Category Archives: happiness

Stuff Addiction II

I haven’t posted anything in my happiness category for a long time, isn’t that sad?

One of those postings is about a syndrome I named stuff addiction. News on that front. It might be worse than I thought:

the brain systems for liking and wanting are separate. … a drug like nicotine produces much craving but little pleasure.

A good advertisment induces craving. Golly, the distinction between use and signal value runs deep.

That’s from a Sunday supplement article on happiness research that appeared in the Times of London. That’s light and fun to read.

One teaser in the article is the mention of a 100 “interventions” for building happiness; and even that 40 of these have now undergone at least some clinical testing.

Not that these interventions would necessarily be fun in and of themselves. This frightening one is outlined:

A third technique involves writing a long letter to someone you’re grateful to but have never properly thanked, and visiting them to read it out in person.

Seligman and his graduate students weep tears of joy when they do this exercise, but most Brits would probably rather be miserable than do it.

Same in New England I suspect. Thank goodness! That one’s not particularly effective.

These get higher marks:

In one internet study, two interventions increased happiness and decreased depressive symptoms for at least six months. One exercise involves writing down three things that went well and why, every day for a week. The other is about identifying your signature strengths and using one of them in a new and different way every day for a week.

Of course what’s the point of a Sunday supplement if your not selling something.

Seligman speculates that doing more exercises for longer would bring greater benefits. Hundreds of thousands of people have registered with his website www.reflectivehappiness.com – where, for $10 a month, they are given a happiness programme including instruction in a package of positive exercises.

Cheaper than cable!

Professional Grade Humor

A friend of mine floated a cool idea regarding humor. We all know that humor comes in various species: irony, farce, slapstick, etc. etc. But we lack a scale of how skilled a bit of humor is. There is a world of difference between the appropriate bit of humor inserted into a cocktail party and the art of finding the humorous thing to say in the midst of a funeral.

Humor, like enthusiasm, is not self-moderating. A classroom of high school students can trivially be drawn into an escalating chain reaction. It’s ironic; teachers who labor to nurture wit find it necessary to quench even the slightest fission of humor because their charges are such ill-trained humorists.

Of course all emotions run the risk of running off into exaggerated forms. Stress, panic, depression, etc. etc. The wonder of humor is its ability to call them back down out of the stratosphere. It’s a high art of getting it just right. A skill we have all observed in talented people around us. Injecting just the right bit of wit into a situation, diffusing at least a portion of the escalating emotions.

If this talent had a name you could put on a job description! Awards could be granted: “Best pun used in an IRS audit.” High school councilors could advise students join the guild. An international society could be formed. States could grant and revoke licenses. Weighty text books and complimentary multi-media virtual world educational games could be sold at great cost to state school boards.

out sourcing sympathy

Phil Greenspun wrote a satirical posting on why it’s ok not to care about other people troubles. His self amused argument is that in the Modern world such work can be left to specialists.

Modern, aka Urban, life is all about residing in numerous communities. If you buy into my two part model of communities (That they stand on three legs and generally have a limited liablity for their extent.) Then Phil’s strawman can be reframed as one’s duty to other members of a community is limited to that which is within the liablity scope of that particular community.

Phil’s posting is amusing because of it’s exagerated nature. Few communities are very formality about their limited liablity contract. In fact it may well be a sign of a scam in progress when a community becomes exacting about it.

Why exactly am I expected to be sympathetic to a coworker who’s not feeling well? Is that work part of the community social contract of the workplace? Possibly not, more likely it’s part of the social contract of some larger community we both inhabit.

Sometime ago a friend of mine suffered a horrible event. It laid waste to a major aspect of their life. Discussing it, a long after the fact one aspect of the story struck me. People in other spheres of this person’s life had no idea.

It was just like the sailor with two wives, two families, in two ports recieving word of the distruction of his other home. People would have idea what to make of his mood. If he told them their first reaction would be “Gee! I never knew you had another life.” In part their reaction included an element of “Oh, I thought your loyalities lay elsewhere.”

Modern life’s advantage is that it provides a diversified portfolio. Diversifited portofolios only work well if your willing to dump parts of the portfolio.

Resignation

To the untravelled, territory other than their own familiar heath is invariably fascinating. Next to love, it is the one thing which solaces and delights. Things new are too important to be neglected, and mind, which is a mere reflection of sensory impressions, succumbs to the flood of objects. Thus lovers are forgotten, sorrows laid aside, death hidden from view. There is a world of accumulated feeling back of the trite dramatic expression–“I am going away.” – Theodore Dreiser in Sister Carrie

I like that my first day with the current employer was Halloween of 1999; and my last day in the office will be Friday the 13th. Four years, shorter than my usual time per employer; I’m such a homebody!

Now the recreation of looking for a new gig; suggestions welcome. I’m particularly interested in working on systems that help small entities leverage the internet – in quantity. email: bhyde at pobox . com

Paradox of Choice

The library’s copy of Paradox of Choice has gotten around to me. I’m bummed that I didn’t learn very much. I guess, I know too much about modern marketing. Good news, there is one very amusing item, a joke, about half way through.

But first, a story. In the 1950s Herb Simon at CMU passed an insight from one side of campus to the other.

He was working on Artificial Intelligence, building computer programs to play games. If you write such programs you quickly discover that your human opponents wander off before your software has time to pick the best move. To keep them engaged you’d better make some compromises.

Simon passed this insight to the folks over the business school; where the insight evolved into the idea that economic entities (firms, business men) rarely, if ever, seek the best outcome.  Instead economic actors make trade-offs just like the AI programs.  E.g. they seek satisfactory outcomes rather than the best outcomes.

At it’s core the Paradox of Choice is a joke of the two guys walk into a bar kind.  The world is made up of those two kinds of people: the maximizers and the satisfiers. Maximizers spend more resources on getting the best possible outcome and satisfiers don’t. The joke is on the Maximizers. They do tend to archive their goal, accumulating more than the satisfiers, but ironically they are never satisfied. Depression is highly correlated with maximizing behavior.

And this is the books’ key insight – you can make somebody miserable by converting them into a Maximizer.

You do this by presenting them with more choices. That encourages a switch in their behavior from happy satisfier to depressed maximizer. It’s a denial of service attack on the problem solving mechanism.

Remember: “marketing is war” and “planning is what you do to avoid action.”

Complaining

Wonderful and amusing BBC discussion of complaining as a cultural aspect in a British bank. (Click on the Listen again link.)

One thing I find amusing about this was that the researcher was an American. My impression has always been that the British have raised complaining into a national art form, a sport. This sport is best played with a pint in one hand. It’s name is whinging. American’s tend to be suspicious about all that. While meanwhile others tend to be quite suspicious about the enthusiastic nature of American attitudes.

He mentions, at least two kinds of complaining. Deprication – complains about which nothing is expected to happen. These are good for getting everybody together on the same page and provide something to talk about. Derogation – complains about which something should obviously happen but framed in a manner to assure it’s unlikely. This avoids offending those who might do something.

The tail end of the show has a nice enumeration of what makes people happy in the job. Nothing very surprising; but always good to have another list.

  • Control over one’s work.
  • Working for customers or coworkers.
  • Control over small details in the work.
  • Minimization of hierarchtical control.
  • Higher pay, particularly relatively.
  • Rank
  • Achievements relative to one’s asperations.
  • Smaller rather than larger firms.
  • Women are happier than men.

In Britian the blue collar workers are happier than the white collar ones.