Via Greg Zwahlen at Beliefnet, check out "First Person Plural" by Paul Bloom, published in the November 2008 Atlantic. Bloom is a professor of psychology at Yale, and he is writing about happiness. But he is also writing about the nature of selves. He says,
We used to think that the hard part of the question "How can I be happy?" had to do with nailing down the definition of happy. But it may have more to do with the definition of I.
He also writes that scientists are struggling with the concept of self, since self is not something that can be pinned down physiologically. Some scientists say that a person is a collection of systems and subsystems that interact with each other, but there is no one spot in in our heads that is always "me." Others think something within us must be the chief executive in charge; they just haven't figured out what it is yet.
Bloom says he has given up on the idea there is just one self per head.
The idea is that instead, within each brain, different selves are continually popping in and out of existence. They have different desires, and they fight for control--bargaining with, deceiving, and plotting against one another.
This is starting to sound familiar (see "The Five Skandhas: An Introduction to the Aggregates").
The other part of Bloom's article that interested me is the revelation that what we think makes us happy and what really makes us happy are two different things. When people are asked to keep a diary to record when they feel happy and when they don't, it is revealed that what we think makes us happy (such as our children or going on vacation) are really more likely to cause stress. We're more likely to feel happy while working.
Every now and then some study will be published saying that one group of people is happier than another group of people, based on how happy people say they are. For example, recently someone published a study saying women are less happy now than they were 40 years ago. The study also said that women are now less happy than men.
I am skeptical. I think a lot of people, if asked if they are happy, will reflexively say they are because they think they are supposed to be. They may be angry, stressful and depressed, but bleep it, they are happy. In our culture, to admit one is not happy is to admit to being some kind of failure.
I think people who are able to admit they are not happy are not necessarily less happy; they are just more self-aware and honest. That's my hypothesis, anyway, and Bloom's article adds some support.
Yeah, I agree and happy people make crappy Buddhists.
We have talked over the years about how the dharma doesn’t really make people happy but does allow people to face their unhappiness. The sensei at the temple likes to say there is nothing there for happy people. Why should they even bother?
Ajahn Jayassaro on inner conflict experienced in practice.
There’s, Descartes, “Everything I Need To Know I learned In Kindergarten” and Star Trek.
I’ll go with Star Trek reiterating the the same question as a statement, “You are all so separate, so alone in your shell of flesh.” Who am I? Why am I me and not you? The conundrum is that there is no easily discernible commonality that each individual in this species can utilize to answer that question. If there are multitudes of me that trying to achieve happiness one me at a time, that effort will be a timeless austerity and that is why redefining “happy” could very well be the answer to subjectivity.
Most of us are raised to believe that happiness comes from achievement. If we can only get that next promotion, that bigger house, and that new luxury sedan, we would be happy. Is it any wonder the world is full of addiction and violence?
I think that when you talk about an abstraction such as “happiness” that it is appropriate to define as precisely as possible what you mean by happiness. After all, not everyone thinks about what “happiness” is all about. To a monk it may mean a simple and uncomplicated life whereas to someone who needs stimulation in their life, a struggle to reach the top of Mt. Everest may be in order. Moreover, a person will answer according to the mood they are in — at the moment. Buddhism helps one to turn a negative into a positive but how one struggles to attain it but the ego will still intrude if we say, “Hurray, I am egoless.” There are too many paradoxes in Buddhism and perhaps happiness is living in a world of paradoxes in which happiness is simply “no commitment.” Answers to abstractions can be very misleading. The question I would ask is, “Is it necessary to ask abstract question?”
One thing I am sure, searching for “happiness” is not happiness which I did throughout my life and still doing as a habit. An appreciation for my work, good increment, less conflict with colleagues, end of the day some chess with son and cracking jokes with wife, dancing to some music….none of them I can call happiness. Love, Happiness etc are something we try to know in comparison with earlier state or future state which never gives an idea of present state. But, sorrow/suffering touches us to the core. It gives such a threat to many things we posses from materials to health to feelings. The fear of loosing those haunts even during “pleasant” moments. Because we are programmed ourself in that way.
Our brain as I read somewhere left and right part conflicts most of the time. Contradictory information stored in our both sides of brain conflicts constantly. We are what we think is right in one sense. But, we think through conflicting perceptions stored in our brain. When it comes to action, some times some part wins. In a way…I think because “I am”…..This “I” is obviously “A group” as well because every time I think, I do a “group discussion” in my mind
Is happiness sustainable? If you can answer this question about your particular set of circumstances,you may realize that “happy and “sad” are relative terms.
Then I think you may be able to answer the ?.
Mike and Wayne said it well here. Can happiness exist when it is not in relation to unhappiness? I’ll go further. Humans thrive on hope, but can hope exist without fear?
Can you abandon hope?