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

91–100 of 222 posts

Re: How to Be Happy

#91

Post by carlosdp »

chippy wrote: post #81
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…

"the pursuit of happiness" is right there in the US Declaration of Independence. The country holds that the pursuit of happiness as an unalienable right.

That's a straw man though. The "pursuit of happiness" in the Declaration is just fancy phrasing for what was originally the "right to own property". It was changed by Jefferson before the Declaration was finished because of some philosophical points from John Locke [1].

[1] http://hnn.us/article/46460

Re: How to Be Happy

#93

Post by jasode »

pkorzeniewski wrote: post #46

I've read many articles and books on this subject and not a single one of them had any effect on my life. It's usually just a list of things that - according to the author (and every author of course has different opinion) - will make you happy. It's bullshit, there is no "golden solution" for everyone. Reading such articles will make you even more unhappy, because now you've the whole list of things and you feel lik…

Maybe the closest writing to fit your view is Daniel Gilbert[1]. Basically, humans have a biological "set point" for happiness and it's different for everyone. It is not affected by winning the lottery, or getting paralyzed from a car accident, or doing meta-analysis on what happiness is (such as reading self-help books about achieving happiness.) Those events may affect happiness in the short term but not in the long term. People will eventually gravitate back to their predisposed set point of happiness.

If I agree with the above, I can set aside the quest for ultimate measurement of absolute happiness (e.g. Solon's "Count no man happy until he be dead."[2]) . However, I can still do things that affect relative happiness. When I stopped consulting for boring ERP software, my quality-of-life definitely improved. Again, I won't know if I'm ultimately "happy" until I'm lying on my deathbed. Nevertheless, it feels like I got a little victory from changes like that.

[1]http://www.amazon.com/Stumbling-Happiness-Daniel-Gilbert/dp/...

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_gilbert_asks_why_are_we_happy

[2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solon

Re: How to Be Happy

#94

Post by chippy »

carlosdp wrote: post #91
chippy wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"the pursuit of happiness" is right there in the US Declaration of Independence. The country holds that the pursuit of happiness as an unalienable right.

That's a straw man though. The "pursuit of happiness" in the Declaration is just fancy phrasing for what was originally the "right to own property". It was changed by Jefferson before the Declaration was finished because of some philosophical points from John Locke [1]. [1] http://hnn.us/article/46460

Sorry, I didn't mean to use a logical fallacy...I just got it from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life,_Liberty_and_the_pursuit_o...

Edits: Actually, reading the article fuller, this makes it even MORE interesting. Buying things, protecting products and property has always been tied up with happiness and the declaration. Fascinating!

"life, liberty ... and the possession of outward things"

Re: How to Be Happy

#95

Post by afro88 »

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…

I think you're attacking 2 different things here. One is chasing happiness, the other is the commercialisation of chasing happiness.

I have no problem with the former. I think it's healthy to try to lead an enjoyable and happy life. And I don't think that's mutually exclusive with leading a productive and meaningful life either.

Re: How to Be Happy

#96

Post by badman_ting »

pkorzeniewski wrote: post #46

I've read many articles and books on this subject and not a single one of them had any effect on my life. It's usually just a list of things that - according to the author (and every author of course has different opinion) - will make you happy. It's bullshit, there is no "golden solution" for everyone. Reading such articles will make you even more unhappy, because now you've the whole list of things and you feel lik…

It's really not bullshit, I think. The stuff about fear rings totally true to me, it aligns perfectly with my experiences. But, I know that being on the other side of it, it can sound like a bunch of hokum. (That's part of the reason why people keep living that way - the logic is pretty watertight.)

I've read books about it too, and not been helped that much beyond perhaps gaining some insight, or setting expectations of what happiness is like. But that doesn't invalidate the information in the books, it tells you that merely reading about happiness does not make it so. You can read all the books about how to be a great basketball player, but you won't improve until you actually get on a court and shoot some shots.

Re: How to Be Happy

#97

Post by angersock »

rquantz wrote: post #82
mansr wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is also, as the author mentions, a correlation between religiosity and happiness. Still, "start going to church" is not on the list of things to do. I'll hazard a guess that the author is not religious and thus doesn't consider it relevant. While I don't personally believe this a worthy pursuit, it does show the arbitrariness of the selection. EDIT: Point 8 does touch on religion but does not (directly) endorse…

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.

Re: How to Be Happy

#98

Post by davidrusu »

rodrigoavie wrote: post #57

Great article. I think that the main point is always being busy doing what you like, namely, in the "flow" the author describes.

Flow has high highs but it doesn't produce a lasting contentedness that the author is talking about

Re: How to Be Happy

#99

Post by washadjeffmad »

rquantz wrote: post #82
mansr wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is also, as the author mentions, a correlation between religiosity and happiness. Still, "start going to church" is not on the list of things to do. I'll hazard a guess that the author is not religious and thus doesn't consider it relevant. While I don't personally believe this a worthy pursuit, it does show the arbitrariness of the selection. EDIT: Point 8 does touch on religion but does not (directly) endorse…

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.

Re: How to Be Happy

#100

Post by walterbell »

maaku wrote: post #48
walterbell wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your friend has dust in their eye, do you feel the urge to help or comfort them? Is that good, bad, utilitarian? If you personally torture someone, would that have any effect on you? Is that good, bad, utilitarian? Is there a recursive relationship between observers and observed systems? If so, does the intention of an observation matter?

What do you mean "good, bad, utilitarian"? Good and bad are descriptions we attach to causal causes which lead to outcomes with higher (good) or lower (bad) utility. Having either my friend have dust in his eye or some stranger tortured are outcomes with less utility in my book than the counterfactual default. Actions which lead to these outcomes are bad, actions which prevent or provide restitution are good. I don't…

> What do you mean "good, bad, utilitarian"?

I'm asking if emotion (e.g. desire to help friend) has higher or lower utility.

> recursive relationship berween observers and observed systems

See page 2 onward in this cybernetics paper

http://www.nomads.usp.br/pesquisas/design/objetos_interativo...

Post reply on HN