 Superb
This is an outstanding book, offering a readable and highly sophisticated synthesis of ancient wisdom and modern science.
 An Atheist's Take on the Value of Religion in Happiness
I really enjoyed Haidt's book. But it's definitely an odd book. The first half reads like a survey of the latest findings from positive psychology. Haidt also clumsily integrates quotes from various religions and philosophers, which I found sort of gimmicky.
The second half, starting with the chapter on Virtue, is Haidt's grand thesis. What started out as gimmicky - Haidt's analysis of world religions with respect to modern psychology - is finally consummated. Haidt presents evolutionary psychology's understanding of religion (it arose to assist group selection) and argues that while religion is wrong insofar as it postulates absolutes, it is integral to human happiness insofar as it militates against the free-rider problem. So Haidt, who freely admits he believes God is purely a fictional construct of the mind, finds value in theism because it motivates people to act altruistically. This is quite interesting because most atheists usually dismiss religions as unnecessary to create a civil society. Haidt seems to make the opposite case.
In the end, though, I found Haidt's advocacy of religion to be reductionistic and paternalistic. It seems to me that you can get religion's community spirit through other avenues, like nationalism. If religion's central premise, there is more to existence than the physical word, is false, then religious belief is delusional. Second, I thought Haidt's attempt to bridge the gap between science and religion was really subsuming religion under science. It's like declaring truce and then slipping a shiv in the opponent's gut while you shake hands. It's not very intellectually honest. And third, and this is somewhat tangential, I thought Haidt's understanding of all world religions as basically about the same thing was reductionistic and incorrect. For instance, Haidt argues that all religions posit the essential divinity within all people. This is the case with many Eastern religions, but this is certainly not the case with the classic monotheistic religions. In fact, in Christianity, this is the essence of what is wrong with the world, that humanity tries illegitimately to grasp the divine prerogatives.
But overall, I really enjoyed Haidt's book. His prose was very conversational and he tried to seem fair to both sides. Best of all, I found his thesis thought-provoking and engaging.
Interesting and useful book beautifully presented by Haidt
This book may change my life. Haidt analyzes happiness on a biological and historical level that has changed the way I look at happiness and what it means to me. Though not an easy read, it's certainly readable for anyone willing to put thought behind their reading. I appreciated that he remained open minded to other ways of thinking and presented cultural and religious differences to help mount his hypothesis in a rational way. There didn't seem to be an agenda or magic thinking to convince the reader that he knew the secret to eternal joy. Yet, I seem to feel happier...
Trust Your Gut? By the end you'll know.
Excellent message. Trust your gut and then think it through to be sure. There's a lot more good stuff, but that's my favorite part.
Tao Cycle Therapy: Natural Happiness via Self Directed Cure for Chronic Anxiety & Depression [Updated 2008 3nd Edition]
This might become a classic---so much wisdom in so little space
The blurb on the front cover of this book is "For the reader who seeks to understand happiness, my advice is: begin with Haidt." I believe this assertion is exactly right. I have never read a single volume that summarized and wove into a coherent whole the variety of insights concerning human happiness that have been discovered by philosophers and religious gurus of the past and modern social psychologists. Moreover, this book is beautifully written, the exposition of various theories always taking a fresh viewpoint, however venerable the source. Finally, I think this book is a vigorous endorsement of modern social psychology, which beautifully complements and supplements the insights of the grand masters. I am generally critical of social psychology because it does not use the rational actor model and hence consists of a grab-bag of nano-insights with no structural core. But, this body of empirical findings contributes richly to our understanding of human happiness (the reference section of this book is truly a masterpiece, by the way).
Haidt claims there are ten great principles for understanding happiness, and he devotes a chapter to each. The first is the "divided self," we may be summarized as "Our minds are loose confederations of parts, but we identify with and pay too much attention to one part: conscious verbal thinking." (p. 22) Haidt analogizes our mind as a conscious rider on an unconscious elephant. The elephant mostly goes where it wants to go, although our conscious mind never gives up the illusion that it should not only be in the driver's seat, but have a powerful steering wheel. The references here are many, but typical are Freud's Ego vs. Superego/Id, emotional brain vs. rational brain, left vs. right brain and split-brain studies, and the like. This fact about mind is key to understanding happiness because an excessive preoccupation with conscious, volitional action tends to lead people to slight the actions they can take that have little immediate effect, but in the long run lead the elephant to move in ways more conducive to our emotional well-being. The rest of the book explains how this might be done.
Like many chapters of this book, Chapter 2, "Changing your Mind," is deeply paradoxical, or perhaps dialectical. The basic message is well stated in the quotes at the head of the chapter: "life itself is but what you deem it," (Marcus Aurelius) and "our life is the creation of our mind." (Buddha). Whereas it is very natural to think of our perceptions of our lives as real and external as the coffee cup on my table, in fact our perception and interpretation of our personal psychic and interpersonal lives is, in a deep way, personally constructed by our minds. This fact implies that different minds might very well perceive the same situation in very different ways, and this disjunction in perceptions can lead to conflicts that reduce the happiness of all parties and defy resolution because of the disputing parties' lack of insight into the subjective nature of their perceptions.
The dialectical nature of the principle of the "personal construction of reality" is that this construction is normally not conscious, but rather a deep mechanism controlled by the "elephant" over which the rider has virtually no control. It a deeply unsatisfying fact that we are basically incapable of seeing the world in any way other than the way we do, although we may achieve some liberation by recognizing this fact, and "going with the flow" (e.g., by accepting that family members and friends do not see the world as you do, they are not guilty of misperception, and you will not get them to perceive otherwise with sufficient effort on your part).
Haidt brings in a major finding from social psychology here: "happiness is one of the most highly heritable aspects of personality." (p. 33) This does not mean that our happiness cannot be affected by our actions, but the battle to do so is extremely difficult and likely to be only partially successful. This is perhaps why the book is about understanding happiness, not achieving happiness. Nowhere in the book does Haidt claim to offer you the key that will unlock the door to happiness. Rather, Haidt suggests three methods of actually improving our happiness: meditation, cognitive therapy, and Prozac. "All three are effective," he claims "because they work on the elephant." I concur with Haidt in this regard, and especially recommend psychopharmacology for those who remain unhappy after all the objective reasons for being unhappy have been addressed (e.g., a bad marriage, commuting two hour to work in traffic, or having your hand caught in a car door), as long as the side effects are not themselves debilitating.
Haidt's third principle is reciprocity, which he interprets as acting according to Kant's categorical imperative. He takes issue here mainly with those who believe that human intelligence developed in a Machiavellian manner to give big-brained individuals a personal advantage over others. Rather, he suggests, humans evolved to be predisposed to reciprocal behavior, both rewarding those who are nice and being vengeful towards those who are nasty. I am totally in agreement with Haidt that this is among the top insights needed to understand not just happiness, but human behavior in general.
Many thinkers trained in biology and economics believe that we are reciprocal not by nature, but from fear of retaliation for letting others down. Indeed, Haidt appears to believe that people will renege on their obligations unless social pressure can be brought against them, in the form of gossip (p. 55). "Gossip paired with reciprocity," he states, "allow karma to work here on earth."
Haidt's position here is a deep and unfortunate error. Gossip cannot explain reciprocity because unless gossipers have a moral preference for truth-telling, there is no reason for gossip to be accurate. Gossip is important because humans have a predisposition to reciprocal behavior, but does not explain reciprocal behavior. Strangely, for a book published in 2006, Haidt makes no reference to the results in behavioral game theory exhibiting altruistic cooperation and punishment even when there is no chance for being repaid in the future (I have called this "strong reciprocity," a phenomenon exhibited in the experiments of Ernst Fehr, Simon Gaechter, and others). Moreover, Haidt's treatment here is in contradiction to the main insight of Chapter 8, The Felicity of Virtue, which I discuss below.
The fourth principle is that we are more likely to see fault in others than in ourselves. This is of course a corollary to the principle that we construct our own reality, adding merely that we tend to do so in a way favorable to ourselves. This tendency terribly destructive of personal relations because it councils against compromising and lead to excessive levels of conflict and disputation, in which the other side is the personification of Evil, with which compromise is morally prohibited.
The fifth principle is that happiness does not lie in achieving outward goals, but rather inner psychic peace. According to Haidt's "progress principle," we only get pleasure by moving towards our external goals through having a succession of little successes, but attaining the goal is not a source of pleasure, as we quickly become used to our new state and bored with it. Haidt provides some excellent evidence for this principle, including the fact that lottery winners seem not to become happy with their new-found wealth, but rather within a short time revert to their pre-winning level of happiness. In addition, the average level of happiness in a country tends to stay the same even when the average income in the country triples over a period of time.
I have read all this evidence and plenty more, but I am not convinced. I know from personal experience that I never cease to get pleasure from attainments that I achieved long in the past, such as the ability to read a foreign language, the appreciation for the house that my wife and I built ourselves and live in every day, the level of skill I have achieved in various sports (all quite moderate, but plenty good enough for me), and so on. Moreover, I perceive that most of my friends and neighbors are the same. There is a sense of well-being of having attained a position that need never go away, and indeed, can become heighted continually over time.
I think Haidt here has relied too much on the social psychologists, when the truth was long ago asserted by the young Karl Marx, according to which humans have "slumbering capacities" (Gattungswesen), including physical, psychomotor, cognitive, affective, aesthetic, and spiritual power. Flourishing as a human being consists in developing these slumbering powers. The enemy here is material goods, which seem like the source of happiness, but are merely instruments we use in exercising our slumbering powers. This was the theme of my Ph.D. dissertation many years ago. Indeed, one of my head quotes was from the jazz musician Mose Allison, who said "Things are getting better and better; it's people I'm worried about."
This is a very dissatisfying chapter, to my mind, and completely wrong-headed. It should say that gratifications follow from the capacities we have developed to act in the world, and that material goods are valuable almost exclusively when they contribute to our exercise of personal powers. The lottery winner does not become happy because he has not developed any new personal capacities to which his new-found wealth might contribute. People who have developed their capacities do not "get used to" and hence devalue their material possessions.
The sixth chapter is an absolutely brilliant interweaving of ancient philosophy and modern social psychology on the importance of love in our lives. The seventh is a sensitive but rather inconclusive chapter arguing that we should see adversity as a challenge rather than an unmitigated evil. I am not convinced. The major adversities in my life have been unmitigated evils from which I gained nothing but grief. I suspect I am not alone.
The eighth chapter (and eighth principle), the Felicity of Virtue, is very important and well done. I would have placed it before the actual Chapter 4 because of its importance. Social scientists tend to think of sacrificing on behalf of others and on behalf of society as a personal cost that people undertake either because they are irrational or because they have moral values that lead them to devalue their own happiness in favor of other-regarding goals. By contrast, the ancient philosophers and theologians have generally taken it for granted that "virtue is its own reward;" that is, altruistic acts and virtuous behavior in general benefit not only those helped thereby, but the virtuous subject himself. According to this view, it is difficult to be virtuous because we are tempted by all sorts of short-term pleasures to forego such natural virtues as loyalty, honesty, courage, humility, and considerateness.
The felicity of virtue is particularly important because it gives us a much deeper understanding of the basic prosociality of human nature than the standard theories of philosophical ethics---the "duty" theories such as Kant's and the "utilitarian" theories such as Bentham's and Mill's. These theories try to determine what sorts of actions are ethically desirable, but give no reason why individuals should be moral at all. Virtue theories, by contrast, tend to argue that we know in hearts what is right and what is wrong, and we are happiest when we are capable of having our "elephant" carry out the right and the good as opposed to the wrong and the evil.
The ninth chapter (and principle) is a very nice exposition of the idea that we do not need to be believers in God to lead a meaningful and ethically fulfilled life. This seems more obvious to me than many other points in the book, but it may be useful for young non-believers who worry if the loss of belief implies the loss of meaning. The final chapter is a synthesis of the preceding that Haidt feels has been most useful in guiding his personal life.
The existential philosophy of life was once well expressed by Andre Gide: "Jette mon livre; dis-toi bien que ce n'est là qu'une des mille postures possibles en face de la vie. Cherche la tienne. Ce qu'un autre aurait aussi bien fait que toi, ne le fais pas. Ce qu'un autre aurait aussi bien dit que toi, ne le dis pas, -- aussi bien écrit que toi, ne l'écris pas. Ne t'attache en toi qu'à ce que tu sens qui n'est nulle part ailleurs qu'en toi-même, et crée de toi, impatiemment ou patiemment, ah! le plus irremplaçable des êtres." Thank God we have moved from the existential nonsense of my youth to the heartening wisdom displayed in this book. (The French means "Throw away my book. Understand that it is only one of a thousand ways to deal with life. Find your own. Whatever another could do as well as you, do not do. Whatever another could have said as well as you, do not say--have written as well as you, do not write. Only care about that within you that is nowhere other than within you, and create in you, patiently or impatiently, ah! the most irreplaceable of beings.")
|
