The concept of Happiness Hyperopia is very interesting:
Overestimating the benefits we think we will accrue at some mythical time in the future.
There are people who “suffer” from this condition. But there are also people who do not. I asked my friend Steve a long time ago: What is more likely to happen? Overvaluing or undervaluing the future?
“My take is that it depends on who it is. For example, someone who does a lot of hard-core drugs or gets a facial tattoo is obviously someone who is likely to undervalue the future. On the other hand, the person who toils away in a miserable job just for the money that he theoretically will spend when he retires is someone who overvalues the future.”
While Steve may be right, those are extreme examples. They are not demonstrative samples of the rest of us.
My estimation is that most people do suffer from happiness hyperopia, whatever it is they do. You don’t have to be an executive that works 70 hours a week to overvalue your future. Happiness hyperopia is what feeds consumerism: the constant illusion of a better future. We become victims of this “condition” frequently, no matter how many times we have been disappointed before. We bought that device, we got that job, we dated that girl, only to end up looking for something else.
There are many reasons happiness hyperopia to be so prominent:
- Tradition would be one. The mentality that religion has impregnated in our culture for hundreds of years is all about happiness hyperopia. What’s religion if not a promise of a heavenly future as long as you pay your dues on Earth?
- The increase of our life span also has huge effects on our way to see the future. When people lived 40 years and the fear of war or many deathly illnesses was constantly present, there weren’t many motivators to wait, invest and play the “hope” game. Now, with many of those fears mostly eradicated, we can expect a wonderful future if we work hard enough. Not that this future will ever come, though.
- When one gets rational about this, one can’t avoid considering the “live now” mentality as the best choice. The problem is that “living now” is not that easy either, because dying now is hard. When you know that there’s nothing after you die (which more and more people are believing), there’s a lot at stake on living like a rock star. Basically, those that live the moment and undervalue their future aren’t ready to say their goodbyes before their undervalued future catches up with them, which usually does in today’s world. People get to live for many years regretting their past decisions.
In the end, happiness hyperopia is all we have. We can’t go any other way because we’ve been trained to overvalue our future.
Trying to be realistic and being ready to settle is the best choice. It will bring the most tolerant misery (or the most realistic happiness).
{ 1 trackback }
{ 20 comments… read them below or add one }
Fantastic post Carlos. You are so right, we are always searching for that next “thing” to make us happy. That better job. The cuter girl. The big bank account. It really never ends. I also agree with you, all this does is feed into materialism as well.
I think the one thing that can strip this desire or need for more “stuff” is pain. Pain is a great killer of ego and cutting out the unnecessary in life and making us be grateful for the “good stuff”. It’s unfortunate that it takes this to make us change our perspectives and needs.
Cheers
Dayne
Great point. People do need more real problems, life’s too damn easy nowadays. Result? Weakest people in history.
Very well done, Carlos. You’ve articulated “the crisis of death.” Once we die, there are no more chances to do anything. So, we’ve got to do it now.
For the entrepreneurs out there, I’d suggest reading Randy Komisar’s, “The Monk and the Riddle.” Great fictional tale about this very topic. He calls it “the whole life plan” and the “deferred life plan.”
Will look into it, thank you Sam.
Agreed that we are heavily medicated by your “happiness hyperobia”…Focus on the past or future alone provides plenty of ego satisfaction, and quite the emotional ride.
It figures that we attempt to escape the present into these illusions, because we can’t for the life of us understand how to live right now. It’s ‘doing’ versus thinking about doing (or what you’ve done/should’ve done). We don’t know how to unplug from our minds enough to just do/live/be. Imagine if the only mind time we put into the past was learning from it, and the only time we put into the future was planning our coming experience.
Our foresight and hindsight would become so disciplined that our minds wouldn’t have much to do. We’d actually be experiencing life on a grander level because we’d be experiencing each real moment versus past/future moments that are really only memories and hopes.
Maybe something about the stresses and overexertion in our lives weakens us too much to realize this–because it does take (sometimes great) effort to reign in the mind from the free roam it currently has (which gives it all the control-how perfect for the ego!).
By free roam I mean the mind’s unhindered ability to turn thoughts (and emotions) wherever it’s pulled instead of where you’d like it to be; you’re in a merely responsive position. The ego keeps this ability because we let it, because we don’t know how to put aside past/future in our identities and live straight from the reality of the moment– largely due to tradition/religion/media feeding the ego, as you said, Carlos.
Living from the present lets us direct our futures with our true intentions (to initiate or respond), which don’t normally show up when we’re living off previous or future identities/feelings. Instead of this “balance” being something mediocre (saw a tweet from you on this one, Carlos), I think it brings us peace with our sense of time and the endless facets of our lives. Living from this peace does not seem tolerant misery, though that might be a egoic perspective of it. Do you consider it settling to live as you intend? After all, that choice is our freedom….
Many interesting points. I’m only going to reply to what you say about balance. My point with my tweets was that to be the best, you can’t be balanced. Being the best requires extreme obsession and dedication. Balance is not possible.
Also, live as one intends sounds beautiful but it’s quite impossible to achieve. Randomness rules our lives.
Randomness may rule life, but only as a display of circumstances. You still decide how you respond to it. Respond as you intend to live and you’ll have achieved the impossible.
I don’t think you’re off on the balance thing, just some differentiating needed. Balance cannot occur in a freely roaming mind. Funny that we’re enhanced with such a thing as the mind. As its function is only to be in use, it will run you with anything that achieves its continued use – unless you exercise your choice to harness it for your intentions. We do this when we work math problems, but have a harder time governing its paths when it incites our emotions. When it reacts to people/change/situations, etc…, the mind’s response is to maintain its functioning, thus ego–the constant mental identity. Problem is, what usually maintains the ego’s functioning is focusing outside the present moment, where you have the option to control it, or NOT use it; and on whatever thoughts/emotions perpetuate it, which may or may not suit your intention.
But in your dictation of its function, you use the mind as a tool for your intentions. Now you have the opportunity for balance, if you so choose it.
previous comment was missing something; I ran out of time and I feel I need to specify…
If your endeavor to be the best is an egoic (competitive/comparative) endeavor, it’ll take all the obsession and dedication you can throw at it. And that road ends and begins again with new fervor every time you fail at being the best. No balance there. Lots of ego responses to fuel your fire though, and lots of hopes/dreams/memories.
If it’s not an endeavor of ego, then it’s about what’s beneath your ego. You (unless you think you are your ego, which I’m sure makes it happy)….which is a whole different ballgame, but I’ll elaborate a bit.
Though you may pursue it with great passion, your endeavor would be more than being the best at one thing compared to others, but being the most perfect ( or best) you possible, right now, because the past moment has faded and the future has yet to come. It’s the realist (but also opportunist) sense of being the best, I guess.
Being the best in this sense is challenging because it requires self honesty and a detachment from the egoic sense of best– by comparison. In all generality, unless you are being the best you, you are not the best, no matter what you achieve. Seems like a tall order, but that’s coming from a martial artist…and we’re all into that mind/body/spirit stuff
and that requires balance…
Ok…I know this is a semantic battle but it is one that I struggle with so I pose it to you (and the readers.) Did you know that the verb “settle” has 22 meanings in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary? That’s an overused and easily miscontrued little word!
Do you think being realistic is TRULY settling? This coud be just me, but I see settling as giving up. Taking what you have available because nothing better came along. Accepting your “fate” in spite of the fact that you are dissatisfied with it.
The quickest easiest real life application of “settling” comes in relationship when you “settle for” someone because your fantasy never became a reality. But is it giving up that you thought the only person you could ever love was tall dark and handsome but in the end short bright and dorky won you over? Is it ever really that we are “settling” or are we instead just trying to impose our own beliefs/notions/concepts onto our happiness while they are not TRULY the things that will bring the happiness about?
No, we are settling. The other possibility sounds nice, but it’s one of those pretty lies that we like to believe. Hey, life is not fair, it’s not supposed to be nice for everyone. Some will have to settle, or get frustrated.
Another thing: giving up sadly has been tainted with the worst connotations ever. People 200 years ago didn’t give up. They just lived the way they could. Giving up is a modern idea. It’s this notion that we like so much of everything being possible. Everyone can do anything.
Bull****.
I see nothing wrong with settling, or “giving up”, with some aspects of our life. I’ve given up trying to be a great soccer player. It’s fantastic how accepted it is to “give up” on sports, but not on love, careers, etc. when basically it’s all about talent and luck.
So when you play soccer now you don’t try, at all? Do you just stand on the field and watch the ball roll around you? Maybe occasionally kick it a little hoping it goes one way or the other?
Did you give up on being a great soccer player or did you accept that fact that you would never be a professional soccer player?
Does that explain better what I’m saying? I think the thing about reality is not so much settling for it as accepting it.
Classic girl move when debating: Go for the extremes
We are discussing semantics.
Classic boy move..call someone a girl
But really…did you GIVE UP on being a great soccer player or did you accept reality and adjust your dreams?
Reminds me (no one stone me, please) of evolutionary adaptations… Plainly speaking, some things die off because they’re ill-equipped to handle the environment. I guess we could liken this to giving up. Is it that we can’t survive particular circumstances? Or is it that we don’t want to?
Two words: American Idol. Some of the most tone deaf mother f*s think they can be a pop star. Yeah right.
Wheelchair handicaps. If your legs don’t function, you can’t walk. (hope that wasn’t too extreme)
Sometimes it’s just not in you. Accepting that fact helps us redefine reality, instead of living under the illusion that *someday* we will become … like the hope game you mentioned.
But other times we don’t WANT to put effort towards being the best/outlasting. Here’s where our choice rules our experience. Carlos could well be on his way to the World Cup, but if he doesn’t want to be a super star soccer player, he doesn’t have to be…or he’ll just be a really unhappy s.s.s.p.
I think I’d call that settling, if we’re playing semantics-being really unhappy, despite your ability to change/choose. But that’s only if happiness is your desire. (and let’s be honest, it is, cause it feels good…though your ego might have you thinking otherwise in its stubbornness)
A choice’s connotation is only negative if we make it so. It’s not “settling” to lack circumstances. In fact, I think it’s more of a “giving up” to be frustrated in that lack. Facts are facts. We like to think everything is up for negotiation, and in our possibility/option-laden society, it certainly seems that way.
Ultimately, it’s not your circumstances that play the game; it’s you, right? And how you feel is a big factor in your momentary experience. As was mentioned, 200 yrs ago you didn’t see folks crying about settling in marriage, housing, career etc. The times (and the weather!) dictated what you could do and what you had. You could enjoy life, or not.
Choose to feel good, and no one can say your life was a compromise, giving up, settling (whatever), because chances are, you merely choose better than they did. (apologies for the length. I know Carlos could use 5 words to sum this up )
And thus my question:
“Is it that we can’t survive particular circumstances? Or is it that we don’t want to?”
The difference between the two seems to be the crux of the settling matter. Is settling a decision that is forced upon us or one we choose to make? Circumstance dictates outcome, but how much of a part do we play in it?
Isn’t that REALLY where happiness comes into play?
We can’t. Everything that you can do, you will do.
We have to stop believing that we are all superstars. It’s creating ridiculous expectations.
Hey, it’s beautiful. But it’s tiring.
Superstardom IS a ridiculous expectation. Created by the mind.
Elisa- you play as much a part as you can in your circumstances, as was said, but you decide what that looks like. Our genetics are a hand we’re dealt…changing circumstances are often outside our power…but the outcome depends on how you respond to them, since the only thing you can truly change is yourself, by taking action or not. You choose your response to your environment/your own thoughts/emotions/people. And that choice is a highly adaptive power if you use it well.
Carlos- What is beautiful, but tiring?
Wow, who is talking extremes now?
I’m not saying that we all need to be superstars. In fact, I would venture to say that by societal standards less than 10% of us will achieve the “stardom” that we are foolishly taught is within our grasp if we “just try hard enough.” There are things that will just NEVER happen.
I *am* however saying that life is about more than superstardom and utter failure. How we approach the middle is where the problem with settling/accepting/adapting comes into play. It is much more tiring to live in a world where it is all or nothing instead of just striving each day to be the best at whatever you are setting your mind to.
Settling is what happens when stuff ceases to move. I will listen to your ideas most definitely, but unless someone compels me with a great arguement, I refuse to believe that a happy life is one that is not in motion.
May I warmly recommend reading a book that has a refreshingly clear view on what we’re discussing:
Rapt: Attention and the focused life by Winifred Gallagher
Please go beyond the self-helpish sounding title and read it if you can.
Cheers
Anita
Definitely will, thank you Anita.