PDA

View Full Version : The Budda was right, Desire is the souce of Unhappiness.


a_unique_person
4th November 2003, 03:56 PM
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/04/1067708207453.html

Ever feel you are Sysiphus? This article discusses what appears to be a crucial flaw in our inherent psychology. I can imagine it would have made sense in the stone age, when scarcity meant we could face starvation at any time. For those of us living the Western Dream, however, we are like rats running around in a little wheel.



Human nature is a trickier thing than we imagine. Even the mundane activities of our daily lives are more complex than we realise.

For one thing, we seem to be subject to some kind of compensatory mechanism that prevents us feeling we've attained the goals we strive for.

Most of us, for instance, would like to feel financially comfortable - to have a bit more income than we need to make ends meet. And, since Australians' real income per person has risen by more than half in the past 20 years, you'd expect most of us would finally have attained that goal.

According to opinion polls, however, almost two-thirds of Australians believe they can't afford to buy everything they really need.

How could that be so? Well, I think it happens because most of us think money is for buying things and most of us have an infinite list of things we'd like to buy if only we had the dough. So, every time we get a pay rise, we lose little time in spending it and in taking on the extra commitments that are now possible.

It follows that, no matter how high our pay has risen in the past or may rise in the future, we'll always be fully committed. We'll always feel that we're just making ends meet, with nothing to spare.

That's the way we feel. For objective proof that we are a lot better off than we used to be, you need only look at the stuff we've got in our homes.

A home without a television set is exceptionally rare and, in 1997, 56 per cent had more than one. The proportion would be higher by now, no doubt, as would the 82 per cent of homes with a VCR.

In 1999, 35 per cent of homes had air-conditioning - though I'm sure it would be a lot higher by now. The same goes for these 2000 figures that over half of all homes had a personal computer, with a third of homes connected to the internet.

It's paying for all these gizmos that keeps us feeling stretched, of course. But at least all the labour-saving appliances we use around the home leave us with more leisure time, right?

Well, no. Not according to some surprising research by Michael Bittman and colleagues in the Social Policy Research Centre at the University of NSW.

According to the Bureau of Statistics' survey of time use in 1997, 83 per cent of people lived in a household with a microwave oven. For other appliances the proportions were 53 per cent with a deep freezer, 34 per cent with a dishwasher, 57 per cent with a clothes dryer and 76 with a lawnmower or whipper snipper.



Amazingly enough, a clothes dryer actually increases the amount of time spent in the laundry.

And as I have noted myself, spending expands to fill the available income.

hammegk
4th November 2003, 04:07 PM
Damn big of you to agree with Buddha.

peptoabysmal
4th November 2003, 05:45 PM
I believe you can cure that Sisyphus with penicillin.

Dancing David
4th November 2003, 06:55 PM
What no science, just a bunch of claims, maybe the problem is not genetics but culture and internal cognitive processes.

And I applaud your reference to the buddha.

3-toed-sloth
4th November 2003, 08:39 PM
Originally posted by hammegk
Damn big of you to agree with Buddha.

Buddha was a cool dude. I don't think I'll ever become a monk (no drinking allowed), but it is easier to want less than to be constantly driven to make more money.

Tony
4th November 2003, 09:04 PM
The key to happiness is treasuring the relationships with those you love. Everything else is peripheral.

Cain
4th November 2003, 10:10 PM
_The New York Times Magazine_ had an article summarizing research from psychologists and economists studying happiness. I may have posted it.

Humans, it turns out, are not very good at predicting what will make them happy.

Here's the opening paragraph:

Daniel Gilbert is right, then you are wrong. That is to say, if Daniel Gilbert is right, then you are wrong to believe that a new car will make you as happy as you imagine. You are wrong to believe that a new kitchen will make you happy for as long as you imagine. You are wrong to think that you will be more unhappy with a big single setback (a broken wrist, a broken heart) than with a lesser chronic one (a trick knee, a tense marriage). You are wrong to assume that job failure will be crushing. You are wrong to expect that a death in the family will leave you bereft for year upon year, forever and ever. You are even wrong to reckon that a cheeseburger you order in a restaurant -- this week, next week, a year from now, it doesn't really matter when -- will definitely hit the spot. That's because when it comes to predicting exactly how you will feel in the future, you are most likely wrong.

Not so bad, not too good.

The problem, as Gilbert and company have come to discover, is that we falter when it comes to imagining how we will feel about something in the future. It isn't that we get the big things wrong. We know we will experience visits to Le Cirque and to the periodontist differently; we can accurately predict that we'd rather be stuck in Montauk than in a Midtown elevator. What Gilbert has found, however, is that we overestimate the intensity and the duration of our emotional reactions -- our ''affect'' -- to future events. In other words, we might believe that a new BMW will make life perfect. But it will almost certainly be less exciting than we anticipated; nor will it excite us for as long as predicted. The vast majority of Gilbert's test participants through the years have consistently made just these sorts of errors both in the laboratory and in real-life situations. And whether Gilbert's subjects were trying to predict how they would feel in the future about a plate of spaghetti with meat sauce, the defeat of a preferred political candidate or romantic rejection seemed not to matter. On average, bad events proved less intense and more transient than test participants predicted. Good events proved less intense and briefer as well.

One final snippet:

Gilbert and his collaborator Tim Wilson call the gap between what we predict and what we ultimately experience the ''impact bias'' -- ''impact'' meaning the errors we make in estimating both the intensity and duration of our emotions and ''bias'' our tendency to err. The phrase characterizes how we experience the dimming excitement over not just a BMW but also over any object or event that we presume will make us happy. Would a 20 percent raise or winning the lottery result in a contented life? You may predict it will, but almost surely it won't turn out that way. And a new plasma television? You may have high hopes, but the impact bias suggests that it will almost certainly be less cool, and in a shorter time, than you imagine. Worse, Gilbert has noted that these mistakes of expectation can lead directly to mistakes in choosing what we think will give us pleasure. He calls this ''miswanting.''

''The average person says, 'I know I'll be happier with a Porsche than a Chevy,' '' Gilbert explains. '' 'Or with Linda rather than Rosalyn. Or as a doctor rather than as a plumber.' That seems very clear to people. The problem is, I can't get into medical school or afford the Porsche. So for the average person, the obstacle between them and happiness is actually getting the futures that they desire. But what our research shows -- not just ours, but Loewenstein's and Kahneman's -- is that the real problem is figuring out which of those futures is going to have the high payoff and is really going to make you happy.

John Gertner, "The Futile Pursuit of Happiness," _NYT Magazine_, Sept. 7, 2003.

subgenius
5th November 2003, 12:52 AM
all i want is everything
all i want is what i cannot have

Crossbow
5th November 2003, 07:39 AM
That is not quite right.

Sorry to be pedantic, but Buddha actually said that "selfish desire" is the source of misery. Thus, if one eliminates selfish desire, then one can be on the path to enlightenment.

Desire for food, shelter, life, and so on is not selfish. Whereas desire for lots of sex, money, power, and so on is selfish.

If one is going to start throwing around Buddha philosophy, then I think he should be accurately quoted.

Underemployed
5th November 2003, 11:46 AM
I think you will find the Tao predates the teachings of the Buddha a little. See sig. Take that, Buddhists! MUAHAHAHAHAA! I WIN! MY RELIGION IS BETTER! AHAHAHAHAA*cough*AHAHAHAA!

Ah, those pesky desires.

a_unique_person
5th November 2003, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by Crossbow
That is not quite right.

Sorry to be pedantic, but Buddha actually said that "selfish desire" is the source of misery. Thus, if one eliminates selfish desire, then one can be on the path to enlightenment.

Desire for food, shelter, life, and so on is not selfish. Whereas desire for lots of sex, money, power, and so on is selfish.

If one is going to start throwing around Buddha philosophy, then I think he should be accurately quoted.

Thanks for the clarification. I was worried that wanting to eat and drink could be making me unhappy.

TruthSeeker
5th November 2003, 06:08 PM
"Happiness is the absence of striving for happiness."
~ Chuang-tzu

"There is only one way to happiness and that is to cease worrying about things which are beyond the power of our will."
~ - Epictetus


How often has not having something you don't want made you unhappy?
~ Phil, my meditation teacher

subgenius
5th November 2003, 07:50 PM
i do not want what i cannot have

LuxFerum
6th November 2003, 02:48 AM
Originally posted by subgenius
i do not want what i cannot have
I do, but I don't care.

TruthSeeker
6th November 2003, 06:46 AM
And if you can't be with the one you love,
Love the one you're with.

~ Stephen Stills

Dancing David
6th November 2003, 07:26 AM
boo-boo-boo-buddha, yeah, yeah yeah yeah

the buddha mentioned many things that lead to dookey(actualy dukka)
desire for something
fear of the loss of something desired.

I like the part of Star Wars twoo the Empire wher Yoda says something like 'always looking to the future and never seeing what is around him'

or the like.

Enjoy the moment when you can
face fear and get through it

and do as Tony says

Love those around you!

Luke T.
6th November 2003, 07:39 AM
Originally posted by subgenius
i do not want what i cannot have

Exactly! That is how I live my life, and I am very happy.

"Expect nothing, accept everything." I used to stamp that on the back of my business cards.

LuxFerum
6th November 2003, 07:42 AM
Originally posted by Luke T.
"Expect nothing, accept everything."
"accept everything"???
no thanx.

Dancing David
6th November 2003, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by LuxFerum

"accept everything"???
no thanx.

Accept mentaly, act safely.

TruthSeeker
6th November 2003, 01:16 PM
Acceptance of what has happened is the first step to overcoming the consequences of any misfortune.
~ William James

"Attachment is the source of all suffering." ~ Buddha