Via Rodrik, it seems some people are claiming is happiness is not all it’s cracked up to be. Nothing new to me: as Darby O’Gill said “There is only one who is truly happy… the village idiot!”. There is unfortunately no mention of Theodore Dalrymple, whose relation to human misery may be analogized to that of a fish to water or a sculptor to clay (I think he gets a kick out of his most Hogarthian depictions).
This seems relevant in light of the recent discussion on anti-natalism, which was continued here at Marginal Revolution though my second post was blocked as spam. Perhaps I should put a damper on the rampant linking. Some, like Matthew Cromer, claimed anti-natalists were motivated by depression (I will now concede that Jim of the antinatalism blog is likely unhappy). It was countered that depression is no more likely to result in faulty reasoning that happiness, and in fact tends to debias people (except with regard to how long their depression will last). However, if the utilitarians are wrong about the utility (snort) of hedonic utility, that could also undermine the case for anti-natalism, at least of the David Benatar variety. I don’t know what “virtue ethics” has to say about anti-natalism, but some advocates are certainly fine with killing lots of people (Larison replies on the issue here). Even those who put exalt “revealed preference” above all (as I pretty much do) can get behind unhappiness, as some are apparently willing to spend time and money at “crying clubs“. UPDATE: The anti-natalist blog discusses the depression charge here.
There is a good roundup of blues videos here, so instead I’ll link to sludge and doom metal, which actually makes me laugh. Apparently there used to be a genre called “sadcore“, which seems even more removed from hardcore than “emocore” (Rites of Spring is succeeded by Fugazi, which also comes from Minor Threat) featuring appropriately named bands like Low.
Some music trivia: Low’s bass player joined a drummer and another bass-player to form a guitarless band called Enemymine. The other bassplayer was from the also guitarless band Godheadsilo (what’s with the smushing of multiple words together?). The two members of that band have since formed Smoke & Smoke with Spencer Moody of the Murder City Devils, but they still don’t have any instruments other than a bass guitar and drums. Previously the bass player (Mike Kunka) played with Moody and MCD’s guitarist & drummer in Dead Low Tide. That drummer formed another 2-man guitarless band called Big Business with a former member of Karp, both of whom joined the Melvins (who were without a bass player, but oddly enough not a drummer) for the album A Senile Animal. It’s rather unusual for a band to use two drummers at once, but it worked for King Crimson and it worked for the Melvins as well.
On an unrelated note, it appears I’ve been exceeding the appropriate limit of comments at UR.
February 6, 2008 at 8:11 am
low rules!!!
February 6, 2008 at 5:02 pm
Smoke and Smoke doesn’t give a fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck.
And while I find myself nodding along to Dalyrymple (because he’s not wrong) the voice in my head keeps bellowing, but what about the well-dressed old men who drop bombs on middle eastern countries? And the sated city journal readers who applaud them? Of what kind is their evil? If Dalyrymple continually attacks the poor and ignores the (far worse in consequence) sins of their betters, isn’t he being a bit frivolous himself?
February 6, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Dalrymple is writing about what he knows, because he has worked in the socialist trap of Britain’s underclass. I don’t recall him writing anything for or against war. If only Norman Podhoretz had stuck to writing about what he knows. What annoys me about Dalrymple is that he wrote Romancing Opiates, apparently a good book on drugs, but comes out against legalization with some pretty lame reasoning.
February 6, 2008 at 7:58 pm
tggp,
The problem with assuming that depressed people are more “accurate” about reality than non-depressed people is that assumes that life and reality can and should be perceived from an Archimedean point.
Such a belief assumes that thoughts and concepts are able to properly capture the reality of existence.
In fact, the richness of life is its subjectivity, and even all concepts of an “objective” reality are themselves constructed out of the clay of our essentially subjective nature.
Does a textbook description do justice to the reality of a sexual experience? Does a Wikipedia entry substitute for the experience of climbing a mountain, camping atop, and watching a spectacular stormy sunrise? I can assure you, not.
Concepts are dead labels to stick on reality, helpful and useful for navigating the world, but utterly incapable of grasping the experiencing of it. A good description of depression is a state of being so focused on concepts that one is unable to perceive the subjectivity underneath them. This is the principal psychological dis-ease of modernity.
February 6, 2008 at 9:04 pm
The problem with assuming that depressed people are more “accurate” about reality than non-depressed people is that assumes that life and reality can and should be perceived from an Archimedean point.
Are you attempting to deny that any such thing as accuracy, even in a relative sense, may exist (a position Asimov called “wronger than wrong“)? If so, why are you arguing against me and anti-natalists if we are no less wrong than you? Furthermore, to state that depressed people have a more accurate view of the world is not tantamount to saying anyone ought to be depressed and/or have a more accurate view of the world. I am neither depressed nor an anti-natalist, I recognize that depression decreases bias and I have no intention of trying to become depressed in order to decrease my bias. I do not have a cause greater than myself that will be served by my rationality, it is merely something I like and insofar as it may conflict with my other priorities I am content to have some biases.
Such a belief assumes that thoughts and concepts are able to properly capture the reality of existence.
I am perfectly ok with the idea that the human mind evolved for certain purposes and may be incapable of understanding certain truths about reality, though I think other minds might be able to. Mystery is a property of questions, not answers.
In fact, the richness of life is its subjectivity
Is the same not true of the poorness of life?
and even all concepts of an “objective” reality are themselves constructed out of the clay of our essentially subjective nature.
Do you mean to deny that an objective reality exists?
Does a textbook description do justice to the reality of a sexual experience? Does a Wikipedia entry substitute for the experience of climbing a mountain, camping atop, and watching a spectacular stormy sunrise? I can assure you, not.
As an unworldly and inexperienced person I might take your word for it, except that I don’t believe in any normative “justice”. A scientist might say that personal experience of an event does not do justice to the reality grasped by rigorous, replicated double-blind study and on what grounds are we to judge between the two conceptions of justice offered?
Concepts are dead labels to stick on reality, helpful and useful for navigating the world
Seems good enough for me. I say they pay rent.
A good description of depression is a state of being so focused on concepts that one is unable to perceive the subjectivity underneath them.
I would think they depressed are quite aware of their own subjective experience of depression, so much so that they overestimate its longevity. It may be related to impact bias and other biases that inflate our subjective experiences.
This is the principal psychological dis-ease of modernity.
Mental illnesses are metaphorical illnesses, not diseases at all. One could just as easily say the the non-depressed are mentally ill.
February 6, 2008 at 9:37 pm
*raises hands above head, turns in a circle three times while humming ‘afternoon delight’ puts shoe on head, screams incoherently five times, pats belly*
There’s my non-conceptual rejoinder…I win!
Nice analysis there, btw, tggp. I’ve always found these sorts of arguments to be the ultimate copout. Sort of like saying, ‘there is NO truth, goddamit, and I’m damned well gonna prove it to you!’ You can’t take or leave conceptual representation when it suits you, Matthew. We may both be pointing to the moon, but we’ve at least got to agree that there are fingers, or…what’s the point?
February 6, 2008 at 10:16 pm
I think the point is, to go outside and climb a mountain and watch a sunrise, so you won’t believe all the conceptual tail-chasing your mind is spinning about how awful life is.
Or if you prefer, go listen to a really talented band perform.
What you call “truth” is only ideas you have assumed to be absolutely real, but you have not investigated them.
February 6, 2008 at 11:25 pm
I’ve climbed mountains. I’ve watched sunsets. I’ve slept under the stars in 26 states. I’ve listened to music. I’ve performed music. I’ve made love. I’ve sired offspring. I’ve married people. I’ve buried people. And never once have I denied that there are people, and other lifeforms, and objects that I have loved, and cherished, and felt keenly the loss of. And yet, if you asked me if it were better had I never been born, I would say yes, and yes again in regard to the species, or to life as a whole. Because life involves more than the things that I deem as ‘good’, or pleasant; a whole, helluva lot more. And you are quite leisurely skipping over the arguments, and positing non sequiturs.
As for what I have ‘assumed’…I’d say you’re assuming an awful lot yourself there, kiddo.
February 6, 2008 at 11:32 pm
Oh! I also write poetry, and for a while was the #6 most popular poet on a site with over 24,000 members worldwide. I’m in the process of re-working my 600 plus pieces, and am slowly adding them to another blog, but since I express myself a lot in metaphor over there, I thought it best to not link that site to my philosophy sites, lest I be misunderstood over here. Peace.
February 7, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Jim,
I am sorry that you think life is wretched and terrible and not worth living.
For a hard case of high-IQ thought-identified, concept-induced misery like I used to feel and you are experiencing, probably the only thing that works is seeing that your ideas are in actuality insubstantial shadows that cannot capture reality.
In short, I would recommend self-inquiry such as Zen Buddhism or Advaita. I think the more modern writers are better than the ones with flowery Indian-subcontinent names or those who affect lots of new-age trappings. John Wheeler, for example, can be pretty helpful in pointing out the delusions of self that formed around age two and in severe cases is the cause of so much (apparent) suffering.
Or you can keep wallowing. . .
February 8, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Matthew, I’d say you’re side-stepping the issue, as well as mis-representing my case. I don’t want to tie up TGGP’s space with what could easily devolve into a pissing contest, so I think I’ll address this some more, as well as try to sum up, on my own page (might be a while…having some wireless problems). I’ve got a background of 25 years, more or less, in zen studies (admittedly, somewhat casual most times, puncuated now and again by some pretty intense practice and reading). For now, I’ll leave you this little piece by Ikkyu, 15th century zen master, for your reflection…
…nature’s a killer I won’t sing to it
I hold my breath and listen to the dead singing under the grass…
February 8, 2008 at 6:33 pm
You can feel fry to tie up my space with a pissing contest any day.
February 8, 2008 at 6:50 pm
You’re a gracious host…at least let me bring the beer.
July 6, 2009 at 8:22 pm
[...] a wise drunk once remarked, the only one who is truly happy is the village idiot. Feel free to be against happiness, but it’s hard to use it as a stick against [...]