Will Wilkinson - Latest Comments in Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

James — Thu, 01 May 2008 14:36:07 -0000

Good point "guest"!

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

Dave Babbitt — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 22:28:00 -0000

This reminds me of a proverb:

Honor goes to kind and gracious women,
mere money to cruel men.
(TLB Pro 11:16)

or:

A gracious woman attains honor,
And ruthless men attain riches.
(Nasb Pro 11:16)

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

Bruce K. Britton — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:03:52 -0000

'Personality' traits have no place in this discussion, not only because they are not part of the NBER paper, but mainly because 'personality' if taken to mean enduring consistency in patterns of behavior, has simply not been found to exist empirically. That is, when we look at individual persons, we find inconsistency across situations, framing effects so large as to swamp any notion of consistency, and nothing there. This annoys people because they think they have a consistent personality, but, sorry, they don't.

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

LP — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 18:03:28 -0000

If it's true that "our intuitions about real and hypothetical cases are probably already deeply infected with our ideological notions–or with the personality traits that lead us to find those notions attractive," then how do we hold off the creeping anomie of postmodernism? Isn't this just what they (the pomos) have been claiming all along? Especially this line: "It doesn’t settle the dispute: it explains why we’re having it."

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

Jason — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 15:54:13 -0000

Huh? (huh?)

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

mk — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 13:39:15 -0000

George: I hear you. I am confused when I look back at the original post. (It doesn't help the discussion that I wrote my response at 4 in the morning)

It seems like first, Will says that moral intuitions are the result of "personality"...

It’s pretty amusing if this is just a reflection of a particular personality type.

Next, Will seems to say that "happiness-effects" are the result of moral intuitions...

More generally, the fact that the happiness-effects of various things seem to be mediated by ideological leanings..

So this seems to paint the picture:

Personality -> Moral intuitions -> happiness-effects.

I am not sure how to distinguish "personality" from "happiness-effects". In my first response I was conflating the two, but now I'm not sure what's going on.

If I don't habituate to something good, that means I am happier. If I tend not to habituate to a certain kind of good thing, that seems to be a statement about my personality... ??!

If I do not tend to habituate to status, is that a statement about my personality?

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

Independent George — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 13:22:41 -0000

I'd love to join this discussion, but, honestly, I'm even more confused than ever.

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

guest — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 12:50:59 -0000

Isn't status (income) a zero-sum (positive-sum) quantity? Regardless of its importance to specific people, a general improvement of status (income) seems to be a contradiction in terms (obviously desirable).

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

Will Wilkinson — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 10:39:37 -0000

Zubon: good point! I guess I was thinking of studies that show a correlation between personality traits and ideological stance and other studies showing a correlation between these same traits and happiness.

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

Zubon — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 10:11:40 -0000

More generally, the fact that the happiness-effects of various things seem to be mediated by ideological leanings...

Is that the correct direction of causality? I would expect ideologial leanings to be mediated by happiness-effects. That is, you turn right because of your sensitivity to income effects or left because of your sensitivity to status effects. That would make ideological leanings an expression of what sort of improvement (income/status) is more important to you, which we then presumably project on everyone else.

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

Colin Fraizer — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 10:04:43 -0000

Ah, it is (is not) all so perfectly clear (confusing) now (then).

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

steve — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 09:31:21 -0000

Interesting. If true, would this say anything about the "left" leaning bias of Academia, and the "right" leaning bias in industry?

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

conchis — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 09:03:28 -0000

Of course this also significantly undercuts Layard's case for taxing the negative internality that arises from adaptation. If those on the right are typically the ones earning the big bucks, and those on the left are typically the ones who give up that sort of thing for more prestigious jobs or whatever, then that suggests that, by and large people actually are aware of the things that will make them happy in the long run, and may be properly taking account of whatever internalities exist already.

Re: Happiness and the Ideological Mediation of Adaptation

mk — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 04:43:51 -0000

Well-- also, presumably, a reasoned moral judgement can cause us to dislike certain things.

I mean, if someone makes a racist comment in my earshot, I will feel unhappy because I think it's immoral.

So to call moral judgements about status "just a reflection of a particular personality type" might have the causation reversed. Perhaps the "personality type" (system of preferences, in this case) is an outcome of moral beliefs. Or perhaps they arise together (seems plausible).

It does suggest, though, as you say, that happiness research results are going to be reflections of particular views on morality. If we believe that a person's system of morality is changeable, then happiness research is complicated by (1) analyzing a moving target and (2) giving us a lot of biased evidence in support of our current way of doing things.

My own feeling on this is that there are many "local maxima" in systems of morality/happiness, especially when you note that people tend to surround themselves with people they agree with.

A truly nonpartisan analysis of happiness would perhaps seek a global optimum, in addition to wanting to know more about all of the local optima (and how local optima arise-- what are the social prerequisites, how do the necessary moral systems, social strictures/etiquette, etc. come about). Additionally, techniques for "nudging" ourselves out of local optima.