Recenzie — “Ipoteza fericirii” de Jonathan Haidt

https://uofuhealth.utah.edu/accelerate/img/connect/pendleton-elephant-rider-header.jpg

Am citit initial Mintea moralista de Jonathan Haidt, care explica destul de bine conceptul de moralitate si m-a ajutat sa inteleg daca am inclinatii conservatoare sau liberale, dar apoi am vazut ca in 2006 a scris o carte despre viata, fericire: Happines hypothesis.

Cartea este o introducere foarte buna in filosofie, dar modul de sumarizare a diverselor idei filosofice de-a lungul vremurilor ajuta foarte mult la intelegerea personala, la modul holistic de a vedea viata. Cartea e impartita in 10 “Great Ideas” si fiecare primeste un capitol, unul mai interesant decat celalalt. De multe ori am avut impresia ca o astfel de carte poate inlocui cu succes zeci de carti care ating cate un mic element. Aici pur si simplu avem toate lucrurile puse cap la cap: the big picture.

O sa incerc sa extrag ideile principale in special prin citate in limba engleza.

The divided self/Sinele impartit

• Toti ne spunem povesti si reducem/simplificam/metaforizam pentru a vizualiza procese complexe. Despre viata in sine: “We understand new or complex things in relation to things we already know. For example, it’s hard to think about life in general, but once you apply a metaphor “life is a journey” the metaphor guides you to some conclusions: You should learn the terrain, pick a direction, find some good companions, and enjoy the trip, because there may be nothing at the end of the road”
• Un aspect mai intim al autorului, dar care se regaseste/s-a regasit in multi dintre noi: “But it was during some larger life decisions, about dating, that I began to grasp the full extent of my powerlessness. I would know exactly what I should do, yet, even as I was telling my friends that I would do it, a part of me was dimly aware that I was not going to. Feelings of guilt, lust, or fear were often stronger than reasoning (On the other hand, I was quite good at lecturing friends in similar situations about what was right for them)”
• Nu poti fi inteligent fara emotie, fara un cadru emotional. Chiar nu poti functiona, devii handicapat, in special in urma unor traume puternice (stress post-traumatic de ex): “Human rationality depends critically on sophisticated emotionality. It is only because our emotional brains works so well that our reasoning can work at all. Plato’s image of reason as charioteer controlling the dumb beasts of passion may overstate not only the wisdom but also the power of the charioteer. The metaphor of a rider on an elephants reflects Damasio’s findings more closely: Reason and emotion must both work together to create intelligent behavior, but emotion (a major part of the elephant) does most of the work. When the neocortex came along, it made the rider possible, but it made the elephant much smarter, too.”
• Apoi scrie si despre binecunoscutul test al bezelei ( Marshmallow test) si explica puterea copiilor ce reuseau sa amane placerea pe termen scurt pentru beneficii mai mari mai tarziu printr-un mic efort de control al atentiei prin stimuli. Desi testul e experimental, poate conduce la ideea/regula de viata ca un control al reactiei la mediului cu care interactionezi sau alegerea mediului in care actionezi, poate conduce spre rezultate net superioare pe termen lung: “What was their secret? A large part of it was strategy — the ways that children used their limited mental control to shift attention. In later studies, Mischel discovered that the successful children were those who looked away from the temptation or were able to think about other enjoyable activities. These thinking skills are an aspect of emotional intelligence — an ability to understand and regulate one’s own feelings and desires…It’s hard for the controlled system to beat the automatic system by willpower alone … Once you understand the power of stimulus control, you can use it to your advantage by changing the stimuli in your environment and avoiding undesirable ones; or, if that’s not possible, by filling your consciousness with thoughts about their less tempting aspects.”

Changing your mind/Schimband gandirea

• O sinteza scurta dar destul de completa a depresiei. Pana si cel depresat poate fi de acord cu asta, cand este in afara starilor respective, sa reuseasca sa fie constient/sa observe: “Depressed people are convinced in their hearts of three related beliefs … :

1. “I’m no good”,
2. “My world is bleak” and
3. “My future is hopeless”.

A depressed person’s mind is filled with automatic thoughts supporting these dysfunctional beliefs, particularly when things goes wrong … The thought distortions were similar across patients that Beck gave them names: personalization (“I am a bad father”) over-generalization (“Why Am i always doing these terrible things”) combined with dichotomy “ always/never”, magnification (“Now she is going to have brain damage”) arbitrary inference (“Now everybody is going to hate me”).”

The fault of others/Vina celorlalti

• Egoismul face sens din punct de vedere evolutionist. Este sursa unitatii unui grup vs alt grup, motiveaza grupul sa castige contra celuilalt grup, a fost si poate este o strategie foarte eficient si inevitabila: “From a psychological perspective, Manicheism makes perfect sense. ‘Our world is the creation of our mind’ as Buddha said, and our minds evolved to play Machiavellian tit for tat. We all commit selfish and shortsighted acts, but our inner lawyer ensures that we do not blame ourselves or our allies for them. We are thus convinced of our own virtue, but quick to see bias, greed and duplicity in others. We are often correct about others’ motives, but as any conflict escalates we begin to exaggerate grossly, to weave a story in which pure virtue (our side) is in battle with pure vice (theirs)”
• 4 cauze ale violentei: lacomie/ambitie, sadism, self-esteem & idealism. Idealismul este cel mai destructiv pt ca uneste grupuri foarte mari de oameni impotriva altora.
• Un pasaj excelent despre “barna din ochiul propriu”, si un sfat practic de a trece peste acest lucru accesat de noi prea usor si instinctiv : ”A better place to start, as Jesus advised, with yourself and the log in your eye … And you will see the log only if you set up on a deliberate and effort-ful quest to look for it. Try this now: think of a recent interpersonal conflict with someone you care about and then find one way in which your behavior was not exemplary. Maybe you did something insensitive (even if you had the right to do it) or hurtful (even if you meant well) or inconsistent with your principles (even though you can readily justify it). When you first catch sight of a fault in yourself, you’ll likely hear frantic arguments from your inner lawyer excusing you and blaming others, but try not to listen. You are on a mission to find at least one thing you did wrong. When you extract a splinter it will hurt, briefly, but if you keep going and acknowledge the fault, you are likely to be rewarded with a flash of pleasure that is mixed, oddly, with a hint of pride. It is the pleasure of taking responsibility for your own behavior. It is the feeling of honor. Finding fault with yourself is also the key to overcoming the hypocrisy and judgmental-ism that damage so many valuable relationships. The instant you see some contribution you made to a conflict, your anger softens — maybe just a bit, but maybe just enough that you might be able to acknowledge some merit on the other side”

The pursuit of happiness/Cautarea fericirii

• Exista si o ecutie a fericirii pentru cei mai tocilari: H = S + C+ V, H = happiness, S = set point (unii oameni se nasc mai optimisti si deci au un punct de plecare mai norocos. Cele 3 metode de crestere a S sunt in opinia lui Haidt: meditatia, terapia si medicamentatia). V = activitati voluntare
• Partea interesant din punctul meu de vedere este C = conditiile, mediul care influenteaza starea de bine, de satisfactie, de fericire. Elementele identificate de Haidt sunt: Zgomotul (evident e de redus), Naveta la locul de munca, Lipsa de control, Rusinea, Relatiile. Despre relatii: ”conflicts in relationships — having an annoying office mate or roommate or having chronic conflict with your spouse — is one of the surest ways to reduce your happiness. You never adapt to interpersonal conflict, it damages you everyday, even days when you don't see the other person but ruminate about the conflict nonetheless”.

Love and attachments/Dragostea si atasamentele

• Alte sectiuni foarte interesante in carte: despre casatorie si efectele benefice, despre dragostea pasionala (short-term) si dragostea companion (long-term), teoria lui Durkheim despre “anomie”

The uses of adversity/Utilitatea adversitatii

• Capitolul 7 din carte este preferatul meu si este despre adversitate si gestionarea adversitatii. Mi se pare important pt ca adversitatea si reactia noastra la ce ni se intampla advers defineste o mare parte a timpului nostru ulterior, a modului de gandire si definire a personalitatii.
• Urmatorul citat sumarizeaza destul de concis si pragmatic seriozitatea intalnirii adversitatii: “Because human beings were shaped by evolutionary processes to pursue success, not happiness, people enthusiastically pursue goals that will help them win prestige in zero-sum competitions. Success in these competitions feels good but gives no lasting pleasure, and it raises the bar for future success. When tragedy strikes, however, it knocks you off the treadmill and forces a decision: hop back on and return to business as usual, or try something else? There is a window of time — just a few weeks or months after the tragedy — during which you are more open to something else. During this time, achievement goals often lose their allure, sometimes coming to seem pointless. If you shift toward other goals — family, religion, helping others — you shift to inconspicuous consumption and the pleasures derived along the way are not fully subject to adaptation (treadmill) effects. The pursuit of these goals therefore leads to more happiness but less wealth (on average). Many people change their goals in the wake of adversity; they resolve to work less, to love and play more. If in the first few months you take action — you do something that changes your daily life — then the changes might stick. But if you do nothing more than make a resolution (“I must never forget my new outlook on life”), then you will soon slip back into old habits and pursue old goals. The rider can exert some influences at forks in the road; but the elephant handles daily life, responding automatically to the environment. Adversity may be necessary for growth because it forces you to stop speeding along the road of life, allowing you to notice the paths that were branching off all along, and to think about where you really want to end up.”
• In restul capitolului, Haidt sublinieaza cum reactionam la adversitate in functie de natura noastra prin accesarea urmatoarelor 3 reactii: reactie activa, reevaluare sau evitare. Evident reactia activa si reevaluarea sunt indicate si de dorit si sunt accesate in primul rand de optimisti. Pesimistii, sunt ghinionistii loteriei genetice si tind spre evitare. Principalul sfat pentru pesimisti este sa scrie ce continuu foarte serios despre adversitate/drama si sa raspunda sincer si serios de ce s-a intamplat si ce s-a invatat din asta.
• Se pare ca sunt studii si despre momentul optim pentru adversitate si anume la finalul adolescentei si inceputul decadei 20 de varsta. Dupa 30 esti mai putin rezistent si mai putin probabil sa cresti personal din intalnirea unei adversitati.

The felicity of virtue/Bucuria virtutii

• Despre intelepciune, un alt pasaj excelent: “Wisdom, says Sternberg, is the tacit knowledge that lets a person balance two sets of things. First, wise people are able to balance their own needs, the needs of others, and the needs of people or things beyond the immediate interaction (e.g. institutions, the environment, or people who may be adversely affected later on). Ignorant people see everything in black and white — they rely heavily on the myth of pure evil — and they are strongly influenced by their own self-interest. The wise are able to see things from others’ point of view, appreciate shades of gray, and then choose or advise a course of action that works out best for everyone in the long run. Second, wise people are able to balance three responses to situations: adaptation (changing the self to fit the environment), shaping (changing the environment), and selection (choosing to move to a new environment). This second balance corresponds roughly to the famous “serenity prayer”: “God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference”. If you already know this prayer, your rider knows it (explicitly). If you live by this prayer, your elephant knows it, too (tacitly), and you are wise.”
• Reaminteste de virtutiile de nivel inalt enuntate de Peterson si Seligman: intelepciune, curaj, umanitate, justitie, temperare si transcendenta
• Obsesia noastra cu reciprocitatea (care este totusi efect al evolutiei) conduce, in special la copii, dar si la adulti la ideea de justitiei inerente naturii umane, care se manifesta in special in fata adversitatii: De ce mi se intampla mie Doamne?

Divinity with or without God/Divinitate cu sau fara Dumnezeu

• Mircea Eliade este reamintit in carte din prisma teoriei desacralizarii societatii vestice. Haidt (evreu ateu) are un capitol intreg dedicat ideii ca o mare parte a implinirii umane este sa facem parte din ceva mai mare decat noi. Religia se pare ca este fenomenul cel mai la indemana pentru a realiza acest lucru: “Eliade says that modern West is the first culture in human history that has managed to strip time and space of all sacredness and to produce a fully practical, efficient and profane world. This is the world that religious fundamentalists find unbearable and are sometimes willing to use force to fight against. Eliade’s most compelling point, for me, is that sacredness is so irrepressible that it intrudes repeatedly into modern profane world in the form of “crypto-religious” behavior. Eliade noted that even a person committed to a profane existence has “privileged places, qualitatively different from others — a man’s birth place, or the scenes of his first love, or certain places in the first foreign city he visited in his youth. Even for the most frankly nonreligious man, all these places still retain an exceptional, a unique quality; they are the “holy places” of his private universe, as if it were in such spots that he received the revelation of a reality other than that in which he participates through his ordinary daily life”. When I read this, I gasped. Eliade has perfectly pegged my feeble spirituality, limited as it is to places, books, people, and events that have given me moments of uplift and enlightenment. Even atheists have intimations of sacredness, particularly when in love or in nature. We just don’t infer that God caused those feelings”
• Tot legat de nevoia de a face parte din ceva mai mare, Haidt scrie despre emotia evlaviei, veneratiei (“awe” in engleza): “Awe is the emotion of self-transcendence. … the emotion of awe happens when 2 conditions are met: A person perceives something vast (usually physically vast, but sometimes conceptually vast, such as a grand theory; or socially vast, such as great fame and power); and the vast thing cannot be accommodated by the person’s existing mental structures. Something enormous can’t be processed and when people are stumped, stopped in their cognitive tracks while in the presence of something vast, they feel small, powerless, passive and receptive. They often (although not always) feel fear, admiration, elevation or a sense of beauty as well. By stopping people and making them receptive, awe created an opening for change, and this is why awe plays a role in most stories of religious conversion”
• Tot la capitolul despre religie, Haidt identifica egoismul (mandria) ca principalul inamic al religiilor, care impiedica omul sa inainteze in progresul spiritual: “Leary’s analysis shows why the self is a problem for all major religions. The self is the main obstacle to spiritual advancement in 3 ways: 1st, the constant stream of trivial concerns and egocentric thoughts keeps people locked in the material and profane world, unable to perceive sacredness and divinity. This is why Eastern religions rely heavily on meditation, an effective way of quieting the chatter of the self. 2nd, spiritual transformation is essentially the transformation of the self, weakening it, pruning it back — in some sense killing it — and often the self objects. Give up my possessions and the prestige they bring? No way! Love my enemies after what they did to me? Forget about it. And 3rd, following a spiritual path is invariably hard work, requiring years of meditation, prayer, self-control and sometimes self-denial. The self does not like to be denied, and it is adept at finding reasons to bend the rules or cheat. Many religions teach that egoistic attachments to pleasure and reputation are constant temptations to leave the path of virtue. In a sense, the self is Satan, or, at least, Satan’s portal.”

Happiness comes from between/Fericirea vine din echilibru

• Un alt moment de intimitate din partea autorului, dar care cred ca este comun multor alti oameni in anumite perioade ale vietii si anume inutilitatea vietii, care este scopul?. Haidt spune: “I spent the winter of my senior year in a kind of philosophical depression — not a clinical depression, just a pervasive sense that everything was pointless … I finally escaped when, after a week of thinking about suicide (in the abstract, not as plan) I turned the problem inside out. There is no God and no externally meaning of life, I thought, so from one perspective it really wouldn’t matter if I killed myself tomorrow. Very well, then everything beyond tomorrow is a gift with no strings and no expectations. There is no test to hand at the end of life, so there is no way to fail. If this is really or there is, why not embrace it, rather than throw it away? I don’t know whether this realization lifted my mood or whether an improving mood helped me to re-frame the problem with hope; but my existential depression lifted and I enjoyed the last months of high school”
• Un pasaj excelent despre aspecte foarte importante ale vietii, pentru ca ambele pot reprezenta un mare nivel de stress daca nu sunt abordate pro-activ: “If people are like plants, what are the conditions we need to flourish? In the happiness formula in Chapter 5, H (Happiness) = S (Setpoint) + C (Conditions) + V (Voluntary activities), what exactly is C? The biggest part of C as I said in Chapter 6 is love. No man, woman or child is an island. We are ultrasocial creatures, and we can’t be happy without friends and secure attachments to other people. The second most important part of C is having and pursuing the right goals, in order to create states of flow and engagement. In the modern world, people can find goals and flow in many settings, but most people find most of their flow in work ( … student and full-parent are (also) good answers). Love and work are, for people, obvious analogues to water and sunshine for plants. When Freud was asked what a normal person should be able to do well, he is reputed to have said “Love and work”
• Apoi despre munca, o sumarizare foarte buna care te poate face sa te gandesti unde esti acum in cariera, unde te indrepti, ce iti doresti. Haidt vede munca mult mai acceptabil decat Christensen de exemplu care o vede fie ca pe o cariera sau chemare, componenta de “just a job” cred ca este intr-adevar foarte nociva: nu poti petrece 40 de ore pe saptamana intr-un loc doar cu gandul ca trebuie sa o faci si ca ai “hobbies” sau ca ai o familie de crescut:

“More recent research finds that most people approach their work in one of three ways: as a job, a career, or a calling.

If you see your work as a job, you do it only for the money, you look at the clock frequently while dreaming about the weekend ahead, and you probably pursue hobbies, which satisfy your effectance needs more thoroughly that does your work.

If you see your work as a career, you have larger goals of advancement, promotion, and prestige. The pursuit of these goals often energize you, and you sometimes take work home with you because you want the job done properly. Yet, at times, you wonder why you work so hard. You might occasionally see your work as a rat race where people are competing for the sake of competing.

If you see your work as a calling, however, you find your work intrinsically fulfilling — you are not doing it to achieve something else. You see your work as contributing to the greater good or as playing a role in some larger enterprise the worth of which seem obvious to you. You have frequent experience of flow during the work day, and you neither look forward to “quiting time” nor feel the desire to shout “Thank God it’s Friday!” You would continue to work, perhaps even without pay, if you suddenly become very healthy”

Urmatorul citat este concluzia cartii pentru mine si anume ca viata este despre cum gestionezi relatiile, munca si acel ceva mai mare decat tine, care impreuna pot da sens vietii: “It is worth striving to get the right relationships between yourself and others, between yourself and your work, and between yourself and something larger that yourself. If you get these relationships right, a sense of purpose and meaning will emerge”

In engleza cartea am gasit-o la Carturesti, iar in romana la editura Amaltea, dar pare o editie foarte veche si negasibila. Sper ca o editura o va republica pentru ca este o carte foarte buna comparativ cu alte carti de self-help, care par ca doar ajuta autorul sa vanda carti.

Happiness Hypothesis

TEORIA FERICIRII - Editura Amaltea