[FairfieldLife] Re: Britain's happiness in decline
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Just saw the first of 6 BBC programmes on this series about > happiness. The idea that happiness is the goal and things like money > and pleasure are just a means to it was put forward by Aristotle. > After a certain income - about $15,000 - any extra happiness from > economic consumption is fleeting and has diminishing returns. > Moreover whilst prosperity has trebled since the mid-fifties > happiness has fallen from 52% then to just 36% today. > > Yes these are "subjective" measures but they do seem to correlate > with more tangible "effects". Smoking can cost 3 years of one's > life; unhappiness 9 years. The "good feel" factor has attracted > political interest but all governments are obsessed with GNP growth - > which we know won't make much difference to happiness. > > However the first country to adopt National Happiness as its "GNP" > is the Kingdom of Bhutan. Not sure how this works out in practice - > so far they've decided to ban advertising boards and plastic bags! > > I agree that questionnaires are rather rough measures and in a cult > setting especially unreliable. But perhaps in future there might be > brainwaves and other physiological measures that can be used in > addition. > > But I see this new "serious" interest in the happiness of the > population as a positive development. I agree...a good sign. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" > > wrote: > > > > > > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/happiness_formula/4771908.stm > > > > Did you take the "Happiness Test" at that link? > > I scored "Highly Satisfied." That and a couple > > of bucks will get me a cuppa java at Starbucks. :-) > > > > But this article brings up the same question for > > me that another recently-posted article about > > relative happiness as measured by *asking* people > > whether they were happy or not did: > > > > How meaningful is the result of such polling in > > a cult community? > > > > I'm not talking just about TM or real cults or > > even just spiritual communitites here...for the > > purpose of this question, you could include the > > employees of a company whose PR image proudly > > proclaims that it provides "a perfect work envir- > > onment," or a small town that bills itself as > > "the perfect place to live." What I'm suggesting > > is that these self-polling data collection methods > > are (or should be) suspect when they are used in > > a community that exerts pressure on its members > > to conform to a "group image" of some sort. > > > > For example, I would suspect that you would have > > a completely different set of answers to the > > "how happy are you" test in Fairfield, depend- > > ing on who was administering the test. > > > > If it were being given by the TMO, you'd get the > > expected "very happy" answers. But if the test had > > absolutely nothing to do with the TMO, and the > > people being asked the questions knew that the > > data was theoretically never going to be seen by > > people in the TM movement, I would expect you'd > > get a more balanced "happy" to "fairly happy" set > > of answers. > > > > This tendency to answer poll questions the way > > the questioners want you to answer them was a > > well known and oft-discussed phenomenon in the > > Psych and Sociology courses I took in college. > > We even did one experiment in which half the class > > was given a test to administer to subjects and told > > that they were trying to prove Theorem A, and the > > other half of the class was given the same test > > to administer (without knowing it was the same), > > and told that they were trying to prove Theorem > > B (the opposite). Natch, the first group got > > results proving Theorem A and the second group got > > results proving the exact opposite, using the > > exact same test. I never forgot that experiment, > > and remain skeptical of all "polled" research data > > to this day. > > > To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Maharishi university of management Maharishi mahesh yogi Ramana maharshi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Britain's happiness in decline
Just saw the first of 6 BBC programmes on this series about happiness. The idea that happiness is the goal and things like money and pleasure are just a means to it was put forward by Aristotle. After a certain income - about $15,000 - any extra happiness from economic consumption is fleeting and has diminishing returns. Moreover whilst prosperity has trebled since the mid-fifties happiness has fallen from 52% then to just 36% today. Yes these are "subjective" measures but they do seem to correlate with more tangible "effects". Smoking can cost 3 years of one's life; unhappiness 9 years. The "good feel" factor has attracted political interest but all governments are obsessed with GNP growth - which we know won't make much difference to happiness. However the first country to adopt National Happiness as its "GNP" is the Kingdom of Bhutan. Not sure how this works out in practice - so far they've decided to ban advertising boards and plastic bags! I agree that questionnaires are rather rough measures and in a cult setting especially unreliable. But perhaps in future there might be brainwaves and other physiological measures that can be used in addition. But I see this new "serious" interest in the happiness of the population as a positive development. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" > wrote: > > > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/happiness_formula/4771908.stm > > Did you take the "Happiness Test" at that link? > I scored "Highly Satisfied." That and a couple > of bucks will get me a cuppa java at Starbucks. :-) > > But this article brings up the same question for > me that another recently-posted article about > relative happiness as measured by *asking* people > whether they were happy or not did: > > How meaningful is the result of such polling in > a cult community? > > I'm not talking just about TM or real cults or > even just spiritual communitites here...for the > purpose of this question, you could include the > employees of a company whose PR image proudly > proclaims that it provides "a perfect work envir- > onment," or a small town that bills itself as > "the perfect place to live." What I'm suggesting > is that these self-polling data collection methods > are (or should be) suspect when they are used in > a community that exerts pressure on its members > to conform to a "group image" of some sort. > > For example, I would suspect that you would have > a completely different set of answers to the > "how happy are you" test in Fairfield, depend- > ing on who was administering the test. > > If it were being given by the TMO, you'd get the > expected "very happy" answers. But if the test had > absolutely nothing to do with the TMO, and the > people being asked the questions knew that the > data was theoretically never going to be seen by > people in the TM movement, I would expect you'd > get a more balanced "happy" to "fairly happy" set > of answers. > > This tendency to answer poll questions the way > the questioners want you to answer them was a > well known and oft-discussed phenomenon in the > Psych and Sociology courses I took in college. > We even did one experiment in which half the class > was given a test to administer to subjects and told > that they were trying to prove Theorem A, and the > other half of the class was given the same test > to administer (without knowing it was the same), > and told that they were trying to prove Theorem > B (the opposite). Natch, the first group got > results proving Theorem A and the second group got > results proving the exact opposite, using the > exact same test. I never forgot that experiment, > and remain skeptical of all "polled" research data > to this day. > To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Maharishi university of management Maharishi mahesh yogi Ramana maharshi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Britain's happiness in decline
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/happiness_formula/4771908.stm Did you take the "Happiness Test" at that link? I scored "Highly Satisfied." That and a couple of bucks will get me a cuppa java at Starbucks. :-) But this article brings up the same question for me that another recently-posted article about relative happiness as measured by *asking* people whether they were happy or not did: How meaningful is the result of such polling in a cult community? I'm not talking just about TM or real cults or even just spiritual communitites here...for the purpose of this question, you could include the employees of a company whose PR image proudly proclaims that it provides "a perfect work envir- onment," or a small town that bills itself as "the perfect place to live." What I'm suggesting is that these self-polling data collection methods are (or should be) suspect when they are used in a community that exerts pressure on its members to conform to a "group image" of some sort. For example, I would suspect that you would have a completely different set of answers to the "how happy are you" test in Fairfield, depend- ing on who was administering the test. If it were being given by the TMO, you'd get the expected "very happy" answers. But if the test had absolutely nothing to do with the TMO, and the people being asked the questions knew that the data was theoretically never going to be seen by people in the TM movement, I would expect you'd get a more balanced "happy" to "fairly happy" set of answers. This tendency to answer poll questions the way the questioners want you to answer them was a well known and oft-discussed phenomenon in the Psych and Sociology courses I took in college. We even did one experiment in which half the class was given a test to administer to subjects and told that they were trying to prove Theorem A, and the other half of the class was given the same test to administer (without knowing it was the same), and told that they were trying to prove Theorem B (the opposite). Natch, the first group got results proving Theorem A and the second group got results proving the exact opposite, using the exact same test. I never forgot that experiment, and remain skeptical of all "polled" research data to this day. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Maharishi university of management Maharishi mahesh yogi Ramana maharshi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
