Same word, different meaning? “I’m happy about the new shoes I got on sale.” “I’m happy about the birth of our child.”
Do we even know what “happiness” means? We seem to have a growing obsession with “happiness,” and while I love the positive spark of this concept, I suspect we’re missing the point.
As Todd Kashdan wrote recently in The Problem with Happiness (Huffington Post), we’re going about the “pursuit of happiness” in a way that’s actually undermining wellbeing!
“…as people place more importance on being happy, they become more unhappy and depressed.”
I frequently ask parents, “what do you most want for your children?” On a tiny poll I ran, 73% gave their top score to… you guessed, “Happiness.” Unfortunately, recent research suggests that not only does a happiness-obsession decrease real happiness, this trend may also be increasing self-interest and decreasing care for others.
At the core, I suspect, is a misunderstanding of the word itself.
Happiness Creates Unhappiness?
You may have heard one of Brené Brown’s compelling TED Talks about her research on vulnerability. One important finding: Suppress one emotion, and you suppress them all. We cope with overload by dissociating – at a neurological level we dampen our emotional responses. This lets us “cope” with seriously difficult moments (e.g., a warrior in hostile territory) – but there are significant costs to living in survival mode.
On a “happiness quest,” people often reject difficult feelings – and even blame themselves for feeling something “less” than bliss. I remember once being on vacation in Hawaii, and thinking, “I SHOULD be blissfully happy,” but I wasn’t. In Buddhist thought, that mismatch between expectation and reality is one the cause unhappiness. I increased my unhappiness by rejecting my own real, useful feelings of worry and discontent, attempting to replace “real” with “pleasant.”
I suspect that many of us fall into this trap: We’re “supposed to be happy,” and in trying to be so, we push aside feelings that seem contrary to bliss. We suppress the uncomfortable feelings, thinking that will make room for happiness; but when we suppress any feeling, we suppress all feelings. Instead of increasing happiness, rejecting those “negative” feelings just creates numbness.
Even worse, this emotional favoritism makes it extremely difficult to move forward. Emotions serve to signal opportunity and threat, and at the core, we have them to solve problems. We use mathematical data to solve math problems, we use emotional data to solve emotional problems. If we decided only to use even numbers, we’d have a hard time with algebra – the same thing happens with emotions and the algebra of relationships.
In craving happiness, if we reject and devalue sadness, and a host of other valuable emotions as “in the way of happiness,” paradoxically we lose great data that would actually help us find a more profound and lasting happiness.
Shallow Happiness
In English, we use the word “happiness” to convey a wide range of experiences. From the transitory moment of satisfied desire, to the profound connection to our own souls, we’re ‘happy.’ My colleagues Wendy Wu and Natalie Roitman from Six Seconds China told me there are multiple words for happiness in Chinese, two are:
快乐 (“kuaile” in Mandarin) represents the happiness of a moment. A cold beer on a hot day. A coveted pair of shoes on sale. The beauty of a sunset.
幸福 （”xingfu” in Mandarin) signifies a more enduring fulfillment. Reciprocity in a relationship. Balance between present and future. Growing wisdom. This “happiness” is deeper, each person “owns” it and nobody can just take it away. Is more stable/sustainable.
My colleagues in China said both might be translated as “happy” in English, despite profoundly different meanings. If we have trouble distinguishing between these aspects of happiness, I suspect we’ll have a hard time gaining either.
One of my university mentors, Colin Dobell, once asked me in his crisp Anglo-Canadian accent: “Why are Americans so obsessed with happiness? Aren’t there more important goals in life?” At the time, I thought being happy might be quite fulfilling. A few years later, I’d like something deeper. Maybe “profound happiness” – I’d like to feel wholeness, connected to the fabric of life. I’d like to feel worthy of the incredible gifts and opportunities life has given me. I’d like to be on the side of history that makes the world better. While this would make me happy, I’m also willing to struggle and sacrifice for these goals.
New research suggests that most people would call this “meaning,” and that the drivers of meaning are quite different from the drivers of “happiness.” Roy Baumeister is the lead author of the forthcoming paper, Some Key Differences between a Happy Life and a Meaningful Life. Based on surveys about the meanings and causes of these two goals, a key conclusion:
“Happiness seems intertwined with the benefits one receives from others. Meaningfulness is instead associated with the benefits that others receive from the self.”
The paper offers an important insight: wellbeing, or thriving, comes not from chasing momentary happiness, but from deeply engaging in life. “Happiness is mainly about getting what one wants and needs, including from other people or even just by using money. In contrast, meaningfulness was linked to doing things that express and reflect the self, and in particular to doing positive things for others.”
I’m Really Happy Now
Many studies show that we can increase our levels of happiness, and even more, our wellbeing. Engaging with life is key. Connecting. Deep relationships. Meaning.
A recent BBC article, Can We Make Ourselves Happier, offers that “studies suggest leading an active life has the strongest correlation with happiness.”
Other studies show that money can buy happiness – when used for the benefit of others. Generosity, gratitude, compassion, and service all seem to be positively correlated with a deep, lasting wellbeing.
As Emily Esfahani Smith recently wrote in The Atlantic, There’s More to Life Than Being Happy, “by devoting our lives to ‘giving’ rather than ‘taking’ — we are not only expressing our fundamental humanity, but are also acknowledging that that there is more to the good life than the pursuit of simple happiness.”
Fully Alive
In English, we don’t have one word to express the state of “fully aliveness” that might translate as lasting happiness. Maslow encouraged “self-actualization.” Happiness researcher Martin Seligman is now advocating, “flourishing.” I like the term, “Thriving.”
All these words describe a rich engagement with life. Like those traditional marriage vows, it’s about living life when it’s easy AND when it’s hard. Most likely, we actually grow and deepen in times of challenge. That’s one reason we need to be open to all our emotions, not just the “pleasant” ones.
Emotions help us know what is important, and are important in “mature judgment” as well as ethical decision-making. They tell us where we stand, who we can trust, who to push away, and who to embrace. They also remind us to take care of ourselves and each other, and fuel both resistance and innovation.
So let’s not limit ourselves to a pursuit of happiness. Let’s participate fully in life, and welcome the fear as well as safety, the sorrow as well as bliss, even shame as well as pride. Let’s use all of our emotions as advisors and signals on an adventure to a life lived fully.
- Coaching Through the Emotional Recession: Three Practical Tips for Trauma-Informed Coaching - May 1, 2024
- Knowing Isn’t Coaching: Three Emotional Intelligence Tools for Professional Coaches - April 3, 2024
- Coaching Down the Escalator: 3 Emotional Intelligence Tips forCoaches to Reduce Volatility & De-escalate Conflict in a Polarized World - March 6, 2024
Hi everyone,
Great to see such a robust conversation. I think as others have commented it’s difficult to define happiness vs other pleasurable states. And so its difficult to discuss its merits and how to achieve it. I think I tend to purse external pleasures, when I’m feeling internally disturbed – the external pleasure provides a moment of relief/distraction from my unpleasant state within. Yet that unpleasantness if felt fully tends to transform into joy/happiness/peace in action.
On reflection, to me people often don’t look happy when shopping/pursuing material gain. Perhaps excited? I think perhaps happiness or deep abiding happiness is a result of doing something whole heartedly with others without fear of being judged or ridiculed.
I don’t think happiness is something we can get materially, but something we can choose by accepting the reality of the present while leaning into that which we love and care about the most in our lives.
Anyway – once again – lovely to see such a robust conversation.
Hi Everyone,
Have you been able to find metrices to measure happiness ?
Thank you Joshua for one of the most insightful and thought provoking article on a subject of “Happiness” which I have ever read having been familiar with Goleman and BarOn EQ Frameworks.
I am of the opinion that this is a timely discussion in light of the highly disrupted VUCA World that we are living today resulting at times a state of confusion and stressful conditions.
This is a must read article for all my Coachees, Executives and Grad Students. Thanks again. Cheers.
Thank you Prof Bawany, that is very generous praise. I agree with you that in the VUCA context (which seems to be more V, more U, more C, and more A each month), people may find more urgency to chase surface-happiness due to the pain of the complexity. It’s a trap that has dangerous implications for us individually, organizationally, and collectively.
Otto, according to your own words you found the post “to be infuriating” and you “felt challenged, threatened, and attacked” as Josh tampered with your Noble Goal. Isn´t it your ego speaking? How do you manage to combine this ego and search for happiness? Socrates, whom you mentioned, “recommended gaining rational control over your desires and harmonizing the different parts of your soul” (no full range of emotions here and certainly no fury). Buddha said: First remove “I”, that’s ego, then remove “want”, that’s desire. See now you are left with only Happiness” They were not threatened, challenged, attacked and infuriated by those who did not agree with them. Actually, Socrates was made to drink a poison as a punishment for his teachings, and yet he was literally teaching till his last breath. Why don´t you first define what the ancient philosophers meant by happiness and if this is the same meaning that is pervasive in our times and our society, and then compare Buddha´s “desirelessm selfless” happiness with your own definition and the degree to which they match?
Hi Irina,
Thank you for your response. I can’t confess to being without ego, but I can confess to exaggerating my emotion. You may have pictured someone stomping around his house, screaming, and punching walls. That would not have been me. However, this is one of the few subjects for which I feel a marked passion. And, I was at least agitated. All that said, my greatest concern was not for myself, but for anybody that may have been misled to think happiness was only the short-lived, pleasurable emotion associated with trivial pursuits or material gain. As the passages you quote indicate, Socrates and the Buddha must have been advocating something much more significant.
Hi Josh,
I found your post to be infuriating – you plunged a dagger into the heart of my noble goal! I felt challenged, threatened, and attacked. I was fearful that your words might confuse and harm the people I love. I worried about the grief, sadness, and emptiness of those that may have read the post without reading the comments, or seeking an alternative view elsewhere. I was seething with anger. I was so agitated after reading your post that I couldn’t sleep.
Philosophers worldwide have long recognized that happiness is the pinnacle of human achievement. This recognition dates back millennia, at least as far back as Socrates and the Buddha. As Rosemarie remarked, the actual definition of happiness has to do with life that is full and meaningful. Happiness is a general, pervasive, and enduring feeling of joy, contentment, and peace; it is enduring fulfillment (the definition you gave for xinfu) and tranquility. It is more stable and less transient than one’s mood. It is certainly not a temporary and fleeting emotion derived from short-tern gratification of selfish or trivial desires (glee or delight or gladness). In fact, it is not disturbed by extraneous or immediate desires. It is wellbeing and flourishing and (true) success. While we may not have an English word for “fully aliveness”, we do have an English word for “fully aliveness with joy”. That word is “happiness”.
I could write pages about all the things wrong with the Baumeister et al. research which you quoted, and on which (with further distortion) the Emily Smith article was based. A careful reading reveals that Baumeister et al. had other motives (pushing an agenda) than thorough research. There are many elements with which to take issue including the pre-assumptions (e.g., “we assume the simpler form of happiness”) and methodology (e.g., using an unrepresentative sample and transferring the opinions of an even smaller and less representative sample onto the first), not to mention that the only definition of happiness was that of the researchers (which was then projected onto the sample).
Trying to differentiate meaningfulness and happiness is like trying to differentiate a boxed cake mix and cake. Meaningfulness is an ingredient or means to happiness. Thus, all of the things that are ingredients of meaningfulness are also ingredients of happiness. Yet, just as a boxed cake mix does not have all of the fullness and richness of cake, meaningfulness does not have all of the fullness and richness of happiness. The boxed cake mix is missing the other ingredients that make a cake all that it is. Had Baumeister et al. begun the research with an accurate definition and understanding of happiness, they would have approached the research differently and would have a much different interpretation of the data that was derived. As would be expected when one recognizes the true meaning of happiness, Buameister et al. found that, “Happiness and meaningfulness were substantially and positively intercorrelated.” However, these correlations were ignored because they didn’t fit Baumeister’s preconceived notion of happiness. (As for the other articles you cited, they too suffer from this confusion of terminology.)
As Linda commented, happiness is a state of being that allows joy in our lives, and, as you commented, a condition in which we can experience all of our feelings. This is not a state that is easily achieved. It is a condition that is only derived from leading a life that is good (another misused word) and virtuous (i.e., conducive to worldwide, long-term happiness). It takes work and practice. Beyond that, it takes excellent work and excellent practice. It takes the persistent striving toward one’s noble goal. There is little evidence that one can acquire happiness by “chasing” after it for oneself. There is abundant evidence that the surest way to achieve happiness is to promote the happiness of others.
As you might suspect, I could write for days on this subject. There are many more ideas expressed in your post and the comments that I would like to address, but this is not the appropriate venue. I do hope that readers will recognize the true and actual meaning of happiness and that they won’t feel compelled to modify the word with adjectives such as real, authentic, deep, or profound; that they will recognize happiness is all of these things without modification.
Josh, I thank you for provoking my fury. Navigating fury brought forth inspiration, courage, and conviction. Yes, we must embrace all of the emotions – even those we find unpleasant. Now I can sleep.
Thank you Orrin! I am delighted to have been ‘this kind of infuriating.’ Apart from the problems with the specific study, what do you think about the basic premises of this article? Such as, 1) We’ve conflated so many concepts into ‘happiness’ that it’s confusing. 2) We’re overly focused on externally driven happiness.
Hi Josh,
It does seem that we’ve conflated too many concepts into happiness. Certainly, there is confusion as to what happiness is. Perhaps we try to understand and define happiness by a single aspect as a way to avoid the more difficult task of full exploration. As Irina alludes to above, perhaps it is a fault of the English language (not enough words) or an issue of emotional literacy (we don’t know all the words). Consequently, we lump all the concepts into “happiness”. There is no danger as long as we remember we’re looking at a single aspect of a complex idea. In practice, we often forget, and think the one part is the whole thing.
Certainly, we are excessively and overly focused on externally driven happiness. Hopefully, we can educate people about the realities of happiness so that they begin doing the things that will actually lead to it.
Otto, what a wonderful reply.
To me it came over as quite passionate & intense – thank you. I have a quote from Thoreau on a magnet on my fridge; the quote goes “Happiness is like a butterfly; the more you chase it, the more it will elude you, but if you turn your attention to other things, it will come and sit softly on your shoulder …” For me it is about doing meaningful stuff & letting the happiness arise as a kind of natural consequence. Sometimes that meaningful stuff is working through difficult times – mourning our losses, dealing with challenges & then kind of noticing that the happiness that departed has returned somewhat differently – like the chrysalis to butterfly transformation. Othertimes it is other things.
I kind of disagree you with your assumptions that the researchers could have arrived at different outcomes. Mostly because, in my opinion and experience, folk usually get only the outcome that they set themselves up to get; & a pre-loaded agenda is usually a pre-predicted, i,e, ensured, outcome.
Josh – in regard to your 2nd question to Otto, I read a small newspaper article yesterday. It was discussing that research had proven that “comfort shopping” is a myth – the shopper gets little to no comfort (aka happiness) from the shopping and feels miserable afterwards because of the costs incurred and/or the failure of the attempt to make themselves happy by buying themselves things. An interesting outcome considering all that that “feeling miserable? treat yourself” oriented advertising. I suspect the same cycle of non-happiness might arise as a result of ‘comfort’ eating.
Rosemarie, according to psychologists, shopping, actually, provides a sense of well-being and/or contenment (happiness), as our brains release endophines. This sense of uplifted spirit and euphoria is short lived though (like when we eat chocolates), so commons sense kicks in which leads us to shoppers remorse and eventually going back to the store to return the items we bought. Sounds familiar?
Hi Irina,
Yes, I’d read this theory from psychologists & it is a popular story-line on TV, for example the women in Sex & the City are prone to stories including such shopping. My understanding of the article is that some testing of the theory has now been done; and based on the test outcomes the theory is wrong as the sense of well-being during shopping mostly didn’t seem to be happening for the test subjects.
I wondered if it was something that used to be true years ago when indulgence shopping was rare, & the ‘up’ no longer happens because indulgence is kind of humdrum & everyday for many of us nowadays.
Me, I’ll stick with chocolate – my experience is that it works for me;-)
Hi Rosemarie,
Thank you for the kind words. I agree that what becomes humdrum doesn’t do much for happiness. Fortunately, it takes a whole lot of chocolate before it gets humdrum…and then there’s chocolate with nuts, and chocolate with chili, and…
Great thought Joshua!
Explains why some of the poorest countries like Tibet and Nepal have the highest happiness quotient:while in the developed nations the quotient was significantly lower.In Asia people ‘understand’ the second kind of happiness( enduring fulfillment) even when they are materialistically poor.
Quite a lesson there….
I find that the problem with “happiness” is the lack of existence or use of a “less permanent” adjectives. In English we used to have “merry” and “gay”, but these words are not used anymore in the same context. In Spanish, we still have “contento”, “alegre”, but it´s still easier to use “feliz (happy)”. When we teach emotional vocabulary to little kids, we use “happy” as the opposite of “sad”, which, of, course, it´s not correct and children books, movies and the media re-inforce the mistake and the pursuit of the eternal happiness. So, when we grow up we keep calling any positive or bubbly feeling “happiness” and search for it. When people don´t get along in a relationship or at work, they say that they are not happy… and we don´t even bother to look carefully at what´s really going on inside our relationships or work. I just don´t agree that one can be “happy” at work: here in Mexico they say that that´s why one is getting paid for doing the job. Jokes aside, I think that both relationships and work offer to us a lot more than just the elusive concept or feeling of happiness. Final thought: Viktor Frankl wrote a book about the quest for meaning, not for happiness…
Hi Irina – several powerful points you raise. I particularly tune into the point that when we generalize feelings as “happy” or “unhappy” we miss so many clues. If we can see that “unhappy” really is afraid + lonely… or worried + frustrated + distrustful… or disgusted + hurt… or whatever… then we gain insight and focus to actually address the issue. But “unhappy” doesn’t really give us much to work with, so we cover it over, or attempt to fill the void with something from the outside.
In a recent PhD course, Psychological Coaching, two of the textbooks were on positive psychology…as if it is assumed that the concepts of the “cheer up” culture are seminal. The cultural obsession with avoiding discomfort and unconscious exploration is growing. Comfort is over-rate and stops growth dead in its tracks. A good example of the utility of feeling the full spectrum of emotion is grief and depression…this is when we ask questions like “is my life valuable?” and “what’s important to me?”. Fairly essential inquiries for anyone interested in deepening life experience. When we skip along “happily” to the exclusion of the rest, its unnatural. Nature cries, screams, and shakes, and doesn’t seem to try to avoid or judge or control these expressions…and the sun comes out .
Hi Bob, I particularly like this line: “The cultural obsession with avoiding discomfort and unconscious exploration is growing. Comfort is over-rated” — it’s intriguing and disturbing to me that in a time and place where we have HUGE levels of comfort, that we’re so ‘scared'(?) of discomfort. I had a huge argument w/ my daughter when she was about 12, and snapped at her, “I think you’re life is just too easy…” (in a mean way). Later, after we’d settled down, she asked me if I meant that. I said that in some ways, I think it’s true: We work to make our kids’ lives better, but in a way, we rob them of the opportunity to learn through the challenges we faced ourselves. At the time she liked the Laura Engles Wilder books a lot, and I pointed out that what was ‘hard’ for Laura is SO much harder than what we face today (e.g., living through winter by braiding straw for the fire ’till your fingers are bleeding daily) — and while I don’t want that for our family, we have lost perspective on what is actually ‘hard.’ As a result, I think we’ve also lost perspective on what’s important. 🙁
Made me much less cranky about all the faux promises attached to the Be Happy Rants. Pinned it of my Emotional Fitness Pinterest Board. http://pinterest.com/pin/147141112798591827/ Thank you.
Well said Josh.. Bravo.
The problem with defining happiness in our society, is that it is mostly based on financial accomplishment and how we selfishly benefit. If you define happiness as a general attitude of acceptance of other people, not judging, envying, belittling, criticizing, it creates a totally different attitude about life. Happiness is a state of being. It does not negate other emotions, but serves as a point of reference in daily life. it allows us to see other lives and choices and not sacrifice the contentment we have with ourselves. People who are not comfortable with themselves first, cannot truly be happy. Happy people have no problems with sharing or loving; giving or receiving. Happiness allows joy in our lives. It is choosing the positive over the negative. Happy people have a very high degree of empathy and compassion for others and patience with their own short comings.
Hi Linda – interesting – so are you suggesting that instead of thinking of happiness as a feeling, we think of it as a ‘condition’ in which we can experience all our feelings? Kind of like ‘readiness’ or ‘balance’ might be a state?
Isn’t it possible though that living each moment fully and and creating a meaningful life can also lead to happiness?
Hi Lisa – definitely… and it depends on your definition of “happiness.” If you mean the kind of “bubbly feeling you get when someone gives you a nice present,” then actually, probably not. There seems to be a type of happiness that is internal, we might call it “fulfillment” or “wellbeing” or even “contentment” — and this kind of happiness probably grows just as you say. There is an externally-centered happiness, we might call it “bliss” or “thrill” or “reward,” that is not very connected to a meaningful life… and maybe even opposed to it. 🙂
Hi Josh,
Nice article.
Uuum, long ago & far away when fairy-tales used to end with “& they lived happily ever after” happiness wasn’t an emotion. The original notion of a happy life was something like – full & meaningful.
I think, though I’m not sure, that America has the right to the pursuit of happiness written into its constitution. & back when that constitution was written, happiness wasn’t about avoiding the negative, challenging, or transformative stuff of life it was more about meaningfulness, contribution & finding worthwhile things to do.
I have this strong suspicion that happiness as a desired emotional state was part of the manufacturing of the illness ‘Depression’ & the marketing of the ‘Stepford Syndrome’ medications that removed or numbed most of the emotions that someone, somewhere decided were ‘bad’ for us – both long or short-term. Gary Greenberg wrote a book about the industry & Brene Brown’s work is fascinating.
Beautifully said Rosemarie – I’d like to shift the “happy” conversation to that deeper version of meaning/contribution/worth. BTW, you mention depression and the link to happiness – check out this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3yqXeLJ0Kg – it makes me ‘happy’ to hear a young man speak so eloquently and honestly 🙂
Hi Josh,
I’ve just watched the video, very informative.
I’m not sure that depression is globally as stigmatised as the young man thinks; perhaps it is more part of his culture or his own beliefs. Here in Australia we see TV adverts for Beyond Blue & supporting colleagues at work through emotional/mental issues fairly regularly.
& I think that, for me, one of the missing keys is that so much is defined as a mental illness when we are actually struggling to self-regulate our emotions. We are taught how to think reasonably well, yet we are not taught the skills we need to manage our emotions; we are usually left to figure that self-regulation out for ourselves. Plus, we can see & empathise with a physical injury fairly easily, an emotional wound is harder for us to spot & we often lack the skills to respond appropriately; we tend to be inept.
I’m also curious about the difference between burnout & depression; especially now that adrenal fatigue & exhaustion & the effects of cortisol are being recognised. As many experts have pointed out, the signs & symptoms of burnout are very similar to those of depression. & while the route to recovery is quite different, many folk are mis-diagnosed as depressed when they are actually suffering from burnout. I’m currently reading Fried by Joan Boryensko, as someone who has burntout through both overwork & emotional overload (dis-stress) I’m finding it an interesting read.
I love Brene Brown’s work on shame & guilt as I think that many folk have learnt, or been taught, to be ashamed of feeling a bit low, or of struggling to cope with unexpected circumstances. & oddly enough, as human beings we only tend to learn when we are stretched or struggling in some way.
Finally, was it Martin Seligman who said that the positivity work was amongst the biggest mistakes he’d made? Because the marketing of it became that we ‘should’ always be positive, even when it leads to denying our current reality? & so being honest or authentic or pragmatic or realistic became a bad thing?
& having replied to you about the video yesterday, today I got this article: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/08/08/drinking-coffee.aspx?e_cid=20130808_DNL_art_1&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20130808 which kind of suggests that perhaps drinking coffee in moderation might be a good thing for folk who are challenged in the ways the young man in the video is challenged.
Thanks Josh for a fresh and rather unusual perspective on ‘Happiness’ and ‘Sorrow’: We all know that’s typical of you. I think this is the greatest contribution EQ has made to our life…giving a respectable place to all types emotion in our life. And it’s exciting to entertain the so called ‘negative’ feelings as valid and instructive. It was really enlightening to read how our pursuit of ‘shallow happiness’ has brought more unhappiness to our life: what we are looking for as ‘happiness’ is only a mirage and the real happiness remains elusive. Thanks again for the insight!
Thanks Tauqir!