Happiness is just a shitty metric in general because it's entirely self reported so there's no way to be objective. It also depends on who you ask, so there's a lot of ways to fuck with the stats to get the result you want. If a country's danger hairs are self reporting happiness then it's a shithole. Want an even worse metric? Check out how academics measure democracy. It's entirely based on whether or not the left is getting its way.
One of my biggest personal redpills was reading Umberto Eco's 14 features of fascism and realizing that it's basically a screed against any form of nationalism. And that's the seminal text defining fascism according to "academics".
Happiness is actually fundamentally flawed because it creates an inescapable spiral of failure.
Everyone is not happy some of the time, even those who are otherwise successful (good career, loving family, meaningful pursuits, etc). So, if happiness is a measure of success, then despite all those things, they're failing. Which makes them even less happy. Which means they're really failing. And so on.
How do you fix this problem? Definitely don't sacrifice anything to create a better future because sacrifice, in the now, doesn't make you happy. Don't excercise (because it's painful), don't spend time with your children (because they aren't perfect), don't try to fix any of your problems (because they're depressing). Nope, get high, have a wank, and play video games forever; because that makes you happy right now...
Usually they tell me how many times they've tried to kill themselves. But you're right in that they're trying to deal with their problems by being "happy" through drug abuse. If they faced their problems head on, usually by changing their own shitty behaviour, they might not be "happy" but they also wouldn't be trying to OD.
a phenomenological 'analytic' autoethnographic feminist and post-structuralist inspired exploration of Deleuze-Guattarian theory.
A survey is in the 2nd circle, this shit is deep in the 8th.
(not an entirely fake example, remember rachel gunn the australian breakdancer? That's basically her phd in breakdancing). "that's not even science" though? Sure. But I assure you it's in psych, and from there health more broadly.
I think the metric is on point for the Scandinavians. They have a much better work life balance than we do, and feminism is less overt than it is here.
not just by increasing the hedonistic sweets type of happy
Being holistically happy is a combination of many things, including being strong and resilient generally.
But you won't always be strong in every category, and life is gonna test your resilience immensely. Having a loving family will make you happy, being spiritually sound will make you happy, having fulfillment in your job will make you happy. These are things that when you arent strong and you feel things start to strain, give you the support structure you need to recover.
So yes I agree with you, but you're missing several categories of happy.
Happiness is a terrible measure. Many authors a century ago already tackled the problem with self reported happiness. Ignorance is bliss. Someone might report themselves a 10 but objectively they are a 5, it's just they don't know any better.
Happiness is just a shitty metric in general because it's entirely self reported so there's no way to be objective. It also depends on who you ask, so there's a lot of ways to fuck with the stats to get the result you want. If a country's danger hairs are self reporting happiness then it's a shithole. Want an even worse metric? Check out how academics measure democracy. It's entirely based on whether or not the left is getting its way.
One of my biggest personal redpills was reading Umberto Eco's 14 features of fascism and realizing that it's basically a screed against any form of nationalism. And that's the seminal text defining fascism according to "academics".
Happiness is actually fundamentally flawed because it creates an inescapable spiral of failure.
Everyone is not happy some of the time, even those who are otherwise successful (good career, loving family, meaningful pursuits, etc). So, if happiness is a measure of success, then despite all those things, they're failing. Which makes them even less happy. Which means they're really failing. And so on.
How do you fix this problem? Definitely don't sacrifice anything to create a better future because sacrifice, in the now, doesn't make you happy. Don't excercise (because it's painful), don't spend time with your children (because they aren't perfect), don't try to fix any of your problems (because they're depressing). Nope, get high, have a wank, and play video games forever; because that makes you happy right now...
just as some fent-leaner how happy he is.
"shieet, damn right i's happy, i gots alllll da fent i need"
Usually they tell me how many times they've tried to kill themselves. But you're right in that they're trying to deal with their problems by being "happy" through drug abuse. If they faced their problems head on, usually by changing their own shitty behaviour, they might not be "happy" but they also wouldn't be trying to OD.
Finland is the happiest country because all the unhappy people kill themselves.
Canada coming for that crown.
NPC: I'm sad.
Canada: KYS?
Yeah, sure, it's the subjective "macho" culture that's making people unhappy, not the fact they live in third world shitholes or dictatorships.
Thanks for actually reading the article, Lord knows I wasn't going to
Surveys are among the worst kind of shitty junk science.
Social "sciences" in general are just junk. They start with the conclusion and then manufacture the "study" around it.
It gets a trillion times worse in qualitative,
a phenomenological 'analytic' autoethnographic feminist and post-structuralist inspired exploration of Deleuze-Guattarian theory.
A survey is in the 2nd circle, this shit is deep in the 8th.
(not an entirely fake example, remember rachel gunn the australian breakdancer? That's basically her phd in breakdancing). "that's not even science" though? Sure. But I assure you it's in psych, and from there health more broadly.
You know, that's hard to believe considering feminism is turning previous high-trust functional societies into 3rd world shitholes.
I think the metric is on point for the Scandinavians. They have a much better work life balance than we do, and feminism is less overt than it is here.
While I agree with people here that it's a shit study from the looks of it (also nice picture that helps to mislead) the underlying idea is sound.
If you're happy overall, it makes the unfortunate more bearable. If you're unhappy overall, even the smallest trifles are unbearable.
We should aim to be more happy, but not just by increasing the hedonistic sweets type of happy.
That's a drug addict mentality; I can handle all my problems so long as I can get a hit.
You deal with problems by becoming strong and resilient, not by being happy.
That's what I mean by this:
Being holistically happy is a combination of many things, including being strong and resilient generally.
But you won't always be strong in every category, and life is gonna test your resilience immensely. Having a loving family will make you happy, being spiritually sound will make you happy, having fulfillment in your job will make you happy. These are things that when you arent strong and you feel things start to strain, give you the support structure you need to recover.
So yes I agree with you, but you're missing several categories of happy.
Happiness is a terrible measure. Many authors a century ago already tackled the problem with self reported happiness. Ignorance is bliss. Someone might report themselves a 10 but objectively they are a 5, it's just they don't know any better.
If youre gonna be dumb you gotta be tough (I havent looked at the data)