Happiness?

[Dave2002]

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/04/finland-happiness-lagom-hygge.html

The Grim Secret of Nordic Happiness

I particularly liked this article, which makes a lot of sense to me as I lived in Sweden for several years, and read some of the books on lifestyle and "hygge"[Danish]
as well as having the comparison of the USA and other countries I've travelled to for various reasons.

The explanation of how the "happiness" measure is estimated is also enlightening.

Now - should we all just read it and forget about it, or go out and get "pants drunk"?

[I really should learn that Finnish word, and how to pronounce it .... ]

[vinteuil]

"pants drunk" -

[I really should learn that Finnish word, and how to pronounce it .... ]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bf/FI-kalsarikannit.ogg

.

[french frank]

'this emotionless definition of happiness" + expectations + lagom is surely more about contentment than happiness? And some people are content with contentment while the writer here clearly prefers the joy + emotional definition of the word. Temperament + culture?

[Serial_Apologist]

Everyone here must of course be familiar with Brigitte Bardot's 's definition of happiness!

[Keraulophone]

Television chef Nancy Lam came last in yesterday’s Celebrity Mastermind (BBC1). She scored just one point on her specialist subject Rod Stewart, and told John Humphrys that he made her nervous. Hardly able to comprehend the questions, let alone know the answers, Nancy was audibly motivated by the prospect of aiding a children’s air ambulance charity.

What shone out from the screen was that she was a very happy person, despite not being content with her performance in the quiz, and even admitting that most chefs are angry.

[cloughie]

Television chef Nancy Lam came last in yesterday’s Celebrity Mastermind (BBC1). She scored just one point on her specialist subject Rod Stewart, and told John Humphrys that he made her nervous. Hardly able to comprehend the questions, let alone know the answers, Nancy was audibly motivated by the prospect of aiding a children’s air ambulance charity.

What shone out from the screen was that she was a very happy person, despite not being content with her performance in the quiz, and even admitting that most chefs are angry.

Off topic Keraulophone are you involved with the choir and the Tim Rice G7 song?

[Keraulophone]

Off topic Keraulophone are you involved with the choir and the Tim Rice G7 song?

Boys and girls only + 13,000 signed up. (Some amazing aerial video in the cathedral.)

https://www.sing2g7.org/

[Dave2002]

Another view - https://getpocket.com/explore/item/a...nt-to-be-happy

Though I don't agree with this - opinion - from the journalist who wrote the article - trying to distort or re-interpret what the psychologist said

This theory helps to explain our current social media-driven culture. To some extent, we care less about enjoying ourselves than presenting the appearance of an enviable existence. We’re preoccupied with quantifying friends and followers rather than spending time with people we like. And ultimately, this makes us miserable.

No I'm not .... and no it doesn't necessarily .... though that's a logical condition. If the first part of the statement doesn't apply then the second part is irelevant.

That's her opinion, not that of the expert the article is based on.

[french frank]

Another view - https://getpocket.com/explore/item/a...nt-to-be-happy

Though I don't agree with this - opinion - from the journalist who wrote the article - trying to distort or re-interpret what the psychologist said


No I'm not .... and no it doesn't necessarily .... though that's a logical condition. If the first part of the statement doesn't apply then the second part is irelevant.

That's her opinion, not that of the expert the article is based on.

Interesting that the distinction the psychologist makes between happiness and satisfaction (satis = enough) is pretty close to what I said about happy and contented (= satisfied), the emotional and the non-emotional states. And 'satisfaction' is related to the Swedish 'lagom' ('just the right amount') in the link of the OP.

You may not be concerned about quantifying friends and followers, but it seems that many people on social media are. They seem to think that having a lot of 'friends' is the same as having a lot of friends.

[Dave2002]

You may not be concerned about quantifying friends and followers, but it seems that many people on social media are. They seem to think that having a lot of 'friends' is the same as having a lot of friends.

I don't think that counting "friends" on social media is a good way to evaluate things.

What I find really disturbing, and not just in that article, is the way so many journalists and interviewers make statements like "We all want to ....", "Everyone needs ....", and even "It has been shown by research that ... we all ...." Many of these statements are either projections by the journalist or interviewer on to their readers, watchers or listeners, and are simply made for the purposes of having something to say - keeping their job. Some statements are just plain false, or biased, or not backed up by serious research. After all a journalist or interviewer who didn't have anything to say might not keep favour with his or her employer, but there are several factors. Firstly, if an interviewer or commentator is interviewing someone, then it's the views of the interviewee which are important, not those of the interviewer. In some cases an interviewer may have views and can use those for deeper probing - nothing wrong with that - but otherwise I don't think interviewers should smuggle in their own opinions when talking to others. The second thing which happens too often is unwarranted generalisations.

There is nothing wrong with writing or saying that many people, or some people, evaluate their status by how many online friends they have, but extending this to "all people" - no, no, no! It happens too often, but of course that's just my opinion.

[french frank]

What I find really disturbing, and not just in that article, is the way so many journalists and interviewers make statements like "We all want to ....", "Everyone needs ....", and even "It has been shown by research that ... we all ...."

It could be that you're reading such statements a little too literally. I wouldn't take any such statement such as "We're all…" as meaning literally everyone, including me (even if it in reality I know it doesn't include me it is telling me it does). But I would also say an individual's heavy use of social media does indicate that they feel it replaces a gap in their real lives and that the number of 'friends' they have is a sign of 'belonging', a sign of some sort of 'popularity' (tbd).

I agree that any article that resorts to "Research shows …" without showing the research showing it, is pretty lazy stuff, though I'm not sure that journalists do say that often without at least indicating what the research is, where it can be found etc. I have found that the more one knows oneself about a subject, the more one realises that the average journalist knows little or nothing and is just being paid to write a story abut it.

[Keraulophone]

Happiness dosed up by the BBC comes in half hour or one minute sessions:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p08zfbwh

[Bella Kemp]

I don't think that counting "friends" on social media is a good way to evaluate things.

What I find really disturbing, and not just in that article, is the way so many journalists and interviewers make statements like "We all want to ....", "Everyone needs ....", and even "It has been shown by research that ... we all ...." Many of these statements are either projections by the journalist or interviewer on to their readers, watchers or listeners, and are simply made for the purposes of having something to say - keeping their job. Some statements are just plain false, or biased, or not backed up by serious research. After all a journalist or interviewer who didn't have anything to say might not keep favour with his or her employer, but there are several factors. Firstly, if an interviewer or commentator is interviewing someone, then it's the views of the interviewee which are important, not those of the interviewer. In some cases an interviewer may have views and can use those for deeper probing - nothing wrong with that - but otherwise I don't think interviewers should smuggle in their own opinions when talking to others. The second thing which happens too often is unwarranted generalisations.

There is nothing wrong with writing or saying that many people, or some people, evaluate their status by how many online friends they have, but extending this to "all people" - no, no, no! It happens too often, but of course that's just my opinion.

I absolutely agree!

[Bella Kemp]

One of my favourite poems - I've posted it in the poetry thread before, but any excuse for reposting!

Happiness
BY RAYMOND CARVER
So early it's still almost dark out.
I'm near the window with coffee,
and the usual early morning stuff
that passes for thought.
When I see the boy and his friend
walking up the road
to deliver the newspaper.
They wear caps and sweaters,
and one boy has a bag over his shoulder.
They are so happy
they aren't saying anything, these boys.
I think if they could, they would take
each other's arm.
It's early in the morning,
and they are doing this thing together.
They come on, slowly.
The sky is taking on light,
though the moon still hangs pale over the water.
Such beauty that for a minute
death and ambition, even love,
doesn't enter into this.
Happiness. It comes on
unexpectedly. And goes beyond, really,
any early morning talk about it.

[LMcD]

One of my favourite poems - I've posted it in the poetry thread before, but any excuse for reposting!

Happiness
BY RAYMOND CARVER
So early it's still almost dark out.
I'm near the window with coffee,
and the usual early morning stuff
that passes for thought.
When I see the boy and his friend
walking up the road
to deliver the newspaper.
They wear caps and sweaters,
and one boy has a bag over his shoulder.
They are so happy
they aren't saying anything, these boys.
I think if they could, they would take
each other's arm.
It's early in the morning,
and they are doing this thing together.
They come on, slowly.
The sky is taking on light,
though the moon still hangs pale over the water.
Such beauty that for a minute
death and ambition, even love,
doesn't enter into this.
Happiness. It comes on
unexpectedly. And goes beyond, really,
any early morning talk about it.

What a really wonderful poem - thank you very much!
I've been watching a couple of goldfinches helping themselves to whatever has fallen of our bird table - and THAT, together with your poem, has set me up for the day.