| |
| Join Our Newsletter |
 Please Select sub-criteria |  |
|
|
|
|
| |
| Searching for Happiness in Western Societies |
02 |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
A person’s success in his pursuit of wealth came to be seen as a product of his or her hard work and labour. In the 19th century it was argued that equal opportunities would allow people to realize the pursuit of their self-interest; inequalities between people would no longer reflect inherited wealth but rather be a consequence of a person's efforts and talents. The prominent social scientist Thomas Carlyle called for the “real aristocracy”, that is “the aristocracy of talent.” This came to be the accepted wisdom and governments implemented social legislation in the 19th and 20th century that saw the creation of state schools and universities that would produce talented individuals who through hard effort and toil would deserve the positions they obtained.
It became widely accepted that the possession of wealth implied that a person’s character was good, whilst poverty implied laziness, lack of talent and weakness of character. Some thinkers even proposed that charity to the poor was against the natural biological order; Herbert Spencer and his fellow social Darwinists argued that the poor, infirm and weak should be left to the struggle of life and death in order to improve the overall composition of society.
Thus in Western Capitalism the pursuit of wealth is not just good, but morally necessary for both individuals and society; one major role for the state is to promote the pursuit of wealth, for happiness and wealth are inextricably linked.
A study of human nature
Since happiness is a human emotion or physiological state, it is necessary to study and understand how Western societies satisfy human nature and needs. The non-satisfaction of our human needs leads to a variety of states such as being hungry, thirsty, cold, anxious or depressed, depending upon which human need is not satisfied. Conversely the satisfaction of our human needs leads us to a state of contentment and happiness. Richard Tomkins, in an article titled: “How to be happy” , points out that numerous studies conducted in Western societies over the last few decades indicate that there has been a decline in people’s happiness over time as they have become richer. To explain happiness in the context of satisfying human needs, Tomkins uses a widely accepted model of human nature called the “Hierarchy of Needs,” developed by the psychologist Abraham Maslow.
Maslow referred to five factors that motivated people, and were dependent upon each other such that it would be difficult for a person to be motivated by a higher factor if one lower than it was not fulfilled. The lowest factor that he said motivated humans was their desire for basic needs such as food and water; the next factor up was their desire to be safe and secure. The next factor after this was the need that people had to be loved and to feel a sense of belonging; following this was a need for people to have self esteem; at the top of his hierarchy was the need to achieve what one was capable of.
With this model of human nature, Tomkins points out that some wealth is needed so that people’s basic needs are realized and that their environment is safe and secure. Studies have demonstrated that people who are on very low incomes become significantly happier once they are able to achieve this basic level of wealth. These studies also indicate that to achieve this effect a relatively small personal income is required, beyond which further increases in income do not tend to bring significant improvements in happiness.
It follows that the pursuit of an economic policy whose objective is to try and increase a country’s gross domestic product (GDP) on a yearly basis will not necessarily increase people’s happiness.
The next level in Maslow’s hierarchy is the need to feel a sense of belonging and to receive love. This is achieved by developing strong personal relationships with others - especially our partners and family members. As Tomkins indicates, if society programs us for individualistic behaviour and personal consumption, it is likely to be at the expense of these personal relationships. The more hours we spend on developing our careers, the fewer hours we spend with our partners and children. Moreover, many of our activities can directly add to a country’s GDP but simultaneously be detrimental to our emotional well-being. As the rate of divorce increases, we spend more on solicitors’ fees, counselling, maintaining multiple households and so on. These activities add to a country’s GDP, but reflect more unhappiness for individuals as people’s close personal relationships are disturbed. Similarly the money that we spend on personal security such as alarms and surveillance systems increases the nation's GDP, but this is accompanied by feelings of insecurity in our society. And output for the pharmaceutical sector increases as more and more people use anti-depressants to counter depression.
Some economists have proposed modifying the GDP statistical measure to reflect the negative well-being costs of many economic activities. One measure is the “Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare,” which was first developed by ex-World Bank economist Herman Daly and theologian John Daly in their 1989 book For the Common Good. When this measure – or another metric called the “Genuine Progress Indicator” – is used with the economic data of either the US and UK for the last 50 years, a clear correlation is shown with happiness studies that were conducted in both countries over this period. In the US, the General Progress Indicator increases along with GDP from the 1950s to around 1970 and then it starts to decline, unlike GDP which keeps on increasing - and 1970 was around the period at which Americans started to become less happy with their lives.
| |
| |
| |
| |
< 1 2 3 4 > Last »
Page 2 of 6 pages
| |
|
|
