A lot of us have ended up in places where they have tried to force their beliefs on us (a huge one being "debate is always the correct way to understand things, and is never inappropriate in any situation ever" - the concept of, say, cooperative discussion, or even caring about people's emotions and sense of self, seems to have never occurred to any of…

>Or even caring about people's emotions and sense of self, seems to have never occurred to any of them that I have met. But that's not relevant to a community focusing on rational discussion. And it's the exact opposite of what cults do - they try to shower their followers with love. Not caring too much about people's emotional attachments to their beliefs is appropriate on LessWrong. It is inappropriate outside of t…

> It is inappropriate outside of that context.

Yes. The issue is that many seem to have the complete inability to understand this. I don't care what they do in their own IRC channel or community; it's entirely inappropriate to attack somebody without their consent anywhere else, and yet they do.

Post reply on HN