S + C + V = Happiness
At least, that's what this fascinating Washington Post piece says. S is one's biological happiness "set point;" C stands for one's current conditions; V is for one's voluntary associations.
The piece links to a pretty neat site -- AuthenticHappiness.com. Its proprietor is Martin Seligman a prominent psychologist (I studied him in college). He's the guy who propounded the theory of "learned helplessness". At the time, I remember being incredibly intrigued by the theory's insights.
To me, though, it seems that there are two missing, but related, parts of the equation . . . the two G's. One would be a relationship with God -- which, it seems to me, would positively impact both the C and the V variables of the happiness equation. The other, different but related, is gratitude. Nothing lifts the spirits like seriously and sincerely counting one's blessings.
The piece links to a pretty neat site -- AuthenticHappiness.com. Its proprietor is Martin Seligman a prominent psychologist (I studied him in college). He's the guy who propounded the theory of "learned helplessness". At the time, I remember being incredibly intrigued by the theory's insights.
To me, though, it seems that there are two missing, but related, parts of the equation . . . the two G's. One would be a relationship with God -- which, it seems to me, would positively impact both the C and the V variables of the happiness equation. The other, different but related, is gratitude. Nothing lifts the spirits like seriously and sincerely counting one's blessings.
posted by LadybugUSA at 5:07 PM
16 Comments:
"Nothing lifts the spirits like seriously and sincerely counting one's blessings."
Nothing lifts the spirits like counting one's money in front of the hired help who, thanks to this Repugnican-controlled Congress, will remain stuck at $5.15 an hour in spite of higher fuel costs and other cost of living increases.
Ahhh, drink in the sweet aroma of f__ing over your fellow man.
Perhaps the above is just another reminder that Republicans are happier than Democrats.
Perhaps the above is just another reminder that Republicans control every branch of government and are catering solely to their own interests. That would make ANYONE happy.
Carol, will you be providing any coverage of today's Washington Post story that outlines Tenet/Cheney/Bush's embrace of Curveball, the deranged informant whose claims of mobile biological weapons labs (among others) led us into this deadly boondoggle?
It is yet another case of the zero objectivity that Duh-bya had on the matter of Iraq. In fact, it is emblematic of his "we're going in no matter what" philosophy.
It's funny how some of the commenters on here cannot get it through their heads that not everyone who is conservative and/or votes Republican is rich with hired help. I am a SECRETARY for heaven's sake so how rich can I really be? I don't even make enough money to pay for daycare (thank goodness for Grandma) much less hire someone to help me around the house. Are these delusions based on the comment author's guilt over his own affluence or his anger at others for having more than he does? And does he fail to realize that money does not, as the saying goes, buy happiness?
Gratitude is one of the surest ways to happiness, however. I agree with Carol on that. I grew up poor and haven't done much better since then but I am so richly blessed and have so much more than most people in the world that it would be very selfish and myopic of me indeed to complain. Instead I count my blessings and help the less fortunate as much as my small means enable me to. All the while I acknowledge God's hand in all things. That IS happiness, Duke-Stir. One does not need be remotely close to wealthy in order to acheive it.
"One does not need be remotely close to wealthy in order to acheive (happiness)."
I couldn't agree more, Jessica. I grew up in a household with very modest means and we lived within those means. I paid my way through college and worked and saved a number of years before starting my own company. I was happy all those years without money, and I'm also happy these years with SOME money (and a family!), as I work to pay off my equipment.
I do not begrudge the wealthy their money, I begrudge them the pandering their interests currently receive in the branches of government whose primary objective should be the interests of ALL Americans. This is not a new phenomenon, but its current brazenness combined with an utter contempt for the poorest Americans is shameful. Take this past week, for instance. At the same time the estate tax for the wealthiest Americans was being slashed, the House leadership blocked a floor vote on whether or not to raise the minimum wage because it appeared the measure had enough bipartisan support to pass.
How do you feel about that, Jessica? Are you fine with the Republican leadership preventing a vote on raising the minimum wage at a time when the incomes of the top 10% of Americans are accelerating? They say we can’t afford it. This is utter nonsense that has been disproved with every increase in the history of the minimum wage. They say it isn’t really important because no one actually gets paid the minimum wage, except maybe a few teenagers or employees in training. I don’t know where they live, but there are plenty of places where it IS important, where quite a few people DO get paid that wage for more than just flipping burgers. The poorest Americans pay the same price as the wealthy for gas, utilities, groceries, and medical insurance – all of which have increased in the seven + years since the last minimum wage increase. But the Republican leadership continues to thumb its nose at those who want to work to stay off welfare.
I really do want to know how it is you’ve hitched your wagon to the party whose only interest in you emerges every other November, when they hope you’ll keep blindly assuming that they’ve got your back?
I would add that while Frist and others are greedily tending to their own financial interests, greater men like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett demonstrate what it truly means to give back to society.
Amber writes: "From a conservative standpoint, we do not believe that a higher minimum wage will do anything except make basic necesities more expensive."
Then she writes: "Conservatives do think that a person who works 8-10 hours a day and who is raising a family should make more than 5.15 an hour."
Amber, you make me crazy. Which is it? And if, as you state, conservatives DO think that someone raising a family should make more than $5.15 an hour, why did the Republican leadership block a vote that would likely have raised the minimum wage?
You are incoherent.
And if your point was that somehow the CEOs must voluntarily forego their huge bonuses so that the employees can be paid more, well, I don't know what else to say except that maybe when your teacup ride in Fantasy Land comes to a stop, we can resume the conversation then.
Raise the minimum wage, let the boards of directors crunch the numbers AFTER everyone at the bottom has been paid a living wage, and then if they want to stay competitive, they can shave off a few million from the CEOs bonus.
Amber writes: "They are not benevolent people. They will reap what they sew."
Yes, Amber, they will. As will Bill Frist and other money-grubbing, ill-willed politicians drenching the rich with giveaways while giving the finger to those who want to work to stay off welfare.
You need to return to school for a macroeconomics class if you think a minimum wage increase will be fully negated by the higher cost of basic goods.
And please, please, please reconsider your avocation as the perfect toady for those to whom money means everything but need you to believe it's not. (You too, Jessica.)
One more call for civility. Cut out the namecalling and nasty characterization of others' comments, please. It's not necessary to make your point, it's not kind, it's not true and it's not welcome on this blog.
>>I would add that while Frist and others are greedily tending to their own financial interests, greater men like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett demonstrate what it truly means to give back to society.>>
Hmmmm.....
http://tinyurl.com/r6tjx
suek,
What do Al Gore and/or Ipods have to do with Bill Gates and Warren Buffet?
And Carol, what are you talking about?
I think Carol may be referring to Duke-Stir calling Amber and I "toadies", which I am not offended by but which certainly cannot be believed to be the truth by anyone who actually knows me.
Politics to me are about a lot more than money, for one thing, so there are a lot of issues which keep me firmly in the conservative camp. I am more concerned about my principles than my profit.
You know, for all the left's talk about freedom they certainly do not seem to care about freedom where the economy is concerned. I believe in Capitalism and the free market -- so sue me. I don't blame anyone else for the fact that my husband and I aren't doing better financially. We both could have made better decisions in our past that would have generated more wealth. But we didn't and there is no use whining about it to anyone else. And sometimes life just deals you a rotten hand and I don't see how it's the government's job to fix that.
However, as I said to my husband the other night, we are blessed because we have intelligence and talent and we live in a country where those things actually make a difference in the way you can live.
At any rate, Duke-Stir's posts are way off topic and his original one was just a way to be snide and cruel towards half the country (you know, the conservative half -- you may have heard of us). The point Carol was making was about happiness. I'm happy and I am happy to be a conservative which means I vote Republican when they have a decent candidate. And I am no one's "toady".
Oh, I didn't answer your question, D-S -- as for the minimum wage issue, I have to honestly say that I don't know enough about it to have an opinion one way or the other at this time. I try not to form opinions on subjects without having the facts and this is something I simply have not researched.
Post a Comment
<< Home