Researchers Crown Buddhist Monk the World's Happiest Man 348
concealment writes in with a story about a man who has been crowned the world's happiest. "Tibetan monk and molecular geneticist Matthieu Ricard is the happiest man in the world according to researchers at the University of Wisconsin. The 66-year-old's brain produces a level of gamma waves — those linked to consciousness, attention, learning and memory — never before reported in neuroscience. The scans showed that when meditating on compassion, Ricard's brain produces a level of gamma waves — those linked to consciousness, attention, learning and memory — 'never reported before in the neuroscience literature,' Davidson said. The scans also showed excessive activity in his brain's left pre-frontal cortex compared to its right counterpart, giving him an abnormally large capacity for happiness and a reduced propensity towards negativity, researchers believe."
Humor (Score:5, Funny)
when reading this, my brain produces a level of gamma waves — those linked to consciousness, attention, learning and memory — never before reported in neuroscience!
Re:Humor (Score:5, Funny)
You need to repeat this twice... its a mantra!
Re:Humor (Score:5, Funny)
That's nothing, when reading this, my brain produces a level of gamma waves — those linked to consciousness, attention, learning and memory — never before reported in neuroscience!
Re:Humor (Score:4, Funny)
Wow, so many of you have gotten brain scans... I never have. Call your mom and have her scan my brain, Leonard! I'm jealous! I have no idea if my brain produces a level of gamma waves -- those linked to consciousness, attention, learning and memory --never before reported in neuroscience!
But please have her not make me cry like she did Penny. Not many gamma waves there.
An old lady I know said her brain produces a level of grandma waves -- those linked to consciousness, attention, learning and memory --never before reported in neuroscience!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Humor (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Humor (Score:5, Funny)
The meme should be the "never before reported in neuroscience" bit - added to anything.
Re: (Score:3)
The meme should be the "never before reported in neuroscience" bit - added to anything.
Ah, but memes are oft repeated therefore anything "never before ... " cannot be a meme!
Re: (Score:3)
when reading this, my brain produces a level of gamma waves — those linked to consciousness, attention, learning and memory — never before reported in neuroscience!
When reading this, my brain produces a level of gamma rays — "ouch!"
Re: (Score:2)
Just like Hulk... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Just like Hulk... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Just like Hulk... (Score:5, Informative)
Good talk on this.
http://www.ted.com/talks/matthieu_ricard_on_the_habits_of_happiness.html [ted.com]
Re:Just like Hulk... (Score:5, Insightful)
If I can make a suggestion, you might want to try tai chi. I found sitting meditation tedious and boring, but the meditation in tai chi, which is the same mindfulness meditation found in Buddhism, is a lot more engaging for me.
I started tai chi when my daughter was 10 (she's 23 now) and she and my wife have told me I'm a much happier, easier-to-be-with person since I've been doing tai chi. I'm also a lot more physically healthy.
My lineage grandmaster, Cheng Man Ching, when asked what the difference between the Buddhist meditation and the Chinese tai chi mediation, says that it gets to the same place, but if he's meditating alongside a Buddhist monk and they are attacked by bandits, Master Cheng will be able to neutralize the attackers, protecting himself and the Buddhist monk, without interrupting his meditation.
In other words, it makes you a bad-ass too, which is a plus.
Re:Just like Hulk... (Score:4, Funny)
My lineage grandmaster, Cheng Man Ching, when asked what the difference between the Buddhist meditation and the Chinese tai chi mediation, says that it gets to the same place, but if he's meditating alongside a Buddhist monk and they are attacked by bandits, Master Cheng will be able to neutralize the attackers, protecting himself and the Buddhist monk, without interrupting his meditation.
Not if the bandits have a GE M134 minigun he won't.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know about that, some of those Bhuddist monks can be pretty badassed. I spent a year in Thailand, and in their version of Bhuddism, every young man must spend a year as a monk. I saw a Thai kickboxing vs gungfu match, and the Thais beat the holy shit out of the Chinese. Some of the Gungfu guys wound up in the hospital.
I also saw a few of the guys in the orange robes do shit that made David Copperfield look like a piker.
Re:Just like Hulk... (Score:5, Insightful)
The boredom and tedium you feel during sitting meditation is exactly the problem that sitting meditation is meant to solve-- that is, stopping the mental unrest that makes you constantly want to do things. So you probably *should* be doing sitting meditation. That said, yes it's incredibly frustrating, but supposedly after some time your concentration is developed and it becomes a pleasurable activity. Also I don't know the first thing about Tai Chi (except that you look silly when you do it) so you might be totally correct.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
This really seems to be something we should work into our lives like physical fitness and eating healthy.
Well damn! I haven't done well at including those in my life, either!
Idle? (Score:5, Insightful)
This research has practical uses. It's a shame it was filed under "idle".
Understanding how happiness in the human brain works could lead to new ways to treat depression and other mental illnesses. It could also lead to the development of a tasp like device.
Re: (Score:2)
They didn't measure happiness, they measured brainwaves.
Buddhism - the less abhorrent religion. (Score:5, Insightful)
I find pretty much all religion abhorrent. Buddhism however, while still abhorrent for believing in mystical ideas that go against the simplest (and therefore best) definitions of reality, is definitely less abhorrent than the others. I've seen a lot of quotes from the Dalai Lama that I really appreciate and can agree wholeheartedly with. This is something I can't often say for religious leaders of any other faiths.
What I'd really like to see is some good scientific research put in to this sort of thing, stripping away the associated mysticism and getting right to the core of it. Based on the rather limited article, it appears this might not be too difficult as he may already be keeping the mysticism to a minimum.
Re: (Score:3)
There's quite a bit of "real" at the core of most religions. The problem is that the part that's real is not what they say it is.
For example, group prayer certainly strengthens a community, communicates shared values etc. And quite a few religious rituals do have psychological effects (not all positive - an exorcism is a pretty good way to give someone mental damage).
That is true for most "old knowledges". Strip away the mysticism from things like Meditation, Tantra or some of the esoteric stuff and you fin
Re: (Score:2)
What I'd really like to see is some good scientific research put in to this sort of thing, stripping away the associated mysticism and getting right to the core of it. Based on the rather limited article, it appears this might not be too difficult as he may already be keeping the mysticism to a minimum.
That's probably what these neuroscientists were likely doing. There has been a bunch of psychology research into the benefits of mindfulness meditation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness_(psychology) [wikipedia.org]
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110121144007.htm [sciencedaily.com]
http://nccam.nih.gov/research/results/spotlight/012311.htm [nih.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
This is something I can't often say for religious leaders of any other faiths.
Among every single major religious umbrella, you can find people who are the wisest and nicest folks you've ever heard of, and also people who are the dumbest and meanest folks you've ever heard of.
And that includes atheists: There are plenty of hardworking and moral atheists out there. There are also dogmatic atheists (mostly communists) who ordered that anyone who professed a religion be executed.
Re: (Score:2)
...the simplest (and therefore best) definitions of reality...
Serious question, but how do you find such things as M-Theory or Quantum Mechanics to be the simplest explanation?
Also with regards to scientific research that strips away the mysticism, there is actually quite a bit of solid scientific research into meditation [google.com] that has been going on the past couple years that have been pointing to a number of positive effects due to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Serious question, but how do you find such things as M-Theory or Quantum Mechanics to be the simplest explanation?
Because despite their complexity, no simpler theory has yet been proposed that matches the facts quite as well...
Plus, the jury is still firmly out on M-Theory (although I do admire the elegance, even if it turns out to be horribly wrong)
Also with regards to scientific research that strips away the mysticism, there is actually quite a bit of solid scientific research into meditation [google.com] that has been going on the past couple years that have been pointing to a number of positive effects due to it.
Oh definitely - that's the sort of research I'm interested in. I have no doubt meditation can be extremely useful; but I'd like to understand the mechanisms and whys and wherefores without it all being tied up in mysticism.
Re: (Score:2)
Please note that Buddhism isn't a religion, it is a way of life. Don't confuse the two
Kill the Buddha (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
lol. you don't seem to know jack shit about buddhism. fix that.
lol.... mysticism...
There seems to be a lot of that going around ...
A widely accepted definition of Mysticism is:
Mysticism [wikipedia.org]; from the Greek , mystikos, meaning 'an initiate') is the knowledge of, and especially the personal experience of, states of consciousness, or levels of being, or aspects of reality, beyond normal human perception, sometimes including experience of and communion with a supreme being.
Buddhism fits the definition of Mysticism in that it:
While you
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Unlike other religion, Buddhism itself doesn't even have "rebirth" or "planes of existence" as necessary doctrine.
Quite true; if you remove all of the "optional" stuff, what you've got left is a rather nice bit of philosophy, but it's straining it a bit to call it "Buddhism" at that point. While I don't disagree that there are therefore many "flavours" of Buddhism, each with their own unique beliefs, this is true of pretty much any religion. Buddhism just lends itself significantly better to them all getting along (and accepting the others' beliefs/opinions) instead of fighting each other.
So, while it may technically
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Zen Buddhism has been around for 1500 years or so. It focuses on the main teachings of the Buddha, which in themselves are not particularly mystical, at least in the sense of Gods and Heavens.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Ditto for the existence of supernatural beings.
I'm not well studies on Buddhism, but I thought that the Buddha said that the concept of gods or a creator god was not relevant to his teachings?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your consciousness is reborn every moment. Western science hasn't been able to touch this topic since Descartes left questions of the interaction between mind and body to the church (to avoid Galileo's fate). Many of our most revered mathematicians and natural scientists, e.g. Pythagoras and Newton, were mystics who pondered much more than just planes of existence. Unfortunately, their mystical works have been downplayed to fit the new worldview heralded by the so-called Enlightenment, which in addition to
Re: (Score:3)
The discoveries of entanglement, fields of potential, the now measurable 10 dimensions, and the event horizons in our microtubules put us face to face with these age old mysteries.
I'm sorry, but no - they don't.
Cutting edge science and mysticism may SEEM very similar to the uneducated mind, but they really have little in common with each other.
Don't get me wrong - as you can probably see from my sig (and post history), I'm an advocate of the use of psychedelic substances for getting to know one's own mind better. I have had experiences that I *could* describe as "feeling the presence of the divine"; "touching God"; "embracing the universe"; or any other number of mystical sounding t
Re: (Score:2)
Here is just a spattering of interesting reading.
We've only begun to scratch the surface of consciousness because of the Enlightenment bias. That the frontiers of science are
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe he just installed E17 (Score:5, Funny)
I know when I can get Enlightenment to compile I am very happy, too.
Obligatory SMBC (Score:5, Funny)
http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2569 ... :-)
Redundancy (Score:2)
Enjoy.
Seriously.... (Score:4, Funny)
It's because he's not married :).
Happiness as a metric (Score:2)
Whatever you want to call it - 'happiness', 'wellbeing', or 'contentment', I would think this metric takes into account GDP, unemployment rate, health, and many more. It's what we all ultimately need after all, so why do we never seem to bother with it? Even if a 'level of happiness' is a scientifically vague concept, we could at least make a rough att
The Onion got there first (Score:2)
I find this particularly interesting... (Score:2)
...as just this last weekend I was an attendee of the first internet based PSYCH-K conference in which brain mapping was a good amount of the talks. Also was mentioned of relevant articles published and yet to be published on brain mapping and PSYCH-K.
don't want the waves that way (Score:2)
Re:don't want the waves that way (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember, Buddhist monks can't have sex with a woman or even touch a woman.
Tanzan and Ekido were once traveling together down a muddy road. A heavy rain was falling. As they came around a bend, they met a lovely girl in a silk kimono and sash, unable to cross at an intersection.
"Come on, girl," said Tanzan at once. Lifting her in his arms, he carried her over the mud.
Ekido did not speak until that night when they reached a lodging temple. Then he could no longer restrain himself. "We monks don't go near females," he told Tanzan, "especially not young and lovely ones. It is dangerous. Why did you do that?"
"I left the girl there," said Tanzan. "Are you still carrying her?"
Oh yeah? (Score:2)
Did he sleep with a hot chick last night who was dressed as Wonder Woman? Sorry buddy, you're #2.
After A Couple of Decades of Not Being Happy (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other end of the spectrum ... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Why be happy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Can one not be happy during the process of helping others?
Re:Why be happy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Happiness = Perceived Life / Expected Life
Perceived Life = Actual Life x Perception
Therefore, to be happy, either a) improve your life, b) reduce your expectations or c) change your perception. Looks like this guy went for a mix of (b) and (c). At least that's my take on it.
Re: (Score:3)
Happiness = Perceived Life / Expected Life
Perceived Life = Actual Life x Perception
Therefore, to be happy, either a) improve your life, b) reduce your expectations or c) change your perception. Looks like this guy went for a mix of (b) and (c). At least that's my take on it.
I think you're probably right. It'd be interesting to see if it's possible to get the same results with (a) and (c); which is what I generally strive to do. I think perhaps (b) is significantly easier than (a); but since I enjoy a challenge, I may as well get the most out of that little boost of happiness there than taking the easier path.
Re:Why be happy? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is irrespective of the assumption that it is either possible or desirable to be happy in the first place.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody? It sounds like the subject of the article is. He is happy, and devotes the product of his work to helping those less fortunate.
Re:Why be happy? (Score:5, Insightful)
> Happiness comes about from satisfaction and being content, why get satisfaction and feel content if you have failed in helping others?
You're starting off on the wrong foot, there. If you accept your first statement, you won't find happiness.
Happiness is its own reward, it's its own before-and-after. There's no prerequisite for it other than consciousness.
Knowledge that shit happens in the world and you can have very little effect on that is part of it - acceptance of your part as a small piece of all reality. Attempting to rationalise what doesn't have prerequisites or conditions will always lead you down a path away from it.
So - be happy. trust. let go of a set of rules someone taught you (through words or actions or whatever) and you'll find that discovering your own happiness without putting caveats on your experience of it ("I must help people a certain amount" to "I must earn so much" or whatever) will make you all the more useful as a help to others.
It comes naturally, effortlessly, and is kinda surprising when it does - and it's oddly inexplicable too. But there it is
(fwiw I used to be like you - unconsciously I thought the same way. Then I noticed how I thought, then I made some changes, and then they accelerated to the point I found happiness and contentment and it never left me. 38 years of hell, followed by four years and counting of bliss - and being just plain happy has a profoundly positive effect on people I come in contact with, and makes me all the more responsive to their needs.)
Re: (Score:2)
1. You may not ever be able to help everyone. You should still be happy.
2. We are not discussing getting into some heaven, we are discussing happiness.
Re: (Score:3)
Why drag that into this?
Why are you so unhappy that you wish to make others unhappy?
Measuring something does not cheapen it, only those who have frail faith think so. Everything is chemical, deal with it. Even the feelings you get from discussing and practicing your religion. Again, that does not cheapen it anyway.
Re:Why be happy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Nobody should be overly happy, not when there are so many sad things happening in the world. Instead of being happy, why not help those who aren't. Instead of feeling compassion why not make the sacrifice to act on it? If you are happy, you are probably at least a little selfish. Of course what I have said will anger many people, but it's truth. There are many things you can do to help others in your neighborhood, in your state, country, or planet that you aren't doing.
But the (horribly selfish, but nevertheless realistic) question is "why should I?"
I'm a nice guy in general. People seem to like me. But, I don't do it for the sake of it - I do it because being a nice guy is the best way to get those around me to be nice back, which makes me happy.
I contest that every human being is either inherently ENTIRELY selfish, or have something wrong with them (i.e. insanity). Even those ultra-religious types that beat themselves violently in repentance for sins are doing it on the promise of eternal happiness in heaven. If they truly believed that there was no afterlife, or that they'd suffer for all eternity; they wouldn't do it.
I've yet to see a convincing argument otherwise, including from the "I help others selflessly" crowd - they do it because the act of helping others makes them happy. If helping others made them miserable, they'd stop.
Re: (Score:2)
Most people prefer being surrounded by happy people instead of being surrounded by suffering unhappy people. Thus working to create more happiness in your surroundings is entirely rational even for a perfectly selfish person.
Re: (Score:3)
Most people prefer being surrounded by happy people instead of being surrounded by suffering unhappy people. Thus working to create more happiness in your surroundings is entirely rational even for a perfectly selfish person.
Absolutely, and that's essentially my reasoning for "being a nice guy" as stated. It's also one of the reasons I'm more "left" leaning politically - I want society to take care of the lesser fortunate people so I don't have to deal with as much poverty (and associated crime) in my surroundings.
However, I was arguing against the "don't be happy, because you're not helping people" angle that the OP seemed to be going for. To me, that's senseless.
Re:Why be happy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Helping others can in fact make you feel miserable and often does. For example try helping refugees who have been raped and been through hell. Trust me you will feel miserable. Or go to a camp where there are thousands of people and you can hardly make a difference. You will feel like shit. Yet people do it. Even atheists do it.
You are assuming that people are motivated by the same things as you. There are many serial killers by the way, who believe in God and "know" they are going to suffer in hell, but they still keep their behavior .. maybe it's a selfishness against their future self. But anyway I know for a fact there are people who believe they are going to hell but don't care.
Re: (Score:2)
Helping others can in fact make you feel miserable and often does. For example try helping refugees who have been raped and been through hell. Trust me you will feel miserable. Or go to a camp where there are thousands of people and you can hardly make a difference. You will feel like shit. Yet people do it. Even atheists do it.
I disagree that the (majority of) people doing such things feel "completely" bad about it if they continue doing it. They may feel bad for the people and even cry themselves to sleep every night; become depressed; or otherwise be miserable - but then they either stop doing it (i.e. they realised it doesn't make them happy) or continue doing it (because they also get positive feelings from helping; OR are batshit insane (as I already mentioned as an option))
For the "insane" ones, I really simply mean to say
Re: (Score:2)
I will address the serial killer angle since that is easier to expand .. no they are not insane. They know what they are doing is wrong, they even believe there will be consequences .. they just don't care. Its not just serial killers/child molesters etc. by the way, plenty of common criminals think that way too. I'd venture to guess up to 10% of violent criminals or even drug addicts think this way.
Like a lot of people who smoke cigarettes knowing they might get cancer ... or the people who like the thrill
Re: (Score:2)
First let me say I really don't want to argue - I actually am very interested in what you're trying to say, but I don't quite get it yet.
Like a lot of people who smoke cigarettes knowing they might get cancer ... or the people who like the thrill of exposing themselves to HIV (google bug chasers) they don't care about the consequence they only care about the immediate benefit. Let me stress that, it's not that they think they will escape the consequence .. they know the consequence is coming but simply don't care.
I'm a smoker, who quit and re-started several times - including restarting just yesterday after 5 weeks without.
I also know I won't escape the consequences. These things will probably kill me. But that doesn't go against the idea that I'm striving for happiness above all else; and doing it in an entirely selfish way. I enjoy smoking. I love the way it feels; I love the
Re: (Score:2)
Have you looked into electronic cigarettes?
I was a pack a day smoker, and switched to electronic cigarettes. Was off the cigs totally in a week and have been away from Tobacco (Electronic cigs the way alot of people use them, are a substitute not a method of quitting) and from all of the evidence are not a cancer or emphysema risk. You probably still take the cardio risk but that's something inherent to Nicotine that's never going to be resolved.
They don't have the same 'feeling on cloud nine' feeling you c
Re: (Score:2)
I did try an e-cig as a substitute (as you say, not quit method) for awhile some time back before I quit. I think the lack of the MAOIs is actually why I couldn't stick with it permanently.
I have however been considering experimenting with a combination of the e-cig and supplements that assist with dopamine and serotonin (natural MAOIs like turmeric and nutmeg, plus a serotonin/dopamine/noradrenaline re-uptake inhibitor such as St John's Wort and top it all off with fish-oil tablets. Theoretically, that s
Re: (Score:3)
>I disagree that the (majority of) people doing such things feel "completely" bad about it if they continue doing it. They may feel bad for the people and even cry themselves to sleep every night; become depressed; or otherwise be miserable - but then they either stop doing it (i.e. they realised it doesn't make them happy) or continue doing it (because they also get positive feelings from helping; OR are batshit insane (as I already mentioned as an option))
False dichotomy - which excludes the obvious th
Re: (Score:3)
For example try helping refugees who have been raped and been through hell. Trust me you will feel miserable. Or go to a camp where there are thousands of people and you can hardly make a difference. You will feel like shit.
If you feel miserable, it's probably because you expect something, like saving their souls or some other magic thinking.
Helping others is not about helping them materially, but helping them to change their point of view.
When somebody has been raped, the task is not to deny the rape, but stop their feeling of being a victim, or more exactly accept the past and continue their life.
It's a difficult task, because everybody identifies himself with his body, so a physical rape is considered as a rape of the whole
Re: (Score:2)
Well, actually, every human being that is inherently entirely selfish is utterly insane because people, as social creatures, are normally hardwired for being selfless at least to a point.
What you write is basically reiterating an old joke about a driver who listens to the radio announce: "attention, there is a wrong way driver on the highway" and mutters: "a wrong way driver? more like hundreds of them".
Re:Why be happy? (Score:5, Interesting)
I contest that every human being is either inherently ENTIRELY selfish, or have something wrong with them (i.e. insanity). Even those ultra-religious types that beat themselves violently in repentance for sins are doing it on the promise of eternal happiness in heaven. If they truly believed that there was no afterlife, or that they'd suffer for all eternity; they wouldn't do it.
This is the sort of libertarian nonsense that leads philosophers and psychologists to utterly detest randoids.
The problem with egotism, is it rests almost entirely on tautology. When almost any action can be "explained" by a circular reference to "because its in my self interest" (Why? Because I want to? Why do I want to? Because its in my self interest, ad nauseum) its a theory with no predictive powers, and frankly it runs completely at odds with everything we know about psychology and neuro-biology.
We know we have other drives other than self interest, and they are not underwritten by "self interest" either, just biology and if you explain biology by motive, you end up with mystical reification of processes. Just because we have evolved in our reproductive interests that is not the same as the claim of *intentions*. A mother throwing herself in front of a car to save her child might be acting in her species self interest, but she's not under any circumstances acting INTENTIONALLY in her OWN percieved self interest .
We have extensive networks of mirror neurons that give us the ability to empathise with others.
We have deeply wired structures in our brain that cause us to give up comfort for our children.
We are succeptable to ideological configurations that lead us to place the national interest over our own, and no dying in a kamikase attack in no way advances our personal wellbeing, because our brain design (for want of a better word) allows us to decide that the interest of the nation is more important to our personal interest.
And no, claiming that this is "irrational" doesn't help us here, because if rationality can only be defined (by the egotist creed) as self interested behavior, and self interested behavior is that, according to the randian, which is rational (by the same creed) then we are back into tautology territory again.
I could go on.
So we are stuck with a situation of a thesis about human behavior that can't be justified philosophically without committing fundamental logical errors. We can't justify it psychologically without engaging in fundamental ignorance of over a century of psychological research. We can't justify it scientifically because the evidence directly contradicts the thesis.
And to be honest, the hardest task, is to justify it politically because it seems to demand behaviors that go against everything we know about the proper running of a civil society.
Why do people persist in believing such hogwash? Its mystical solipsist randian nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the sort of libertarian nonsense that leads philosophers and psychologists to utterly detest randoids.
I find it interesting how often you use the words "randian" and "randroid" in your reply. I, for reference, think that most Libertarians are far too anarchistic for my tastes. I'm more or less liberal leaning, although against government interference in my personal affairs (tightly defined: the moment it starts impacting others, it's no longer my personal affairs and I do think the society should have a say)
A mother throwing herself in front of a car to save her child might be acting in her species self interest, but she's not under any circumstances acting INTENTIONALLY in her OWN percieved self interest .
But here you're twisting what I was saying.
I believe the mother IS acting in her own interest - com
Re: (Score:3)
A mother throwing herself in front of a car to save her child might be acting in her species self interest, but she's not under any circumstances acting INTENTIONALLY in her OWN percieved self interest .
But here you're twisting what I was saying. I believe the mother IS acting in her own interest - completely selfishly. She derives happiness from the safety and wellbeing of her child. She knows she'd be devastated if the child were killed.
But deriving happiness from the safety and wellbeing of others is, by definition, not selfish.
You are making a fundamental error in assuming that because something somehow relates back to your self that it is selfish.
Ayn Rand's floppy Logic (Score:3)
Yes, the world is a rather selfish place and most people are rather selfish. That doesn't mean they are ENTIRELY selfish. Non-selfish acts do occur. People help others expecting nothing in return and sometimes getting nothing in
Re: (Score:2)
Just because you get something in return for being non-selfish at points does not mean you were being secretly selfish. For example, you can give someone a present and get in return a good feeling. The good feeling is selfish, but the giving of the present was altruistic. They don't cancel each other out and leave only selfishness. Both exist.
I completely agree, but think we're perhaps using different definitions of "selfish". I define the above act as selfish because the act would not have been performed had there been no reward (or expectation of reward) through the good feelings that come from giving the present.
I don't deny altruism exists - I just say that it only happens because of reward or expectation of reward - even subconsciously.
(as I just replied to someone else, I'm far from an "Ayn Rand Libertarian" - more Liberal than anything r
Re: (Score:2)
I contest that every human being is either inherently ENTIRELY selfish
You are wrong, every human is inherently entirely selfish. For example, if you have children, you probably think that you are not selfish, but WHY did you want to have children ?
I've yet to see a convincing argument otherwise, including from the "I help others selflessly" crowd - they do it because the act of helping others makes them happy. If helping others made them miserable, they'd stop.
If you help other to make yourself happy, you are selfish.
In fact, as long as you expect something from your actions, you are selfish.
The correct way is to practice disinterested action, and of course, you don't have to force yourself to help everybody, just people that need your help (and money is not the solution !).
The best text
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People are not motivated entirely by self interest. People do not reason through every decision and categorize things as things that will make them happy or not happy. A lot is going on in the subconscious mind that we are not even aware of and the primary function is not to increase happiness but to increase the likelihood of survival and procreation.
Re: (Score:2)
People are not motivated entirely by self interest. People do not reason through every decision and categorize things as things that will make them happy or not happy. A lot is going on in the subconscious mind that we are not even aware of and the primary function is not to increase happiness but to increase the likelihood of survival and procreation.
Absolutely... but what I was arguing is that we're "wired" to derive happiness (in general) from the things that increase the likelihood of survival and procreation. By being wired as such, we WANT to do those things, because they make us happy.
I never meant to imply reasoning on a conscious level for these things (that of course also happens; but for the most part, not).
Re: (Score:2)
Quote: I've yet to see a convincing argument otherwise, including from the "I help others selflessly" crowd - they do it because the act of helping others makes them happy. If helping others made them miserable, they'd stop.
I worked at a church sponsored food bank for a few years. I filled the role most others didn't want to, the interviewer. I asked existing customers how they were doing, and signed new people up. I asked everyone the same question, "How is it going?" Keep in mind most would have bee
Re: (Score:2)
What did I get out of it, why did I do it for several years? Because it gave me an incredible sense of humility and a true understanding of what I have in life. And it felt good to, on some minimal level, help someone feel a bit better.
And this is exactly the point I was making...
Re: (Score:2)
It's actually the people who are really ENTIRELY selfish that are insane. Humans have evolved as social animals and many behaviors that benefit the groups you live in / identify with will be rewarded by the brain in exactly the same manner as selfish behavior is.
Do you have any evidence for this? Searching around, I found a few hits that tend to point in this direction, but nothing definitive.
I think it's entirely possible to explain altruism and other positive social behaviour through selfishness. As I said in my post above; I'm a nice guy - I'm just not under the illusion that I'm not getting anything out of it. And the moment society stops rewarding me for being nice is the moment I stop being nice (I don't expect that moment to ever come to pass, simply beca
Re: (Score:2)
If you had read TFA:
He addressed the World Economic Forum in Davos at the height of the financial crisis in 2009 to tell gathered heads of state and business leaders it was time to give up greed in favor of "enlightened altruism."
His other works include "Happiness: A Guide to Developing Life's Most Important Skill" and several collections of photographs of the landscape, people and spiritual masters of the Himalayas.
Ricard donates all proceeds of his books to 110 humanitarian projects which have built schools for 21,000 children and provide healthcare for 100,000 patients a year.
I think this guy has done far, far more than his fair share to bring happiness to others, much more than what 99.99 % of the rest of humankind will ever do.
The nice thing about Buddhism is that the most philosophical branches are almost devoid of religious thought but full useful guidelines for life. Amazingly, for example, for applying Zen concepts to popular electronics is that at the Zen Rinzai school Steve Jobs is considered a Zen master.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Happiness is the natural result of not identifying with a self that is separate from others. Selfishness is the antithesis of happiness.
In Buddhist terminology, true compassion is the sense of you-are-the-same-as-me that automatically moves one to act alleviate the suffering of another (because it hurts the helper almost the same). It's not the same as pity, which may not be sufficient to motivate helping. Paradoxically (to people unaccustomed to practicing compassion), feeling the suffering of others who a
Re: (Score:2)
"Ricard donates all proceeds of his books to 110 humanitarian projects which have built schools for 21,000 children and provide healthcare for 100,000 patients a year."
Given this (taken from the article), it sounds to me like he certainly sympathizes with those in unfortunate situations and does what he can to help make their lives better.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually some time ago I read about a study that said basically that a person feels happier if he was performing (in some respect) better than another person. This form of happiness comes with the UNhappiness of other people. The happiest man alive is doing way better than his peers, while his peers must be feeling very unhappy.
This actually contradicts with the idea of feeling compassion leading to happiness, thus I can only conclude that happiness is something which is totally not understood yet.
Re: (Score:2)
The article says that this monk was eschewing intimate relationships and a career. This means that he basically (for a long time) had no peers, which could solve this apparent contradiction.
Re:Why be happy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Nobody should be overly happy, not when there are so many sad things happening in the world. [...] Of course what I have said will anger many people, but it's truth.
"Angry" doesn't even begin to describe it. I've seen people I loved so down that they tried to kill themselves. Do you want to know what I think about people who deny others happiness? They should be taken out back and shot. Twice. Right now.
You are making a dramatic, serious and inexcusible mistake there. You confuse happiness with apathy. You think that people who are happy have no desire of helping others. You think that compassion means feeling horrible because someone else does. You think that people who are happy don't care about others.
And nothing could be further from the truth. People who are unhappy are the ones who stop caring about others. People who are depressed are more likely to fall into apathy than people who are in joy. People who share the feelings of others too much are less likely to be able to help them and more likely to drag them down even further.
Now you will probably argue that you said "overly", but that's a strawman. Who is going to decide on what level of happiness is fine and which is too much? You?
If everyone would be as happy as this dude, the world would be a much better place. Sure, we'd still have hurricanes, but we'd have a lot less war, poverty and inequality.
Now, please take yourself out back and put you out of your misery. We have way too many people like you on this planet, who begrudge other people's happiness.
Re: (Score:2)
He does help others. That is what makes him happy and it is actually what makes a lot of people happy. Humans are wired to release happy brain chemicals and energy release when we help others. That is why they have him meditate on compassion during the measurements. They already know that compassion to other human beings will increase the happiness that he feels.
Re: (Score:2)
Cause happiness have nothing to do with material possessions.
Wrong. Happiness is different for everyone. And some people are perfectly happy with their little toys. Others are unhappy no matter how many trinkets they have. Some people are happy making others miserable. Others are happy making others happy. You can't just pick something and call it happiness and expect everyone to abide by it.
Re: (Score:2)
No there a measurable threshold. Below some level of poverty pretty much everyone will be very unhappy. Above that level the correlation starts to fall apart quite quickly.
No one is happy making others miserable, that is a different feeling that can be pleasant but is not the happiness these scientists measured. We have chosen something and called it happiness and measured it, deal with it. That ship has sailed.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
No sure if serious or just trolling ...
So you're suggesting a happy programmer is a bad programmer? That's ...eh... weird.
Re:Ignorance is bliss (Score:5, Insightful)
The article itself hints at the applications - the research focused on emotional balance. We have a growing problem with depression in the US. If we can find a reliable way to alter brain chemistry through meditation - that provides a very compelling alternative to medication. Even if the impact isn't strong enough or reliable enough to use instead of medication - it might improve one's prognosis when used in tandem with medication or traditional therapy. Exciting research with practical use.
Bliss is Bliss (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In Christianism too, monks choose to live in celibacy.
And to practice buddhism, you don't need to live as a monk, there are a lot of other ways.
Did you ever hear about Tantra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantra) or more exactly Vajrayana (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vajrayana) ?
Re: (Score:2)
Meditation is a poor substitute for sex.
Hmmm, has anyone run this brain scan on Hugh Hefner?