Each person has motivators built into them, and it is the satisfaction
of those motivators over time that produces happiness. The person
experiences happiness as a general feeling of wellbeing. So the
person has a real sense of whether he (or she) is happy or unhappy,
that he can express. However, it is be difficult for the person to
explain exactly how happy he is, or why.
It is the nature of humans that much of what goes on in the mind is
subconscious. A simple example of that is recognizing a person by
looking at their face. At a conscious level, the person just looks
and knows who it is. But we know from development of artificial
intelligence that the processing required to recognize an object from
a picture is extremely complex. That complexity is not evident to the
conscious mind, which receives only the result.
The process of measuring things is also hidden from the conscious
mind. For example, if you ask a person to touch a beaker of water and
then tell you the temperature of the water, they will have difficulty
to give you an accurate answer. The reason is that the mind does not
include a system of measures that it rates things on, in order for the
person to give a numeric answer. He (or she) could tell you if it is
very hot, hot, warm, cool, or cold. But if the temperature was, for
example, 27 degrees Celsius, they couldn't tell you that.
Likewise the perception of happiness lacks precision. The simplest
way to address that is to break down happiness into its component
parts (that were
covered earlier), estimate the
satisfaction of each of them separately, and then combine the
results for an overall impression. That's usually adequate for
most personal decisions. More sophisticated methods are covered
under the article on
Evaluating Success.
As in the example of measuring temperature, a person can express a
level of satisfaction for any motivator on an approximate scale, such
as a scale of 1 to 10. Or, to differentiate between undesirable and
desirable results, one might use a scale from -5 to +5.
That is the method built-into the
Pathways Planner app,
except that it uses "traffic lights" to express the level. For example, if a person
was to rate their satisfaction from having good food to eat,
they could rate it as one of these:
Negative:
Double red = extreme misery (person is starving to death)
Red = displeasure (regularly hungry, inadequate energy or
nutrition, stale or bad tasting food)
Yellow = mild displeasure (still not quite good enough to sustain a
healthy body)
Positive:
Blue = marginally adequate, covers required energy and nutrition
but tasteless
Green = satisfactory, regular supply of good tasting food with
required energy and nutrition
Double green = joyful, tasty gourmet food with unlimited variety,
good nutrition, and energy
If we want to use numbers instead of symbols for ratings, we might
translate the symbols as follows. The "bare satisfaction" (blue) rates as 1,
with a more satisfactory "green" being twice that at 2. Double green is
2 x 2 = 4. For the dissatisfactions, the numbers are negative:
-4
-2
-1
+1
+2
+4
So, let's consider how we would use individual motivational
assessments to judge happiness...
Imagine that you have a control room in your mind that shows that status of your
various motivators and motivator categories. You are inside your own head, operating
the controls that actuate your body. Your mission is to keep all the indicators in
the green if possible, and most definitely to keep them out of the red.
Let's pretend that the picture above is from inside the mind of a real
person. You are the worker who is going to operate all the controls, to
keep him functioning well. Let’s look at the condition of this person, according
to his status indicators. On the “physical group” that covers
needs for food, shelter, fitness, and health, this person is in excellent condition.
He scores a “double-green” which is downright joyful. He lives a luxury life.
In security he is doing O.K. too, with a green indicator.
But look at his social life. He has no love in his life, and no friends.
Double-red is extreme misery. People with extreme loneliness, who see no hope of
curing it, sometimes commit suicide.
If he had hope, it might pull him through, but look at the status of his spiritual
category. We don’t see the cause of the red status here, but it might be that he
feels guilty about something.
The remaining categories aren’t great either. Yellow is a mild warning condition,
and blue is only marginal satisfaction.
So, he definitely needs to find a better path, either through is own efforts or
with the help of someone else.
It's also important to point out that the gauges shown in this control room aren't
enough by themselves. To diagnose a problem you would need satisfaction ratings for
each motivator individually, and then you would further need to diagnose what is
the cause of each conditions reported. A high-level view only serves as an overview.
Moreover, it is normal for each of the satisfiers to fluctuate through a range over
time. That is further explained below, but the main point is that a status
represented by a "yellow" indicator isn't necessarily significant. It's only a problem
if it is continuous and unbroken over a long period of time.
The very highest-level indicator would be just one gauge, showing "happiness" and
it could be rated on the same scale, using the red, yellow, blue, or green indicators.
To get a rough impression of overall "happiness", you could assign points to each
motive's status indicator using the scores listed earlier, and then calculate an average.
However, the double-red condition requires special consideration. It's a status that
sets of alarm bells in the person's mind. It's so distressing to the mind that all
attention is pulled to it, and the pain of it nullifies all other joys. So in the
example illustrated above, you don't need to calculate anything: the person's
happiness is in a double-red condition, which is the lowest negative score on the
scale.
Here is a further explanation of why the "average condition" is not a perfect
indicator of the overall status. It can be explained using the "car gauges"
analogy. Instead of taking care of a person, let's pretend we're taking care of a car.
On gasoline-powered cars, traditionally the oil pressure, engine temperature, and
battery voltage were displayed as meters on the dash-board. Suppose you want to
create a single gauge instead, that just shows the overall condition of the car.
What would you do?
One strategy would be to assign a score to each of the meter readings,
according to how close each was to the manufacturer-recommended value. Then average
the scores to get an overall rating. But there is a big flaw in that
method: if one reading was very poor, even so the average could be fairly good.
For example, suppose the engine lacks oil, but the battery and temperature are fine.
Therefore the overall average is in the "OK" part of its range. But within a minute or
two the engine might cease up and be totally ruined!
So, the average by itself isn't a perfect measure. Another alternative would be to use the
minimum score, but that has a drawback too. Suppose you are offered the job of taking
car of this car. You would want to know whether it is in generally good condition, or
if it needs a lot of maintenance. The average is a better indicator of that than
the minimum.
For a human, your mind has a handy way of solving that problem for assessing its own
well-being. When one part of your life is in severe distress, your overall happiness
becomes the minimum; otherwise your overall happiness is the average.
Now imagine now that you are in the control room of your mind. Pretend you could occupy your
mind and observe all the conditions as if they were gauges, and furthermore you have
levers to control everything your body can do, and you have sensory information too (to
see, hear, etc.). You have not only the status measures shown in the control room photo, but also
the status of all the motivators individually. Moreover, you have a record of all previous
behaviors you have tried, and what the results were. Do you suppose that as operator of this
mind, you could keep the "happiness status" in the positive end of the scale for
most of the time?
With the exception of a major disaster, probably you could do it. It would take
some learning, but it's possible. And this is despite the fact that you don't have
precise measures on anything.
By this point it may seem that a satisfactory life is best achieved by
keeping all of one's motivators fulfilled to a "double-green" state,
or as close to that as possible, within the constraints of one's
resources (time and money). However, while this may seem like a
rational method, one must keep in mind that motivators are only a part
of a thinking system, and in normal operating conditions those
satisfactions will vary. It is simply not practical for all the
indicators to be at double-green status all the time.
It is important to understand that, because if one has the expectation
that one should be in a joyful condition all the time, anything less
than that would be disappointing! And disappointment detracts from
one's happiness!
There are several reasons why this is so, as listed below. If you
want a further explanation of these, click the "Show detail"
button to see the details.
Happiness needs to be real
If we were to write a success formula for a human mind, assigning
the variable "S" for success, it would be a long formula in which
each motivational satisfaction is accumulated over time. However,
suppose you could invent a "happiness pill" that would make you
happy all the time, no matter what happens. Your success formula
would be:
S=100%
A person in such a state wouldn't do anything, because all desires
are fulfilled. Only autonomic functions like heartbeat and breathing
would occur. The person would not feed themselves. They would depend
on other people, to collect nutritious substences and pump it into the
"happy person's" stomach, or perhaps use an intravenous method.
I doubt many people would voluntarily choose such a life--at least,
not while their brain is still thinking and they have a choice in the
matter. It would be like choosing to live in a coma. It would be
like choosing to not live at all, as they would be more like an
inanimate object than a person. And if the body is just an
inanimate object, can it really be said that the person is happy?
Motivational fulfilment assumes the presence of motives, but
that whole system has been defeated.
No happiness pill has been invented, but as second best attempts
at the same thing, there are brain-altering narcotic drugs and
alcohol that people sometimes use to alter or depress brain
functions. Using these as substitutes for real happiness is
not a wise choice. A person might use these things to hide from
their problems, but after the drug wears off the problems are
still there.
Instead, I propose shooting for true happiness, where
you make choices in the real world that result in satisfaction.
Instead of defeating or breaking the thinking system which is
your mind, use it in its full capability, and take control
of your own life.
The Mind can be Wrong
Given the previous point, you might wonder if there is ever any
justification for taking medicine that might affect how you feel,
such as to remove the sensation of pain. The answer is that there
is indeed a good reason to do that in some circumstances.
Your mind has a warning system triggered by nerve impulses that
produces pain. That system pulls your attention away from everything
else and triggers muscle actions to try to pull the hurt area away
from whatever might be harming it. The problem is that this system
isn't very intelligent, and in some cases the reaction could do more
harm than good.
A typical example is getting some dental work done, such as to
get a cavity filled in a tooth. Without "freezing" applied to the
nerves in the area, a person could not stay still, or it would be
a great feat of willpower to do so. There would be a great risk
that the dentist wouldn't be able to do the work successfully.
Moreover, the pain would be such a deterrent that the person might
prefer to leave it unrepaired, until such time as the damage itself
grew to cause greater pain yet.
When a person chooses to get their tooth repaired, they really
want that repair. That is the real situation, and getting
the repair will enhance happiness. The "pain" alarm signal in this
scenario is a false alarm, and it needs to be turned off. It is
reasonable to use medicine to do that.
There are other situations too, where the mind can be wrong.
Phobias are an example of that, where a person has an unreasonable
fear of something that is harmless, or it's only a low risk. It is
again reasonable to take steps to overcome the phobia.
In fact, any kind of fear is triggered by a peception, and even
without phobias, perceptions can be misleading. Sometimes fear
is very appropriate, but sometimes it is not. When the fear is
based on a real threat, happiness is best achieved by taking action
to avoid the harm; but when the fear is based on an imagined but
false threat, happiness is best achieved by correcting the mistaken
idea.
Have true knowledge and understanding is an essential element for
being a happy person. It's hard to have that kind of knowledge
among a society where people regularly deceive each other. So truth is
highly recommended.
Learning requires a gap
As mentioned above, if one's success formula is "S=100%" (success no matter
what), then the person would do nothing. This means that there would
be no learning. Learning requires a person to obtain information and
also to try experiments and discover.
Moreover, even if a person has a normally functioning motivational
system, complacency and complete satisfaction leads to inaction.
There is a saying that "necessity is the mother of invention." If a person
feels like their life is perfect, they will discover nothing.
The progress that people have achieved over the generations has
depended on the fact that people are not perfectly happy. There has to
be at least a little bit of dissatisfaction in order that improvements
are discovered, leading to better satisfaction later. But notwithstanding
that better things are discovered later, that lead to the joy of
discovery and a better life, there must still always be a bit of
dissatisfaction of some sort or other in order to have progress.
The gas tank can't be full all the time
To describe how motivators work in people, with multiple
measures of success, let's revisit the analogy of the gauges on
a gasoline-powered automobile:
If the automobile is functioning within the manufacturer's
specifications, the battery voltage will be at least 12 volts, the
oil pressure will be within a specified range, the engine temperature
will be in a specified range, etc.
If one is to judge the condition of the car, one simply checks
that each gauge is in the range for the "green status." Right?
What about the fuel gauge? If we are seeking to have the maximum
score for the condition of our automobile, shouldn't the fuel always
be filled right to the top?
You can't drive very far that way!
It is likewise in people. Doing the normal things you like to do
will use up stored energy, make you tired, and basically take some
of your "success indicators" off of their maximum satisfaction.
And what about the speedometer. It's a guage too. What is it's
ideal value? There isn't one! You can just expect that the needle
needs to change its position sometime. Some motives are like that
too. There is no ideal value for enjoyment of music or dance, for
example; rather they are nice when one feels like it.
Achievements require Work
This is very similar to the previous point. It is the nature of
things that achievements of any sort require work. Work uses up
energy, and it often has some displeasurable elements, such as
repetitive monotony, perhaps of discomfort due to getting too
hot (as in physically active jobs) or of sitting too much (as in
desk jobs). People naturally like variety in their tasks, but
to get maximum job performance people need to specialize and
thereby they mostly repeat doing what they are best at doing.
So it is typical that a "green" score on earning money or a
"double green" score on some worthwhile achievement are also
accompanied by a "yellow" score on the work effort itself.
Internal conflicts are natural
Like the "achievement vs work" scenario, there are a variety
of scenarios where conflicts between motivators are likely to
occur. So a person may find they aren't perfectly happy, as they
have to weigh competing desires, one or more of which will not
be fully satisfied.
For example, imagine a scenario where you just drove your vehicle all day
long to a vacation destination, arriving late in the evening. You
are very tired and very hungry. What shall you do next: eat or sleep?
You can see that is a conflict between motivators, and you must
choose which is the most intense need at that moment. This is
a normal situation, and yet it can also be frustrating.
In this case, the dilema could have been prevented by taking
some sandwiches to eat along the way. Not every internal conflict
has a preventative solution, but sometimes they do. You won't
see "what you might have done" within your "happiness results." For
that, you need to think it up yourself, and you will have only
estimates for what the satisfaction might have been.
Compassion produces dissatisfaction, but is needed
There is strong evidence that altruism is a benefit to the
wellbeing of a species, and altriusm is supported by caring and
compassion. Compassion is one possible outcome of empathy, with
the other being empathic joy. It is important for the mutual
wellbeing of a group that individuals are open to both empathic
happiness and sadness.
Ideally a person motivated by compassion will do something to
help the person who is suffering, to produce a happy ending. But
sometimes there is nothing that can be done but to console the
other person, and to be sympathetic to them. That will make the
compassionate person feel worse too, though not typically so bad
as the person who is suffering. Regardless, it it's still
necessary for the normal functioning of compassion.
Regret is also natural, and it is useful
People are born knowing nothing, and especially at first they
learn by experimentation. Their parents may protect offspring from
hurting themselves badly, but regardless the child will inevitably
try some things that they regret. Learning doesn't end at
childhood, so regrets can accumulate. Remembering them is important
so that the person doesn't repeat unfortunate mistakes.
Sometimes a person will repeat a regrettable act even though they
know it will have an undesirable outcome. That most often happens
when there is an internal conflict between desires. The person
falls into temptation to satisfy one that is readily achieved, doing
so even when overall the result is worse.
It takes self-discipline to overcome that kind of problem, to develop
time-independant judgement. One learns to weigh competing desires accurately
regardless of which one is most imminent. When the person corrects their
behavior, so that they don't keep repeating the same error, then
the person can forgive himself (or herself). Still they will remember
it, and they feel a bit sad to do so, but that sadness is
mitigated by the fact that they have corrected their judgement.
If the mistake has hurt someone else, a caring person will also
feel guilty about it. To repent, they need to undo the harm as much
as possible, and also they must not repeat the behavior. Here's
where the harmed person can help in the process too, by forgiving
them.
If a person could simply take a "forgetting pill," to make the
memory go away, that might give a different kind of comfort, but that
would also be counterproductive. The person needs to recall it
whenever the same situation or temptation arises again, so that
they don't make the mistake again.
Bad things may inevitably happen
The world has natural disasters, diseases, plagues, crime, and
wars, among other problems. Sometimes a person falls victim to
one of those things through no fault of their own. That situation
will inevitably reduce their level of happiness.
That's bad news for a person who treats their happiness as if
their life was a game aimed at scoring happiness points. Now
they're not only miserable from the disaster, but feeling
disappointed about it too. Moreover, there is a tendency
for a person to blame themselves, as they feel that it is a duty
to win at the happiness game, and they have failed.
It's a wiser course of action to only judge yourself according
to what is under your own control.
Measuring Happiness can be Frustrating
As I pointed out earlier, people have difficulty measuring
satisaction accurately. Moreover, a lot of what happens in a
person's mind is subconscious, so they may barely be aware of it
at all. It takes a process of learning to figure out the
relationships between experience and emotion. This fact is
clearly evident in babies and little children, who sometimes cry
because they know that something is wrong, but not what is wrong.
People can get better at understanding themselves via experience,
but always there will be some degree of ambiguity. Focusing too
intently on measuring and optimizing happiness will inevitably be
a source of frustration, which itself produces unhappiness.
It is a well-known saying that "you can't buy happiness." Once
a person has enough income so that they can live a comfortable life,
additional income doesn't generally improve their happiness. This
has been demonstrated by various surveys in which the respondents
rate their own happiness and identify their income.
However, it might be useful to investigate why happiness isn't
proportional to income. One reason that this occurs is described
by economists as the "declining marginal satisfaction" from purchasing
any good or service. The more items of some product that a person
buys and consumes, the less satisfaction he gets from each
subsequent unit. The satisfaction of "buying one more" is the
marginal satisfaction.
If one graphs the reported satisfaction against units consumed,
it typically looks something like this:
The actual slope of the curve will depend on the product. This graph is
only a theoretical example, using this formula: State = 1 - (1 / (1 + Units)
Different saturation rates can be demonstrated using variations of the
formula.
When a product is sold into a market, sales eventually drop off, as each of
the people in the market get to the point where their satisfaction is
saturated.
Earning a lot of money and using it to buy more and more of something
has a limited ability to produce happiness. We can use an example of buying
an automobile. A person with average income in a modern society can typically
afford one automobile, while a very wealthy person might be able to buy
dozens, or even hundreds of them! But he (or she) can only drive one at any
given time! The benefit of having many is slight.
Similarly, if buying food, there is only so much food a person can stuff
into themselves before they barf.
In the graph shown above, the person can keep collecting more but benefits
little as he continues to collect items. In fact, it could be worse than
that, as all the items take space, require maintenance, and some products may
spoil while in storage. Often the curve doesn't just level off, it actually
takes a drop in satisfaction as more items are accumulated.
A person can mitigate this problem somewhat by using variety. Instead of
focusing on buying cars, for example, the wealthy person could use the money
to satisfy a variety of motivators: to go on trips, take university classes,
donate to charities, contribute to research for curing diseases, etc.
Note especially those uses that help other people, now and in the future!
If the wealthy person doesn't just spend it on himself (or herself), an
incredible amount of happiness can be produced for a lot of people.
Some wealthy people do, in fact, give away a lot of their wealth, and
that adds to their own happiness too, by vicarious satisfaction.
This also raises the question of what is a fair distribution of wealth,
as some societies seem to give a lot to a few people while leaving others
in poverty. However, that's a long discussion outside the scope of the
current topic. For now, it is sufficient to observe that if one has the
good fortune to receive extraordinary rewards, it makes sense to use it
in a good way.
Money isn't a substitute for happiness, but it is a resource. Careful
planning of that resource enables you to use it in an optimal way.
Money is also used as a symbol of prestige. The purchase of opulent
mansions, yachts, collections of automobiles, etc., may be done not so
much for the benefits of using them, but rather for the benefits of
showing how successful one is. It is a search for social acceptance
and esteem.
This is the same reason that people struggle in the "rat race" to climb
a corporate hierarchy. They hope to get to the top, thinking that
finally they will be happy:
I call this, "the pyramid of unhappiness." It is a hierarchy, with one
boss at the top (shown in red), and below that are the underlings in each
layer, with 7 layers in the example:
4 + 16 + 36 + 64 + 100 + 144 = 364 underlings
Planning and preparation can make you eligible for the top spot, but it can't
put you there! And even if you eventually get to that spot, typically you don’t
start your career there. So, you are going to be unhappy your whole life, waiting
to get there, and only then can you be happy?
When the person does get to a prestigious position at or near the top, they
may find that it's a job with a lot of anxieties associated with it. If the
person is a movie star, a top athlete, or a musician, they will know that
fame comes and goes with fashion, and furthermore that the skill difference
between them and others in their profession is typically very slight.
There can be a lot of pressure on them. This is also true for business
leaders and political leaders: if things don't go well, the employees,
shareholder, or citizens are quick to put the blame on them.
Everyone expects that they should be the happiest of people, but in
fact they get up every morning to dress, brush their teeth, eat breakfast,
etc., just like everyone else. They may have gotten good at their career
because they enjoy it, but the pressure to perform at a very high
level takes its toll. In many cases their personal life is pushed off to
a lower priority, and they lose the love of their spouse or children.
It is not unusual for famous people to suffer from depression, alcoholism,
family strife, divorce, and sometimes multiple remarriages and divorces.
For a person in a leadership position, they would do well to avoid the
"great man" approach to leadership, and instead empower other people
within their organizations to share the responsibilities and rewards with
them.
And, for those who aren't at the top of a hierarchy, neither should they
postpone happiness in a struggle to get there. Take joy in the worthwhile
things you do, whether in a small scale or in a larger one.
In the "control room" example presented earlier, the person had a major
problem in their life, which put them into a "double-red" status (very
negative). It couldn't be ignored, because it was a crisis, and inevitably
their whole attention would be pulled toward it.
However, that's not the
case for everyone. In most people's daily life, the worst conditions may
be only in the yellow or red category, and sometimes there aren't any
negatives at all. The persons biggest disappointment in some cases are
simply that their satisfaction in some area of their life is less than
they hoped for.
A person should not put themselves in the "emergency room" if they
don't have an emergency!
We have a tendency in our society to focus our attention on what is
less than perfect, that could be improved. This we learn when we work
in business, because businesses need to continually improve in order to stay
competitive. People get the habit of doing that in their own life too.
However, focusing on weaknesses doesn't work well for a person's life!
The reason it doesn't work well, is because your mind's impression of
its overall happiness state is based on what your attention is drawn
to. If all your attention is put onto what could be improved, you are
missing out on all the things that are going well.
Glass half full vs half empty?
What happens when it's 90% full
and that's still not good enough?
It is certainly simpler to consider only your problems or disappointments,
and to make plans for improving in those areas, than it is to consider
all the satisfactions of your life. However, a wider view of things
will also keep your problems in perspective, and help you avoid sacrificing
joys of your life by being too fixated on one thing.
Earlier I showed how a person could apply scoring to happiness, and there
can be some merit to doing that as a means for
judging and helping others, and as a means of evaluating fairness.
And in fact, there are more sophisticated ways to do it, as I cover
under the topic
estimating wellbeing.
However, for a single person alone, that is generally unnecessary.
If a person feels the lack of something, they
get more of it, and if they can foresee the need they plan for it.
They try different experiences and pick the ones they like the best.
They learn from their mistakes. It doesn't have to be complicated.
For improving one's own life, at times when you are doing things
alone, a more easy-going, less analytical approach works quite well.
That could involve giving a bit of thought to the various human
motivators, and maybe trying some activities to fulfil motivators
that weren't well fulfilled before. Add to that a bit of planning
ahead, for future stages of life such as education, career, or
retirement, and a person can live pretty well without having to
be a genius!
To help you with that, you can use a tool like the
Pathways Planner.
You can indicate how well each of your motivators
are fulfilled over time (now, and in your future plans), to see
if there are any gaps that deserve attention. Further, if you
want Pathways to score it for you, and present you with a
report, it will do that too.
One thing you will find if you follow the
Pathways decision making
methodology is that you don't just fixate on one problem. You
consider aspects of your life, and plan for the future. This means
that you aren't just problem solving. You are also maintaining the
good things that you already have in your life.
Really, our world is incredible. If you have an opportunity to
see a historical movie or read a book about how people used to
live centuries ago, take a moment to ponder the things we do now that nobody
could do just two hundred years ago. If you could go back to describe
our world to those people, they wouldn't believe it. It would seem
like impossible magic. The fact is that today,
magic is everywhere!
Happiness comes with fulfilling your desires, and appreciating it
as you do so. Planning can be helpful, and learning from the past can
be helpful, but joy is in the "now." Most people will find that there
is no more than 10% of their life that is challenging. Putting
some time into improving that can be good, but most of your joy is
to be found if you
focus on the 90%
that is going well in your life.
Thus far it sees like happiness should be a simple matter of
fulfilling desires and putting one's attention to appreciating
the results. It's not always that easy, as there can be challenges
to overcome. There can be diseases, famines, natural disasters, wars, and
other problems arising from nature or by the actions of other people.
People can also face difficulties even when those problems aren't
present, in such matters as finding employment or finding
companions suitable for friendship or love.
Everyone needs help!
A person alone with no civilization would have a very miserable
life indeed! Alone, without civilization, humans would be no
match for predictors with fangs and claws. People need the help
of others around them.
So, one reason why many people aren't happy is that they aren't
getting the help they need.
In the components of happiness, we see the various motivators that
need to be fulfilled. The individual can seek to fulfil them, but
it really helps if others will aid them in that.
It is very fortunate that people are designed to WANT to do that for
others. Helping other people to fulfil their cooperation-compatible
desires will spread happiness, giving you vicarious joy, and
making your world a more pleasant one in which to live.
Don't hesitate to give help to others when they need it, nor to
ask for help when you need it.
I am reminded of an event that happened to me when I was young.
I had capsized my wooden rowboat far from shore, while at a lake that
I frequently visited. Some people drove out from a nearby
cabin in their motorboat, asking if I wanted some help. I was
too proud to admit that I had any problem, so I said "no."
So they drove away.
I was a good swimmer, and I wore a lifejacket, so I was in no
danger. Eventually I bailed out the boat and paddled it to shore,
but meanwhile I was wet, cold and miserable. In retrospect I
see how foolish I had been. Those people wanted to help me, and
yet I denied them the satisfaction they could have had from
fulfilling their benevolent desire to help.
Sometimes it may be hard to find someone to help, but it is
wise to use opportunities when they are available.
Unrealistic Expectations
Another reason people may be unhappy is if they have unrealistic
expectations. They judge themselves harshly if they suppose they
should be filled with joy all the time, and then that doesn't
happen. That's why it was explained above why you can't be 100%
happy all of the time. Further it was explained why it's unwise to
postpone happiness under an expectation that you will only get it
someday in the future, after some planned achievement.
The last common cause of unhappiness is conflict.
At times you may feel some conflict within you, as there can be
competing desires, and sometimes you may have some emotions that
could be counter-productive to your happiness or having a world in
which everyone can be happy.
Here's the basic problem: the list of "motives to be fulfilled in order
to be happy" that was presented earlier is not a complete list
of motives that may arise. There are also motives that can arise
such as anger, hate, etc., which not only make a person feel miserable,
but motivate them to cause misery to others.
This is where internal conflict also gives rise to external
conflict! By the way one person treats others, he may turn them
against him.
This problem seems to arise more for some people than for others.
If you are running into it, or if you have family members or friends
who seem to be challenged by it, you may find it helpful to read
the next chapter.
Finally, there is a summary of strategies for improving
mutual happiness in the final
chapter on this series.
The actual slope of the curve will depend on the product. This graph is
only a theoretical example, using this formula: State = 1 - (1 / (1 + Units)
