5 ms·

You can be equally happy in any culture. You don't need anything external to be happy. It's just a mentality.

by xyzzy4 10y ago

djtriptych 10y ago
I had this realization when considering the happiest people on earth (scandinavians) also have pretty much the most disgusting food (imo). But my culture's food (soul food) makes me happy. This led to the realization that you can change what makes you happy. Though it's very difficult to do that work in today's climate, and impossible over short time scales. A practice like transcendental meditation or yoga is essential in my opinion. Disappointing that well-tested multigenerational wisdom like this is often downvoted on HN =/ disclaimer: currently reading Autobiography of a Yogi.
FussyZeus 10y ago
This. Choosing to be happy is extremely difficult (and is fought hard by any number of other factors, like your diet, your lifestyle, your current economic status, etc.) but the simple fact is being happy is a choice. Hardly ever an easy choice but a choice nonetheless.
- projektir 10y ago
  There's a point in that where the word "choice" seems rather meaningless. A choice is supposed to be a simple thing, it's merely a decision, not an end goal that takes an inordinate amount of energy. At that point, that's a goal, that's a direction, etc., but it's not exactly a choice since the level of difficulty necessarily implies that you are quite likely to fail, which also means most people will fail. If anything, your statement would imply that happiness is absolutely not a choice and something most people will never achieve, just like people can't simply "choose" to become an Olympic athlete or the President. The definition has been pulled too far from its original purpose.
  - djtriptych 10y ago
    I think most practicing yogis, for instance, would argue that yoga is for everyone. In fact, it can be thought of as humanity's best-tested method for self-derived happiness, as filtered through generations of practice and refinement. While you can't choose to be able to do any particular posture or position, you _can_ choose to be happier than you are now...
  - FussyZeus 10y ago
    Becoming an Olympian involves having talent for a given event that attracts the attention of an investor, the investor's resources in getting you trained, nearly the exclusion of all other activities for a good portion of your life and dedicating all time and energy to your event and maybe, you MIGHT get there. Being president requires membership of one of the two strong parties, having name recognition enough to be nominated, have vast resources either at your disposal or willing to be invested in by others, all that again for the actual election, and being able to win over one of the most fickle voting populations on the planet. Being happy...is just a change in how you think. It really is that simple, it requires commitment and self-policing to a great degree but in the end anyone can do it. I wouldn't say it's anything like those other two things.
    - projektir 10y ago
      Note that I'm responding to a specific comment that implies being happy is extremely difficult. Those two things are in my book of "extremely difficult", and I'm bringing them up as examples of the fact that goals are not choices. You can choose to train, but you can't choose to become an Olympian. But I can't figure out if you agree or disagree with happiness being extremely difficult to achieve. > It really is that simple, it requires commitment and self-policing to a great degree but in the end anyone can do it. I don't think I can make sense of this statement... if something has many requirements, and something to a great degree, how can you say that it is merely a choice, and that anyone can do it? Again, a choice is a decision, not a goal. There's no difference between "I'll try really hard to be happy" or "I'll try really hard to be an Olympian", they're both goals with no guarantees that you can fail at. What is great? The average person, by definition, is not great. So why are you saying anyone can do it, in the end, that anyone can be great? Simplicity is not relevant here. Winning a race is simple - just run faster than everyone else. This seems to be along the lines of losing weight. It's simple, but so many people fail at it. If people, in large numbers, greater than average, fail at doing something universality perceived as good, I posit that that means it's not available to most people for whatever reason, because nobody in their right mind would choose a bad outcome for themselves. If your interest is in making a large proportion of people happy, rather than making a few chosen individuals happy, it's a more interesting question as to why so many people "choose" to not be happy or some other universally positive thing. I'd say the word "choice" is being horribly misused. People struggle and fail, that's what's happening. What made you decide that changing how you think is simple, easy, and readily available?
stryan 10y ago
How do you define happy? Are we talking about hedonistic pleasure? Stoic tranquility? Human flourishing (and if we are, Aristotle has some strong words for you regarding external goods)? Oneness with God? Can a clinically depressed person be happy just based off their mentality? Happiness is a tricky and complicated subject; Just saying its a mentality or that you can "choose" to be happy is an awfully strong statement.
ashark 10y ago
I don't think it's an accident that so many religions encourage monasticism and/or hermitic living as the best (even only) way to achieve inner peace or enlightenment or whatever. Every-moment-zen or the peace of knowledge of the divine and so on are probably way easier to find and maintain in some environments than others. That kind of advice too common across too many cultures/philosophies/religions to be BS. So while it may be technically correct that one can be happy entirely without regard for external circumstances, that goes against prevailing... let's say expert opinion. Environment matters, and controlling and modifying it to make contentment easier to attain isn't a bad idea. Exception: Sikhs. They do religious living on hard mode.

You can be equally happy in any culture. You don't need anything external to be happy. It's just a mentality.

by xyzzy4 10y ago

You can be equally happy in any culture. You don't need anything external to be happy. It's just a mentality.

I had this realization when considering the happiest people on earth (scandinavians) also have pretty much the most disgusting food (imo). But my culture's food (soul food) makes me happy. This led to the realization that you can change what makes you happy. Though it's very difficult to do that work in today's climate, and impossible over short time scales. A practice like transcendental meditation or yoga is essential in my opinion. Disappointing that well-tested multigenerational wisdom like this is often downvoted on HN =/ disclaimer: currently reading Autobiography of a Yogi.

FussyZeus 10y ago

This. Choosing to be happy is extremely difficult (and is fought hard by any number of other factors, like your diet, your lifestyle, your current economic status, etc.) but the simple fact is being happy is a choice. Hardly ever an easy choice but a choice nonetheless.

projektir 10y ago
There's a point in that where the word "choice" seems rather meaningless. A choice is supposed to be a simple thing, it's merely a decision, not an end goal that takes an inordinate amount of energy. At that point, that's a goal, that's a direction, etc., but it's not exactly a choice since the level of difficulty necessarily implies that you are quite likely to fail, which also means most people will fail. If anything, your statement would imply that happiness is absolutely not a choice and something most people will never achieve, just like people can't simply "choose" to become an Olympic athlete or the President. The definition has been pulled too far from its original purpose.
- djtriptych 10y ago
  I think most practicing yogis, for instance, would argue that yoga is for everyone. In fact, it can be thought of as humanity's best-tested method for self-derived happiness, as filtered through generations of practice and refinement. While you can't choose to be able to do any particular posture or position, you _can_ choose to be happier than you are now...
- FussyZeus 10y ago
  Becoming an Olympian involves having talent for a given event that attracts the attention of an investor, the investor's resources in getting you trained, nearly the exclusion of all other activities for a good portion of your life and dedicating all time and energy to your event and maybe, you MIGHT get there. Being president requires membership of one of the two strong parties, having name recognition enough to be nominated, have vast resources either at your disposal or willing to be invested in by others, all that again for the actual election, and being able to win over one of the most fickle voting populations on the planet. Being happy...is just a change in how you think. It really is that simple, it requires commitment and self-policing to a great degree but in the end anyone can do it. I wouldn't say it's anything like those other two things.
  - projektir 10y ago
    Note that I'm responding to a specific comment that implies being happy is extremely difficult. Those two things are in my book of "extremely difficult", and I'm bringing them up as examples of the fact that goals are not choices. You can choose to train, but you can't choose to become an Olympian. But I can't figure out if you agree or disagree with happiness being extremely difficult to achieve. > It really is that simple, it requires commitment and self-policing to a great degree but in the end anyone can do it. I don't think I can make sense of this statement... if something has many requirements, and something to a great degree, how can you say that it is merely a choice, and that anyone can do it? Again, a choice is a decision, not a goal. There's no difference between "I'll try really hard to be happy" or "I'll try really hard to be an Olympian", they're both goals with no guarantees that you can fail at. What is great? The average person, by definition, is not great. So why are you saying anyone can do it, in the end, that anyone can be great? Simplicity is not relevant here. Winning a race is simple - just run faster than everyone else. This seems to be along the lines of losing weight. It's simple, but so many people fail at it. If people, in large numbers, greater than average, fail at doing something universality perceived as good, I posit that that means it's not available to most people for whatever reason, because nobody in their right mind would choose a bad outcome for themselves. If your interest is in making a large proportion of people happy, rather than making a few chosen individuals happy, it's a more interesting question as to why so many people "choose" to not be happy or some other universally positive thing. I'd say the word "choice" is being horribly misused. People struggle and fail, that's what's happening. What made you decide that changing how you think is simple, easy, and readily available?

stryan 10y ago

How do you define happy? Are we talking about hedonistic pleasure? Stoic tranquility? Human flourishing (and if we are, Aristotle has some strong words for you regarding external goods)? Oneness with God? Can a clinically depressed person be happy just based off their mentality? Happiness is a tricky and complicated subject; Just saying its a mentality or that you can "choose" to be happy is an awfully strong statement.

ashark 10y ago

I don't think it's an accident that so many religions encourage monasticism and/or hermitic living as the best (even only) way to achieve inner peace or enlightenment or whatever. Every-moment-zen or the peace of knowledge of the divine and so on are probably way easier to find and maintain in some environments than others. That kind of advice too common across too many cultures/philosophies/religions to be BS. So while it may be technically correct that one can be happy entirely without regard for external circumstances, that goes against prevailing... let's say expert opinion. Environment matters, and controlling and modifying it to make contentment easier to attain isn't a bad idea. Exception: Sikhs. They do religious living on hard mode.