The "Fight or Flight" adrenaline effect is yet another (possibly clever?) explanatory note; the specific adversity/disaster is important. I don't believe in any general "happiness while hungry" or "happiness while in pain". But when the crummy circumstance was caused by a more specific threat, the adrenaline creates a chemical mood change, at least temporarily. In war, repeatedly. It's not clear if EP tests given to the Russians during the war would give the same results as those same tests a few years after the war -- I think not; "what's too painful to remember, we simply choose to forget; so it's the laughter, which we remember..."
Another issue is solidarity -- when people can join together to fight against the bad situation, and those nearby are similarly enduring the problems. Not "misery loves company", but "we shall overcome" and "we're all in this together". Mob pyschology / holy spirit in gatherings (?); the US 60's protests generated intense feelings, and many ex hippies never felt generally as good again. And one more issue, the "lack of regret" about decisions, especially in war. Most soldiers follow orders, which they're not really responsible for. For many people, too many choices, too much freedom, causes unhappy indecisiveness about what is desired and what should be chosen. In a stressful time when there are few or no other choices, there is no opportunity-lost regret about what wasn't done. The clarity of pure action implementation, "do, or do not; there is no try", allows a focus of effort and, if successful, a pure enjoyment. This is also related to the enjoyment of trying your hardest, really giving 100% of yourself, to a "worthy" goal. This sounds like sports; when I played ultimate at lunch, it was great to stop thinking about work and the world etc., and just strive to be the best I could be. It also sounds like cramming for tests in university. Insofar as lack of choice is important, then it's probably a little outside of utility maximizing considerations. Whether "disaster raises happiness"; or, if there's more happiness under adversity, then why? is really interesting and leads down many paths. Tom Grey -----Original Message----- From: fabio guillermo rojas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 2:27 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust Well, the second-hand report supplied by me was just one bit of evidence in support of the more general observation that some people report that they are happiest in situations of adversity - a point raised by Robin. Someone volunteered that a survey had shown that some Russians were happiest during WWII, when millions were killed or starved to death. The question is whether this situation - happiness during adversity - is typical for certain contexts. That't empirical. The theoretical question is Robin's: if it is true that you can increase your happiness in crummy circumstance, then is that not a challenge to the utility maximizing hypothesis that modern economics is based on? Fabio
