Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The key to happiness

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
 
ironbark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 08:09 AM
Original message
The key to happiness

7.30 Report ABC TV Aus.
A comprehensive study has offered an insight into what makes for a good life and a good old age. The director of the Grant study George Vaillant speaks with Tracy Bowden about his results.


TRACY BOWDEN: So in the end is the message that you, I guess, would like people to take away, is it that it's all about love? A good life is all about love?

GEORGE VAILLANT: Yes, ma’am. Yes, ma’am. But it's all about positive emotions that are genetically created for survival purposes. So I mean we've evolved to be increasingly altruistic and caring about each other. The spiritual side of that is that whether I blame Darwin for it or whether I blame a loving god that created the universe for it doesn't make very much difference. It's - you do a lot better going to a positive church than you do reading Richard Dawkins. And so that I'm a psychiatrist and I think it's terribly important that my profession spend more time with positive emotion and more time regarding people's spiritual involvement as a virtue rather than something that if they just read enough Freud they could give up.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s2891411.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Eman_Vaillant

‘What Makes Us Happy’
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/06/what-makes-us-happy/7439/


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 08:36 AM
Response to Original message
1. ...is ignorance. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
2. Happiness is at best a fleeting and elusive experience.
The best that most of us can hope for most of the time is to not be unhappy or simply to be content. Being able to appreciate being content is really undervalued.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EvolveOrConvolve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
4. I think Dr. Vaillant has fallen off the deep end
TRACY BOWDEN: "A good life is all about love?"

GEORGE VAILLANT: 'Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am."

A scientist doesn't speak in absolutes like that - unless he has definitive answers, which one study doesn't give us. And duh, positive people with positive emotions live better lives? No shit, Sherlock.

And Dr. Vaillant's statement about psychiatrists getting involved with an individual's spiritual side? He's completely lost me there - each patient should have an individualized treatment pattern. Maybe spiritualism is part of that, or maybe it's not. But to say that it's "terribly important"? I don't think so - there's a reason academics are academics rather than practitioners - they're involved with theory rather than practical applications of the theory.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ironbark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. To answer with article cameos.

“I think Dr. Vaillant has fallen off the deep end”

“Neurotic” defenses are common in “normal” people. These include intellectualization (mutating the primal stuff of life into objects of formal thought); dissociation (intense, often brief, removal from one’s feelings); and repression, which, Vaillant says, can involve “seemingly inexplicable naïveté, memory lapse, or failure to acknowledge input from a selected sense organ.”

“And duh, positive people with positive emotions live better lives? No shit, Sherlock.”

“In fact, Vaillant went on, positive emotions make us more vulnerable than negative ones. One reason is that they’re future-oriented. Fear and sadness have immediate payoffs—protecting us from attack or attracting resources at times of distress. Gratitude and joy, over time, will yield better health and deeper connections—but in the short term actually put us at risk. That’s because, while negative emotions tend to be insulating, positive emotions expose us to the common elements of rejection and heartbreak.”

“there's a reason academics are academics rather than practitioners - they're involved with theory rather than practical applications of the theory.”

“I saw this firsthand in Vaillant’s work with H’Sien Hayward, a second-year doctoral student in psychology at Harvard with a penetrating analytical mind and a big heart. Hayward has been paraplegic and bound to a wheelchair since a car accident at 16. She studies “post-traumatic growth,” the surprising beneficial changes that many people experience after pain or injury. She approached Vaillant on a lark—she never thought someone so famous would have time to advise her. She was shocked, she told me, to see that he insisted on talking about her ideas—and about the pains and hopes that gave rise to them. “The only way to keep it is to give it away,” he told her, articulating and enacting the essence of altruism.”

“And Dr. Vaillant's statement about psychiatrists getting involved with an individual's spiritual side? He's completely lost me there - each patient should have an individualized treatment pattern. Maybe spiritualism is part of that, or maybe it's not.”

Vailliant is not calling for “psychiatrists getting involved with an individual's spiritual side” nor for encouraging those who do not have one to develop one.

The call, founded on the outcome of the research, was for psychiatrists to cease seeing people's spiritual involvement/churchgoing as a negative to be abandoned/educated out of but rather as a clear enhancer of life/satisfaction/happiness-
“more time regarding people's spiritual involvement as a virtue rather than something that if they just read enough Freud they could give up.”
……………………………………………………………………………
I find it fascinating how quickly those who pay lip service to science will flippantly reject the outcomes of research that does not accord with their cosmology.
………………………………………………………………………….
“The project is one of the longest-running—and probably the most exhaustive—longitudinal studies of mental and physical well-being in history. Begun in 1937 as a study of healthy, well-adjusted Harvard sophomores (all male), it has followed its subjects for more than 70 years.”

“Bock assembled a team that spanned medicine, physiology, anthropology, psychiatry, psychology, and social work, and was advised by such luminaries as the psychiatrist Adolf Meyer and the psychologist Henry Murray. Combing through health data, academic records, and recommendations from the Harvard dean, they chose 268 students—mostly from the classes of 1942, ’43, and ’44—and measured them from every conceivable angle and with every available scientific tool.”

“More than 80 percent of the Grant Study men served in World War II, a fact that allowed Vaillant to study the effect of combat. The men who survived heavy fighting developed more chronic physical illnesses and died sooner than those who saw little or no combat, he found. And “severity of trauma is the best predictor of who is likely to develop PTSD.” (This may sound obvious, but it countered the claim that post-traumatic stress disorder was just the manifestation of preexisting troubles.) He also found that personality traits assigned by the psychiatrists in the initial interviews largely predicted who would become Democrats (descriptions included “sensitive,” “cultural,” and “introspective”) and Republicans (“pragmatic” and “organized”).”

“Vaillant’s other main interest is the power of relationships. “It is social aptitude,” he writes, “not intellectual brilliance or parental social class, that leads to successful aging.” Warm connections are necessary—and if not found in a mother or father, they can come from siblings, uncles, friends, mentors. The men’s relationships at age 47, he found, predicted late-life adjustment better than any other variable, except defenses. Good sibling relationships seem especially powerful: 93 percent of the men who were thriving at age 65 had been close to a brother or sister when younger. In an interview in the March 2008 newsletter to the Grant Study subjects, Vaillant was asked, “What have you learned from the Grant Study men?” Vaillant’s response: “That the only thing that really matters in life are your relationships to other people.”
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Silent3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
6. "According to Dr. Vaillant... the very way we deal with reality is by distorting it"
According to Dr. Vaillant’s model of adaptations, the very way we deal with reality is by distorting it — and we do this unconsciously. When we start pulling at this thread, an awfully big spool of thoughts and questions begins to unravel onto the floor.

I think those of us who are atheist and otherwise generally skeptical would rather "pull at that thread" and take our chances rather than carefully avoid disturbing comforting delusions.

If you held out to me the Key to Happiness and the Key to Truth, and I could take only one, I might pause for a moment wondering what I might be giving up, but I'd take the Key to Truth and hope that I could use it to find happiness too. Perhaps if I were already deliriously happy I wouldn't or couldn't care, but from my current state of being, having only imperfect access to either happiness or truth, I find the idea of willingly deciding to accept comforting delusions in order to gain more happiness a repugnant concept.

In regard to the kinds of discussions that take place in R/T, I don't think one should risk being here unless one is ready to "pull at that thread" as well. I feel that a lot of the hostility often directed as atheists here is due to the fact that we atheists don't just pull at out own threads, we pull at other people's threads too. I can't both carry on a meaningful discussion of the topics we explore here and simultaneously carefully avoid disrupting the way others might distort reality for their own comfort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ironbark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Also true of optics… the very way we see reality is by distorting it.
Magicians rely on this distortion for sleight of hand.

“I think those of us who are atheist and otherwise generally skeptical would rather "pull at that thread" and take our chances rather than carefully avoid disturbing comforting delusions.”

The “generally” invites further generalization- How many atheists, at a practical local level, live out and practice the proclaimed preference for ‘verification’ and ‘substantiation’ when it comes to something as tangible as the words actually used in a post? How many will create “comforting delusions” by reporting things not in evidence and/or “avoid disturbing comforting delusions” by failing/refusing to substantiate/verify a claim/accusation regarding what was actually written?

“In regard to the kinds of discussions that take place in R/T, I don't think one should risk being here unless one is ready to "pull at that thread" as well.”

The very foundation of doing so would be preparedness to deal with words in evidence/existence and seek therefrom to establish meaning. Yet a very large proportion of what transpires is fending off projections, insights, straw men and outright fabrications as “reality is distorted” and “comforting delusions” are maintained.

“I feel that a lot of the hostility often directed as atheists here is due to the fact that we atheists don't just pull at out own threads, we pull at other people's threads too.”

I believe the most revealing discussion I have had with an atheist here in that regard was one in which he (?) suggested that when religion was raised/mentioned he had a “little Fallwel bobble doll in his head” that went off. I found that to be an insightful ‘thread pull’ because in a very large percentage of exchanges the atheists are not responding to what was actually written but rather to what they think a Fallwel would be saying. The enemy image gets projected.

“If you held out to me the Key to Happiness and the Key to Truth, and I could take only one,”

At what point and on what basis does it become a choice between Truth and Happiness?
When was division established between them and why would pursuing/holding one preclude obtaining the other?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Silent3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. "the very way we see reality is by distorting it"
Now you're just being silly. I could go into a long-worded "why", but why bother? Your playing the typical false equivalence ploy -- someone challenges your reality, you play it up as if everything anyone else says is just as questionable. Slippery word games and convenient evasions when challenged mean that ploy can be played out as long as you like no matter what I say back.

When was division established between them and why would pursuing/holding one preclude obtaining the other?

I never said the truth and happiness were mutually exclusive. The hypothetical of having to choose one or the other was a rhetorical device for framing a preference of one over the other IF only one was immediately available. In fact, I said I'd hope that truth could lead to happiness, so that comment of mine belies any interpretation of what I said as mutual exclusivity.

As for "When was division established between them", there's a division between truth and happiness in the simple fact that they aren't synonyms. Sorry I can't put a date on that for you, as it probably goes way back into unrecorded linguistic history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gooey Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 02:58 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. The Key to Truth
should bring happiness along with it. No?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagAss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 09:57 AM
Response to Original message
9. ...understanding that there is no "you" to be happy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 13th 2024, 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC