The Truth about What Really Makes Us “Happy” -A Galaxy Insight
"Imagination is the poor man’s wormhole. We can't do what we'd really like to do -- namely, travel through time, pay a visit to our future selves, and see how happy those selves are -- and so we imagine the future instead of actually going there. But if we cannot travel in the dimension of time, we can travel in the dimensions of space, and the chances are pretty good that somewhere in those other three dimensions there is another human being who is actually experiencing the event that we are merely thinking about."
Dan Gilbert -Harvard professor of Psychology and author of the bestseller, Stumbling on Happiness. (Chinese 'double happiness' Symbol).
Harvard psychologist Dan Gilbert says that contrary to popular belief, getting what we want in life has very little to do with happiness. In fact, happiness may be much simple than most of us are making it out to be. Gilbert maintains that when we imagine what could make us happy, such as new clothes or an around the world trip our brains are simply wrong to suggest to us that those things will actually make us happy.
We tend to think that accomplishing worthwhile things, or obtaining desirable material possessions will make us happy. But Gilbert says studies simply don’t support that conclusion. So how do humans obtain happiness? It’s simple, advises Gilbert; we make ourselves happy by imagining that we are happy. So getting what we want doesn’t actually have much to do with feeling happy.
Another seemingly contradictory finding is that those who have multiple choices tend to be less happy than those who have limited choices—a concept that really flies in the face of freedom.
During a particular experiment conducted in Gilbert’s Harvard lab, he offered a photography course. Students were told to take pics on campus of anything that they wanted to preserve as a memory, but they could take twelve pictures.
Afterwards, students had to select the best two, which were then printed out and into large, high quality prints. Once these two favorites were selected the group was divided into two control groups. One group was allowed to select only one of the two pics with an option of being able to exchange this with the other picture within a four day “grace period”. The other study group was given only one choice; take your best picture, but you don’t get to exchange it no matter what. Out of the participants, the group that had no exchange option were happy with their final choice and believed they had chosen the best picture. However, the group with the freedom to exchange were unhappy with their choices. Why?
Dan Gilbert surmises that having too many choices inadvertently creates discontent. Whereas having to settle for something and having no further choices in the matter, actually seems to be a better recipe for happiness.
It’s interesting to consider that as modern conveniences grow, so do our suicide rates. Today’s youth have more choices than ever in what food the eat, what gadgets they buy, what clothing they wear, etc, and yet depression and suicide is a growing problem for developed nations.
“Suicide remains the third leading cause of death among young people in this country,” confirmed Dr. Ileana Arias, acting director of CDC’s Injury Center. “We must focus on the underlying reasons for suicide and a comprehensive strategy to prevent them.”
While the issues are multi-faceted and not easily explained, Dr Gilbert’s argument is certainly persuasive. You can watch a video of him explaining some of his interesting ideas at Ted.com. The link is listed below.
Posted by Rebecca Sato
Related Galaxy posts:
Are Our Brains Hard-wired to Follow the “Golden Rule”?
Tomorrow's People
Great thoughts!
One of the best explanations of the myth of the American dream is Jessie O'Neill's book The Golden Ghetto. O'Neill comes from one of the most affluent families in the country and her candid assessment of the belief that money buys happiness is both insightful and instructive. I am often reminded of her comments.
Posted by: Joe Jordan | October 10, 2007 at 06:17 AM
Liked it... nothing's more strange than the emotional side of our minds; nostalgia, envy. Have to go play "Green" by Edie Brickell now.
Posted by: Mr. Bear | October 10, 2007 at 10:32 AM
Do we have any articles written by happy paupers to back this up? I'd comment more but I am busy managing my vast portolio. Buy! Sell! Buy! Sell! Money Money Boo-Bah!
Posted by: Model Millionaire | October 10, 2007 at 05:33 PM
Re: Happy paupers
Depends on your definition of pauper.
If you mean people so poor they cannot meet the basic needs for survival and security, I'll grant few are happy.
If you mean people who are awfully poor, but still have enough to eat, clothes, shelter, and reasonable security (no one is likely to shoot at them any time soon, for instance), many are happy.
There was a study done a couple decades ago (I can't remember who did it or what it was called, but I remember it was an academic study that seemed reliable).
Essentially, it found that, once basic needs are met, happiness is affected little by wealth. The study looked at many countries and adjusted for relative perceptions of wealth.
The stereotype that the simple and poor are happy and the rich are made miserable by thier wealth is ridiculous, of course. Across the spectrum, the ratio of happy/unhappy was about the same.
Another study (not as large by far) around that time looked at lottery winners. It found no correlation between new wealth and happiness. People who were unhappy before winning tended to be unhappy even years after after winnning. A few happy people became miserable, a few miserables became happy, but they bucked the trend.
That being said, I want more money and I want it now. A lot more.
Posted by: Pogo | October 18, 2007 at 06:42 PM