Relationships with friends and family and more specifically love, both passionate and companionate, are important “C” factors that can influence how we can arrive at happiness.  Our work “flow” is a powerful “V” in which we can create a situation where we are so engaged (referred to as “vital engagement” in the book) that we lose sense of time and space.  That component of work must carry with it a larger purpose; we must be able to wield some degree of autonomy; and we must feel a sense of mastery.  These three components will be discussed further when we cover Daniel Pink’s book, Drive.

In summary, we can become happy in our lives not because of just some internal quality we have nor due to external life circumstances but through a marriage of both.  More specifically, it is the interaction of the two, the internal and the external, that can lead to our happiest condition.  If we are unhappy inside of us, the external world will not make us happy.  If we are happy enough inside, we can create conditions outside that will truly affect and ratchet up our happiness inside.  Happiness comes from between, as Haidt puts it.

The example that opens the chapter is Ben Franklin, who despite his manifold achievements in diverse fields, lived his life by focusing each week on a particular virtue, ensuring each day that he did not violate that virtue with a black mark on his calendar.  Although he self-admittedly failed at humility (he faked it well), he lived a richer life because he adhered to a code that guided his life.

Altruism in the form of volunteerism can promote health and happiness but interestingly in broad sociological evaluations not equally across the different age brackets.  For the younger teenager who is just establishing his or her own identity and forming new social networks, volunteerism is not as critical a factor to developing happiness.  For the middle-aged person who has established his or her own “story” of virtue, volunteerism that conforms to that narrative can help considerably.  However, in the elderly, volunteerism can more certainly create a healthier and happier life and perhaps even prolong it.  The reason for that assertion is several fold:  the elderly have begun to lose their social strands through death and separation, and meaning is more defined for them by giving back than by achieving.

Durkeim whom we have cited before has asserted that societies that have no consistent moral fiber, a state in which he defines as anomie, has a less than happy populace.  When we support complete freedom without accountability, we enter an anomic society that can lead to purported greater unhappiness.  As humans, we gain happiness by having a sense of justice and order.

Martin Seligman who in 1998 founded the field of positive psychology tried to move us away from looking at pathological mental diseases and toward how we can live fuller, better lives.  He argued that living life by six common virtuous traits that he found across cultures (wisdom, courage, humanity, justice, temperance, and transcendence) would help us live these more enriched lives.  He then subdivided these six traits into specific character traits (that obviously the author states could be debated):

1. Wisdom
   1. Curiosity
   2. Love of learning
   3. Judgment
   4. Ingenuity
   5. Emotional intelligence
   6. Perspective
2. Courage
   1. Valor
   2. Perseverance
   3. Integrity
3. Humanity
   1. Kindness
   2. Loving
4. Justice
   1. Citizenship
   2. Fairness
   3. Leadership
5. Temperance
   1. Self-control
   2. Prudence
   3. Humility
6. Transcendence
   1. Appreciation of beauty and excellence
   2. Gratitude
   3. Hope
   4. Spirituality
   5. Forgiveness
   6. Humor
   7. Zest

The point of this blog is not to espouse a religious or political agenda (as you know I have abstained from such platforms) but to help anyone of any persuasion see the merit of living a virtuous life, if for no other reason as it is a foundation for attaining happiness.

We are all familiar with the concept of post-traumatic stress disorder but have we heard of post-traumatic growth?  When someone is stricken with the diagnosis of cancer, does that not reprioritize everything in his or her life?  What happens when adversity strikes us?  How do we emerge from it?

For me, Nietzsche’s idea that what doesn’t kill us makes us stronger is a propos.  The adversity that I have overcome in my life has definitely transformed my life in special ways that I am indebted to have experienced.  We should never wish upon ourselves adversity but we can grow from them.

A study had two groups of people who faced devastating tragedies, e.g., rape, death of a dear family member, etc., and had one group write about their terrible situation for 4 days almost incessantly and constantly while the second group did not.  Months to years later the scientists followed the two groups and found that not only the psychological welfare of the first group was emboldened but so was their physical health.  It seemed almost that the type of tragedy did not influence the outcome but how the individual was able to express that tragedy in a cathartic way did.

As we talked about in the last couple of blogs, we as humans are “ultrasocial” beings far greater than in the animal world.  We need other humans with us to give our life meaning and substance.  What we can do to get over our tragedy is to feel connected with others by sharing that experience out loud and thereby giving us a channel of freedom.

A study found that the right time for the first major adversity to strike was somewhere in the late teens to early/mid twenties.  When people encountered their first major life adversity after the age of 30, they were found to be less resilient and could not grow as much from that experience.

In short, the right timing (late teens to early twenties), the right amount (not enough to cause PTSD), and to the right person (someone who has a social network around him/her) can lead to the most fruitful “post-traumatic growth” that can lead to being empathic with others who suffer and to being hopefully a better person who can use that experience to help others grow in a similar way.

He then explores the idea of passionate versus companionate love.  He looks at how many of the ancient writers viewed passionate love as a negative trait because of its ephemeral nature, and Haidt recommends that no one be allowed to get married until they at least pass through this initial intoxication, as he argues you should not allow a drunken man access to his car.

Passionate love with its attendant intensity soon burns out.  However, companionate love endures and strengthens.  Haidt shows on a timetable that although passionate and companionate love are separate entities that they are necessary in any long-term relationship and that couples who have made it past their 50^th wedding anniversary are heavily imbued with companionate love but can still have a nice residual of passionate love albeit not as strong as during their initial courting.

He likens passionate love to a drug like heroin.  When we take heroin (fortunately I can only speak theoretically here), we get an intoxicating high but after a while that intoxication fades, as the release of sustained dopamine dulls our senses and we become tolerant.   In contrast, someone who is involved in a long-term relationship the high of being with that person for short bursts of time separated by long separations is like the heroin without the attenuated addiction.  The addiction stays strong because it is only infrequent and there is not acclimation to the drug.  People in long-distance relationships beware.

He then cites the work of Emile Durkheim that shows that suicide rates are highest among individuals with very few social connections.  The fewer social connections, e.g., presence of parents, friends, and even more importantly spouses and children, create higher risk of suicide.  The proposition that even the most introverted can have tremendous benefit through even mild extroverted activities.  As Haidt posits, we humans are tremendously “ultrasocial” creatures and thrive on that interaction.  As supported in our previous blog, Mary can be much happier than Bob because of her extensive social connections despite the world’s limited view of her social rank.  I guess love conquers all, or at least social connections help us build our immune system and grow old happily.

Haidt says that the V can be made up of what Martin Seligman calls “pleasures and gratifications.”  Pleasures are things that bring in particular bodily pleasure like food and sex.  But too much of either, and you reach satiety.  If you listen to your favorite CD 15 times in a row, it no longer becomes that special.

Gratifications are things in which you can lose your self-consciousness in and become so immersed that you lose all sense of time and effort.  This happens oftentimes when someone is engaged in pursuit of what he or she loves to do.    Whereas pleasures must be punctuated, gratification need not be as tied to this problem.  Flow is defined as truly getting in the moment like when athletes are totally immersed in the moment.

I actually experience flow almost every day and for that I am grateful.  When I am operating on a patient, I am totally lost in the moment.  I mean totally.  It is a wonderful feeling.  My mother recently said, “I am so sorry that you have to work so hard doing hair transplants and making thousands of tiny sites.”  I replied, “Work?  What work?  It is a joyous moment when I am in that room making exquisite patterns and engaging with my team.”  That is flow.  Find your flow to help elevate your V.

To make pleasures more pleasurable, find variety, as the expression goes, “Variety is the spice of life.”  Haidt talks about how the French like to eat small portions of fatty foods, slowly and in the company of others.  Americans pick restaurants based on portion size.  Of course, large portions of anything are exactly what causes loss of enjoyment in the first place.

There are many Vs that we can find, including helping our neighbor, enjoying the company of a friend, etc.  Isolated pursuit of money and power can actually lead to the opposite effect:  social ostracism, lack of meaning, and eventual adaptation.

The Happiness Formula that Haidt proposes is as follows:

H = S + C + V

H stands for happiness; S, for set point; C, for external conditions; and V, for voluntary actions.  In the strictest definition (and perhaps a bit fatalistic) we could say that H = S.  We are stuck with our genes.  But that is not the case.  Buddhists would argue that H = S + V, i.e., if we pursue the eightfold path and work toward how we view the world that we can reset our set point.  This is true but there are certain things (C) that can affect us that lie beyond our adaptation.

What are these C’s?  Studies have shown that one C is noise.  People that live in noisy homes may never fully adapt to the abrupt alteration to their quietude.  Another C is commute.  Those that have to struggle against a long, onerous drive may be more stressed by the time they get to work despite living in a more tranquil environment at home.  Lack of control where one feels beholden to another can be a negative external C that is hard to acclimate to.  Shame is a C that he says can relate to body and facial appearance.  He says that studies have shown that plastic surgery (how appropriate) can actually create long-term positive, psychological changes that can last years with added self-confidence and improved self-image.  Finally, relationships constitutes the final major C, which will be discussed in a subsequent blog.  Obviously, the more we work on V, the less that C will affect us but C is a major player that we should strive to adjust to raise our H.

Bob may have many of the external trappings of happiness like success, wealth, and youth.  But Mary has many of the less tangible elements that can actually be much more important like marriage and religion.  Social connections for someone can form the bedrock of happiness.  Those that are alienated from heavy social connections find themselves less happy in many cases.

Remembering yesterday’s blog on the Happiness Set Point, Bob was probably pretty happy when he got his new job, bought his new car, and moved into his new house.  However, how long do you think that lasted?  To the world that does not possess Bob’s wealth, that world would think for quite some time.  The reality is that Bob adjusted to his Happiness Set Point rather quickly.  With Mary’s extensive social connections, she is probably much happier than Bob is.

The reason for the lack of distance between these two seemingly extreme events is due to the Adaptation Principle.  We humans tend to respond happily to a positive change and negatively to a negative change but once the change has set in we get used to it and no longer see the beauty or ugliness in it.

The lottery winner will buy a new house, eat better food, wear nice clothes, quit the day job.  A year later the lottery winner may chuckle at how perverse his or her previous life was but may or may really enjoy that difference anymore because the difference vanishes.  The lottery winner adjusts to the new house and car and it seems like the old house and car.  The new anxieties that come with wealth:  “I could lose it”; “People are treating me differently now”; “I cannot trust anyone.”; and “Now I am harassed by relatives I have not seen in a long time.” – may offset the gain from the new amenities and luxuries that wealth affords.

The quadriplegic on the other hand has freedoms fewer than a prisoner and may not want to live.  He/she cannot have sex, must have attendants take care of basic bodily functions, cannot aspire to great, lofty goals, etc.  However, after a year, many quadriplegics reset their goals and aspirations back to a point of equilibrium.  Someone asked the famous astrophysicist Stephen Hawking how he could stand being a quadriplegic.  He replied that after his life was adjusted to a zero in his early twenties everything after that was a bonus.

Then should we not strive for anything if we all return to our basic Happiness Set Point?  Well, that will be a subject in coming blogs.  The answer is not that easy.

Haidt talks about genetically identical twins that despite being separated at birth may come into each other’s lives much later in life and possess very similar outlooks on life.  These separated-at-birth identical twins that contain the same genetic blueprint are not truly identical in every way but they do possess a certain happiness outlook that across many identical twins can account for 50 to 80% of their happiness.

In one story, Haidt talks about a set of two identical twins that did not know about each other until 40 years of age but when they met they were wearing very similar outfits and both laughed spontaneously in mid-sentence and shared a similar cheery outlook.

This is not the case with fraternal twins who possess only 50% of the same genetic makeup.  The 50% difference is enough to make the twins completely different in the way that they see the world so that similarity in outlook is almost not apparent.  Accordingly, genetics and environment have factors that we will explore later.

However, Haidt talks about three concrete ways to readjust your Happiness Set Point.  First, he discusses meditation.  For any of you who have not tried it, you will be magically surprised at how alleviating it can be.  Sometimes without proper guidance from someone else it may be particularly difficult to master this trick during the first few outings.  I am writing this blog en route to New York where our delay in flight due to weather stretched out several hours that made my mother particularly nervous and ill at ease.  I worked with her through meditation and after a short 5 minute intervention, her entire brain chemistry changed and she was calm and relaxed leading up to the flight and throughout the remainder of the flight.

The second thing that Haidt discusses is cognitive therapy.  By helping people who are chronically depressed see coping mechanisms and ways to structure alternative strategies, people can become enlightened and work themselves out of their own depression.

The third way that Haidt proposes is through conventional medicinal route like Prozac, that over 5 to 6 weeks changes one’s brain chemistry.  Haidt, who suffered from a grim outlook on life, took Prozac and 8 weeks into it, all of a sudden started to wear rose-colored glasses, as he says.  However, the pill affected his memory, which he needed as a college professor so he eventually stopped taking it.  However, he swears by it and misses its effect.  Obviously, this is the short route to attain a higher happiness set point.  My sister, who has battled depression for most of her life, has been liberated in a profound way with anti-depressants.  To me, it can be a much-beneficial method to help someone in need get what they require to reset their happiness to a higher plane.

In coming blogs, Haidt will outline a larger picture of how we all can achieve happiness in more profound ways than simply taking a pill or chanting.  However, these are ways that may or may not work for you in your journey toward happiness.

Haidt envisions a human mind like a rider on an elephant.  The rider represents our conscious mind and the elephant represents the unconscious mind, similar in many respects to Maxwell Maltz’s idea that our conscious mind can steer our unconscious mind like a torpedo toward a target.  However, Haidt also recognizes some of the inherent limitations of our being able to do that at all times.  The elephant being an animal carries with it the capricious whims of the animal kingdom.  Our elephant side is reflected in our basal instincts of lust, anger, spontaneity, and desire for revenge, etc.

He talks about this condition as the “Divided Self” and how we can focus ourselves to tame the elephant in constructive ways.  However, no matter how divided we are as a self, we are one self and must own up to the elephant in each of us.  Like Dan Ariely’s masterful book, Predictably Irrational, that we covered last year, we all as humans have a certain quirkiness that is hard to understand through rigorous logical accounting.  Admitting our elephant side as being an integral component to ourselves is a first and necessary step.