Read: The Happiness Hypothesis

It is estimated that 50-80% of the variance in happiness from person to person is a result of their genetics, and only the remainder is a function of how good or bad their environment is. I think I probably got dealt a not terrible but slightly below average hand on the baseline happiness level.

He talks about the brain with the analogy of a person riding and trying to steer an elephant. Where the person represents our logical rational mind and the elephant is our instincts and deep seated emotions. Contrary to how people feel, he says it’s actually closer to the elephant controlling the person, where no rational mind will do what it wants, and then the rider becomes the elephant’s lawyer, making justifications for what the elephant wants to do.

When faced with a decision, people usually have an inclination about it (take raising the minimum wage) and then they look for reasons to support that position. When they find something to support it, there minds turn off. People naturally have no inclination to seek out contradictory evidence.

People’s reasoning is even worse when it is motivated. People given different sides of a court case and then asked to negotiate an agreement were much less reasonable and more likely to be unable to come to an agreement than those who read the court case before being given their side.

Interestingly, people have more accurate perceptions of others than they do of themselves. People over estimate their own skills, moral qualities, and value, but are generally fairly accurate when asked to predict people as a whole. 

Studies show that people who do acts of abject evil, from spousal abuse to rape to genocide, rarely think that what they’re doing is evil. They see themselves as responding to provocations in a justified manner, often seeing themselves as the victim. This is one of the reasons the first goal of evangelism is to convince people they aren’t good. Unfortunately, his main conclusion from this topic was that “pure evil” is a myth.

Because of the biases that people have thinking what they do is fine, it is very difficult follow Jesus’ admonition to take the log out of our own eye first. In conflicts the author suggests trying to find one thing you did wrong, and ignoring the mind lawyer’s justifications for that action. 

After 4 chapters of analyzing the brain, chapter 5 finally begins a discussion on happiness. 

The adaption principle: Within a year lottery winners and paraplegics have mostly returned to their baseline happiness level.  We are sensitive to change in conditions in determining our happiness much more so than the absolute quality of our conditions. Buddhism sees this and tells me to stop striving for anything and just exist or whatever, Christianity warns of the love of money that is never satisfied. 

However, there are some environmental changes that do contribute to lasting happiness. Marriage does, being religious does, and having strong social ties does. A 65 year old with health problems and living off social security who is married and has strong ties to her church will be happier than a 35 year old guy making $100K but who is a single intellectual who reads all the time. 

Levels of power, status, freedom, health, and sunshine are all subject to the adaptive principle. More attractive people are not on average happier than uggos. People in good climates aren’t happier than those in bad, consistent chronic health conditions are adjusted to. Wealth does not really increase happiness after you get above the poverty line. 

Some environmental things can lastingly harm happiness without ever being adapted to. Noise, particularly intermittent noise. So avoid living near an interstate or traffic light. Bad commutes are lastingly negative. You can significant improvement your happiness long term by living nearer work even in a smaller house. Lack of a feeling of being in control can negatively impact (applicable to the elderly in particular). Bad relationships with coworkers or spouses are never adapted to. 

Pleasures like food and sex cause an increase in happiness that fades very quickly after the enjoyment is over. And they should not be overindulged in. Pleasures should be savored and varied to maximize enjoyment and avoid adaption. 

Participating in things that challenge you in areas you are good at or care about can improve mood for hours after the event. I think of playing sports for me personally here, or vigorous debate.

Joyously, the author described his change from expecting the Buddha to be the best psychologist, to realizing that there are actions and things we can do to improve happiness and just detachment doesn’t maximize our lives. 

Strong social bonds are beneficial for everyone. Introverts who are forced to be outgoing find their mood is boosted. Lack of social bonds is a great predictor for suicide likelihood.

Its chapter on morality was interesting. Secular of course, but it had some interesting data, such as that helping others, volunteering, etc, causes people to be happier, and even have health benefits like living longer.  It also had an interesting contrast between the way morality was taught of old, focusing on virtues: wisdom, courage, justice, temperance, etc, and the way morality is taught today, focusing on rationally analyzing individual decision to determine the “moral” course of action. Early America honored the virtues of producers: hard work, self-restraint, sacrifice for the future, but with the rise of consumerism a view of the self centered on personal fulfillment arose. Also, inclusiveness killed virtue. America has experienced a huge shrinking of moral ideas that everyone agrees with. Society needs homogeneity in moral values.

People who view their work as a calling enjoy it far more than those who view it as a job or career. They enter “flow” states more and don’t spend as much time looking at the clock.