Help
Sign In
happiness
May 2009 
Why are zealots so happy?
~C4Chaos
(Crossposted from www.c4chaos.com)
I'm in agreement with Arthur Brooks' post, The Politics of Happiness (Part 5), on the Freakonomics blog. Here's the relevant quote:
"So why are the zealots so happy? Many readers of my last post suggested that there is a tremendous amount of comfort — even happiness— in total certainty. I think this interpretation is right, and applies to fundamentalists of every stripe.
"The troubling characteristic about fundamentalists is that those who don’t agree with them are not just wrong, but maybe even evil. Many religions and creeds encourage the dehumanization of apostates, after all." [read more]
Zealotry is zealotry, whether be it political or religious. The higher the position and the more power wielded by people with 100% certainty on things, the more potential harm they pose to society. That's why politics in a democratic society is extremely hard. Moderate politicians still need to appeal to the extremists on both ends of the Left and Right. Even Integral "Third-Way" politics won't cut it. It seems that our political climate is stuck at this level of polarity at this time.
On the personal side of things, my take away on the this topic is that: Happiness, although desirable, is highly overrated. From the perspective of psychological development, happiness is not the ultimate goal, but a signpost. Just like all human emotions, happiness is temporal. And there are levels of happiness too, depending on our level of psychological development. Happiness evolves as our consciousness and moral compass evolve.
So the next time we feel happy with our certainty, let's go and bask in our happiness for a while, and then let's remember that Divine discontent is what drives our growth, not the complacency of bliss.
That said, check out this lecture by Shawn Achor on the Science of Happiness and Potential. Thanks to Integral Options Cafe for the heads up!
Access: Public
I do think there is a connection between discontentment and questioning, and also between discontentment and creatively seeing possibilities. This translates as unhappy people are more motivated to ask new questions and to seek new answers. Of course, there is a point of too much discontentment and unhappiness that shuts the mind down.
Here is a nice dialogue between Steven Pinker and Martin Seligman.
http://www.slate.com/?id=2072079&entry=2072402
I've read one of Seligman's books. His view is that human choice is greater than genetics. The limitation of his writing is that its basically pop psychology and its only moderately backed up by research. One thing I remember is that pessimists have a more realistic perception of reality, but optimists have more ability to create a different future. Its funny that the optimists delusion is what makes them effective, but you don't want to ask them for objective understanding. On the other hand, the pessimist knows precisely what is going on, but doesn't know how or feel capable of changing it. (Interestingly, I'm a depressed person and I value the straight truth more than anything including happiness… which conforms to this view.)
However, despite the pessimist's useful ability to see reality clearly, Seligman believes that everyone should strive to be optimistic. He does concede that society needs a few pessimists to ground the optimists' vision. But, as I remember, he seems to optimistically think that the strengths of pessimism can be carried over into a more optimistic attitude.
Steven Pinker comes at it from a pure scientific perspective. He limits himself to what the research says. And his book isn't meant as inspirational writing. I haven't read his book, but I have recently come across some of the research done on happiness. Here is an interesting one:
http://www.psych.umn.edu/psylabs/happness/happy.htm
Happiness is a Stochastic Phenomenon
David Lykken and Auke Tellegen
University of Minnesota
Psychological Science Vol.7, No. 3, May 1996
Abstract
“Happiness or subjective wellbeing was measured on a birth-record based sample of several thousand middle-aged twins using the Well Being (WB) scale of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ). Neither socioeconomic status (SES), educational attainment, family income, marital status, nor an indicant of religious commitment could account for more than about 3% of the variance in WB. From 44% to 53% of the variance in WB, however, is associated with genetic variation. Based on the retest of smaller samples of twins after intervals of 4.5 and 10 years, we estimate that the heritability of the stable component of subjective wellbeing approaches 80%.”
Marmalade said: “One thing I remember is that pessimists have a more realistic perception of reality, but optimists have more ability to create a different future. Its funny that the optimists delusion is what makes them effective, but you don't want to ask them for objective understanding.”
i think it's more accurate that both pessimists and optimists co-create a different future. it's the dance of their attitudes that gives direction to creation. for example, in the scientific field, skepticism improves the expriments and research. note that i'm loosely equating pessimism with skepticism here but that's not always the case.
another thing is i don't necessarily equate happiness with optimism. people can be optimist without being happy, they can be in a state of serenity.
thanks for the links. will check them out :)
wishing you happiness and serenity.
~C
I have to go here, but I wanted to post this part of my response. I'll respond more later.
“another thing is i don't necessarily equate happiness with optimism. people can be optimist without being happy, they can be in a state of serenity.”
In Seligman's book Learned Optimism, he said he did research that showed a correlation between the two. Of course, he preferred to interpret that it was optimism that determined happiness. But the opposite could be true or their could be a third factor causing both(genetics, envrionment, etc). Then again, his whole research might be biased.
“i think it's more accurate that both pessimists and optimists co-create a different future. it's the dance of their attitudes that gives direction to creation. for example, in the scientific field, skepticism improves the expriments and research. note that i'm loosely equating pessimism with skepticism here but that's not always the case.”
Yeah. I can't say how much these terms overlap. There is some similarity between pessimism and depression, and between pessimism and skepticism. But these aren't identical terms nor the relationship between them direct.
When I was mentioning pessimism as being more 'realistic' I was referring to research that Seligman mentioned in his book. If you're interested in it, he speaks about several research papers about this in chapter 6 in Learned Optimism. Actually, Seligman is the only book I've read about this, and so my knowledge is limited. Your blog post has made me curious to look at what other more recent research may be saying.