“When will I learn? The answer to life’s problems aren’t at the bottom of a bottle, they’re on TV!” —Homer Simpson

Happiness: That often elusive, no doubt illustrious, and definitely coveted human concept some spend their entire lives chasing has long been studied by the social sciences. Ironically, the sciences have looked at why people are downright miserable (clinical depression) rather than why some are obscenely happy. But before we discuss this topic further, let me introduce you to a new movement in the field of psychology: Positive Psychology (+P), a subfield almost solely responsible for the information that will be presented in this article.

Positive Psychology

Positive Psychology is a recent movement (started some 40 years ago) aimed at rigorously studying the more pro-social aspects of the human psyche. This field differs from “traditional” (or the broader field of) psychology by looking at “what’s right,” as opposed to putting express focus on the pathologies, or “what’s wrong.” Traditional psychology has a long, sorted history of looking at all the things that make you, for a lack of a better term, fucked up. Its history is overshadowed with mental pathology (depression, panic, anxiety, fear, remorse, etc.) when compared to the more positive human emotions (happiness, hope, hardiness, life satisfaction, etc.). In fact, an entire manual (the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or more commonly referred to as the DSM) exists on all the psychopathologies a person may have developed. The manual is currently in it’s 4th revision and has hundreds of entries, from Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) to Voyeurism (See the staggering full list of codes here). Conversely, +P looks to build a database that is in stark contrast to the DSM. For example, why some people never lose hope, have unlimited compassion, survive the most horrendous of situations with no lasting psychological problems (credited to an abundance of “hardiness”), or can shoulder intense stress without wavering—in short, what makes people great. I’d say with people’s inexplicable focus on misery, this is a welcomed attitude.

Happiness & You

A recent article has shed new light on happiness, and subsequently depression. It seems depression and happiness are very strongly negatively correlated. This means when one goes up, the other goes down. That means when you’re happy, you are less depressed, and when you are depressed, you are less happy. This makes intuitive sense, so why bring it up? Well, there are many traits that appear to be on the opposite end of the continuum, but that ultimately do not share this type of effect. This is a problem because we need clarity in science. Moreover, we also assume this relationship to hold when we think we’re studying concepts on a single continuum. Light is the opposite of dark, dry the opposite of wet, etc. If we measured light and also found an abundance of dark, no longer are we measuring a single variable, but rather two separate processes. It may also mean there’s a problem with the way we are measuring (instrument validity), but we needn’t cover that here.

Seligman (pictured), Steen, Park, and Peterson (2006) looked at ways of increasing levels of general happiness through a handful of very simple exercises (download full article). They uncovered two key ways (there were six in total; however, the two listed here had longterm effects while the other four did not yield a lasting change) to increase happiness in their participants: i) using signature strengths and ii) focusing on three, daily good things. The former (i) required participants to visit www.authentichappiness.org to identify their top key strengths. They were instructed to select from the top five and use one of their skills in a creative new way, each day. The latter (ii) required participants to write down three things that went well in their day, and in addition, they were asked to write a causal explanation for each good thing.

These two tasks were shown to elevate happiness levels even after six months, provided participants continued with the exercises of course. Not surprisingly, depression levels also saw a decrease.

The Implications

Now, the implications of such research are two fold. Firstly, they tell us that happiness is not only attainable, but comes quite readily from the within the self. In fact, there exists substantial research showing that the “good life,” where one values intrinsic qualities such as developing skills and abilities, yields more joy than the “goods life” where one values extrinsic objects, such as jewelry and money. Thus, it seems you don’t really need a bigger house, a faster car, or more money to be happier (a good thing for us struggling students). More importantly, it also shows that we have to work towards happiness. It doesn’t come from some magic potion, quick fix, or self-help book. Secondly, and this is really the most pivotal finding in my eyes: We are working towards being miserable.

Now, I am aware it a radical statement, but let’s consider what we currently know. Firstly, depression is the polar opposite of happiness—when we see a rise in one, we see a fall in the other. When people report themselves as happier, they are simultaneously found to be less depressed.

Secondly, a lasting increase to general happiness can occur, but requires work. Participants in the study above were given simple exercises to complete on a daily basis. Those that did, reported higher levels of happiness, even after 6 months. It seems using simple techniques in our day to day lives, we can lead to greater happiness.

Results from Seligman et al. (2006) show conclusively that we have to work at being happy, much as we have to work at math or to become a better tennis player. Yet, considering the relationship between happiness and depression, and the ability to raise happiness levels through cognitive effort, the finding reveals a stark finding: We are working towards being miserable.

The Argument in Standard Form

I’m a student of philosophy. Therefore, I see value in clearly representing one’s point of view, and thus we can rephrase my argument as follows:

(1) Happiness has been shown to be the direct counterpart of depression, thus when one increases, the other decreases, and vice versa.
(2) A person can permanently elevate their general level of happiness using simple exercises throughout the course of time.
_________________________________________________________
(C) A lasting increase in happiness is attainable through cognitive effort, and ultimately results in a lasting decrease in depression.

The conclusion seems clear enough: We can work towards happiness. But there is a flip side to this argument. If that is indeed the case, then it stands to reason that we are also working towards misery.

Challenging premise (2) seems to fly in the face of even anecdotal evidence. Surely we can achieve lasting happiness (regardless of the process) over time. Refuting this claim seems unlikely (or rather difficult to support) and I’m not sure anyone would want to tread on this claim. Moreover, Seligman et al. (2006) have shown conclusive evidence in support of this premise. Admittedly it is just one study, I’m convinced there is something there.

Challenging premise (1), however, carries with it some dire consequences. Namely, I think a person would have to commit to the claim that human beings are hyper-misanthropes. To put plainly, human beings are fundamentally miserable creatures, predisposed to a life of pure misery. Surely that’s not the case. In fact, there exist an abundance of research showing that people are actually happy. When asked, people the world over, report being happier than sadder. Sure outliers exist, people that are extremely depressed, but in general, people report themselves as being generally happy.

A Cyclical Process

To claim that some of us are (inadvertently or subconsciously) working towards misery is indeed a stark revelation, and one that has some serious implications on how we not only conceptualize the world around us, but generally how we live our lives. But in light of what we now know about the relationship between happiness and depression, quite plausible. So let me gloss over each process to galvanize my claims. Consider the following findings:

Depressed people focus more on the negative, and therefore have more negative memories. They also limit social interactions (who would want to invite an extremely cynical and unhappy person to a party?), which further lead them down a road of misery. We have all heard that axiom that depression is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Or the nonsensical suggestion to “just cheer up” when you’re feeling blue.

Contrarily, joyous people would make more joyous memories, and also promote positive social interactions. We all know people that simply light up any room they walk into. These people tend to propagate happiness, and thus, will no doubt be happier themselves.

The processes are no doubt cyclical and the above points hopefully clarify how it can be easy to spiral out of control. Admittedly, it seems people don’t tend to spiral into complete bliss. Incidentally, most people gravitate towards misery. Rather than ascribe to the notion that people are fundamental misanthropes, I point my finger to the world around us. It’s filled with media that perpetuates and exemplifies violence and brutality. While some may see media simply feeding the underlying wants and likes of the population, I would agree that prima facie that is true. But media is so persuasive at this point, that it would be almost impossible to clearly test that claim.

Moreover, media certainly has an effect on the populace. We give our kids medicine when they’re sick not because they like the taste or even want it, but rather because it will make them feel better. Perhaps media can be a little more magnanimous, considering all things. I’m not in favour of seeing hippies hugging on Prime Time, but surely we can restrict placement, insurgence, and the overall culpability of advertisers and some marketing strategies.

What to Do?

I would love to see a more pro-social movement emerge in the media. The scrupulously placed “trash magazines” at the checkout isles, the copious reality TV shows that solely aim to cause conflict, the news reports that peddle in human misery (“if it bleeds, it leads”), and the Perez Hilton’s of the world ultimately only fuel the downward spiral of humankind. The allure of suffering to humans is something best reserved for another article, but I don’t think it’s in our nature. Look at children’s advertising. It doesn’t follow this same trend. That alone suggests that these states are learned rather than ingrained. At any rate, I would love a progressive movement that looks to suppress this type of content.

Now I think Positive Psychologists would be remiss if I ended this article on a negative note. I hope that my readers see that an increase in happiness is attainable (and from the looks of it, requires only minimal effort). Moreover, that it’s not found at bottom of a bottle of SSRIs or through some self-help infomercial (sorry, Homer), but rather in some rather simple, rudimentary exercises.