We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Samizdata quote of the day Surveys about happiness also show that people say they are happier when they feel their circumstances are improving. They are less likely to profess happiness in a wealthy society that is static than in a less rich society which is advancing. It is the improvement which counts, not the actual level. Jefferson rightly pointed to “the pursuit of happiness” rather than to any given level of it.
Humans are not the sort to enjoy static contentment. They seek challenges and the thrill of achievement. The peaceful calm of the Lotos Eaters is not for them, and neither are the sheep-pen and the secure pasture. Those who think of happiness as needs satisfied fail to spot that those needs include challenge and change. Humans are aspirational, seeking much more than the provision of necessities. Better a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied.
– Madsen Pirie reaches 39 in his Common Errors series at the ASI Blog (he has today reached 42)
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
http://blog.mises.org/archives/007805.asp
in the above, a Legotown “lesson” that robs kids of a chance to achieve happiness (which as this fabulous quote says, is mostly in the process and chance to become better off – and not so much in getting there)
http://www.happiness-project.com/happiness_project/2007/09/begin-your-happ.html
Then there’s those who make happiness a dedication:
“do you ever get the feelin’ that … ya, I do … oh, I see … it looks open, but it’s not … it professes thought, but’s not … happier in wondering though, for there’s no bliss in knowing.” from Cat That Could, good food to masticate
Not directly related amdittedly, but our glorious guv have announced another happiness clampdown- on the internet. No more the guilty pleasures of bittorrent for us in the panopticon. The man in charge of this legislation? One Andy Burnham, another classic non-jobber (Uni, “parliamentary researcher”, parliamnetary officer for a crat pressure group, safe labour seat, cabinet) with a Wonka degree (English, Cambridge). So clearly an expert on the internets then.
Sorry, just had to tell somebody in my state of impotent fury.
Here is an antidote to TomG’s
Happiness Project…
Hopefully.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhqlmdrk5Ns
Studies have shown that we determine the value of our accomplishments relative to those of our peers, rather than as a function of our absolute income level – see Alan Greenspan’s discussion on pp. 269-270 of his book, “The Age of Turbulence”
He contends that what people spend or save has to do with their income relative to others (subsistence spending isn’t factored in here.)
I’m not sure how exactly this may help explain Dr. Pirie’s comments, but it does seem suggestive to me.
Humans are status-seeking creatures. We evolved in ridgedly heirarchical small bands. We had essentially no possessions. All we had was our place within the group. It is natural, then, to strive for status and to value it.
Generally, national happiness increases with income until a base level is reached. It varies, but it’s roughly $5000/year or so. To my mind, that pays for food, clothing, shelter, electricity, and modest education for children. These are absolute measures of wealth, safety, security, and comfort.
Above the happiness plateau, my guess is that most of the money is spent to signal status or to compete for it. Status is a zero-sum game: s/he who wins beats s/he who loses. Additional income brings no happiness because there’s no perceived absolute increase.
Joshua, really – I hope you meant $ 50,000.00/annum. No one gets by on $5k a year contendedly … there’s no ‘happiness’ in the constant stress arena of having to compare food and clothing prices *not* for what looks great on ya and up to style, but for adequacy. What’s not being discussed here – and wouldn’t – is that there’s relative levels of happiness, which truly means totally different definitions of it. Yes, there’s subsistence happiness that brings one a bit above the level of a cave dweller/park bench sleeper; and then there’s those content enough to afford an occasional family outing at a local restaurant; and then their are those worry-free enough to take a couple of vacations a year to hot spots and still sock away a good savings for kids’ colleges and comfortable retirement; and then there’s those who have never known a material worry (one could argue that these don’t even know happiness – which could require experiential knowledge of contrast). And of course ‘being happy’ is a subjective term much like the work ‘value’ – and not really quantifiable. But just because one sees a photo of smiling kids, for a camera, on some dirt farm setting doesn’t mean they’re ‘happy’ – don’t we know that already?
Aristotle discussed happiness a few thousand years ago, and decided it was a process of exercising and fulfilling the “human” aspects of our lives, not merely satisfying the animal needs we share with all the primates.
Hence, if one wishes to be human, certain things are self evident—it is in the mind that we truly live, not the body.
I am never threatened by another’s love of, and insatiable apetite for, knowledge and understanding of the incredible beauty and wonder of the universe in which we live.
We need never fear the creative power of the human mind and soul, only the destructive atavism of the reptilian brain, living only at the level of perception, feeling nothing more than its own lusts and desires, never knowing admiration or respect, only fear and envy of anyone smarter or more creative.
I wish to live as a human being, and it is that simple desire which makes me, and others like me, feared and hated above all else by those for whom life is only a contest to see who can force another to his knees.
As a child I knelt to god. As a man, others had best get used to me being on my feet.
Nicely put, I humbly say! Aristotle of course was right-on with that definition – that there’s no ‘happiness’ amongst beasts, only satisfaction from another feast to keep their metabolism going for another day. And that’s why it’s a lie to think that some non-educated village full of HIV babies can have any degree of “happy” feelings – only a hope for animal survival. And as far as those who live on the level of destructive and zero-sum (ie. it’s either win or lose!) perception, we can only hope that they can see the long-term futility of that view for Man – and even of how it robs them of their soul and true happiness in a finite number of heart-beats each of us have (how quickly it goes).