Summary Of The Happiness Hypothesis By Jonathan Haidt

To Help or Not to Help; Finding Happiness through Others.

Altruism is the belief in selfless concern for the well-being of others, while egoism is the theory that one’s self interest is the motivation and the goal of one’s own action. Although the two support opposing ideas, one can always be found with the other. For example, let’s say that John saved Jane from a fire, which normally would be considered altruism because John sacrificed his own life for hers. It is possible that John had egoistic motivations because he wanted to feel like a hero, or avoid the guilt of not saving Jane. In this way, both altruism and egoism saved Jane’s life as well as protected John’s interests. The idea of both forces working together to form a balance is brought into focus in Jonathan Haidt’s book, The Happiness Hypothesis. Ayn Rand states that she is finished with caring about others because it only brings misery and instead will only care for herself. Haidt would believe that she is misled, and while focusing on one’s self is great, people need others to truly find happiness. In his book, Haidt highlights the importance of others through concepts such as the divided mind and the Attachment theory. He further expands on this work with

principles of reciprocity and gossip. Finally, He analyzes the hedonic treadmill and its relation to the philosophies of altruism and egoism.
In the first chapter of Haidt’s The Happiness Hypothesis, Haidt focuses on improving one’s knowledge on one’s self.

He stresses that the mind is divided into parts that sometimes conflict, such as Mind vs. Body, Left vs. Right, New vs. Old, and Controlled vs. Automatic. To clarify, Haidt uses the analogy of our mind being like a rider on the back of an elephant. This helps demonstrate that instead of two opposing forces that are constantly fighting for control, the mind is more like two opposing forces that work together to form a balance. In a way, this supports Rand’s idea of knowing one’s self, however Rand has failed to realize that others are equally important as well. Rand continues her shortsightedness with the Attachment theory, as

well.
Jonathan Haidt begins to indulge the Attachment theory in chapter 6, regarding Love and Attachments. The Attachment theory is the idea that “two basic goals guide children’s behavior: safety and exploration.” A child who stays safe will survive while a child who is able to explore and play will be capable of developing the skills and intelligence needed for adult life. While these needs do oppose each other at times, exploration depends on safety to provide limits as the elephant depends on the rider to guide it. When the safety level is deemed appropriate, the child will play and explore, however the child will cease all exploration and search for safety if it drops too low. For children, safety is found in their mothers; as proven in a study by Mary Ainsworth called Strange Situation. In the experiment, Ainsworth compared the behaviors of children in a room filled with toys with and without their mothers. She found that children were more likely to reduce or stop their exploration and show anxiety when their mothers were nowhere in sight. Although when their mothers were visible, they would show delight and often move towards her, touch her, and re-establish contact before resuming exploration. In this way, Mary Ainsworth proves Rand wrong by fostering the idea that the “we,” not “I” is most significant for happiness. Emile Durkheim further supports this concept.
And if this wasn’t enough, Haidt further explores this same topic when discussing the work of Emile Durkheim, one of the founders of sociology, and how he gathered data from across Europe to study the factors that affected suicide rate. He found that people who had fewer social constraints, bonds, and obligations were more likely to kill themselves, as well as people who were living alone. These studies show that Haidt has more of a “we” view than an “I” view compared to Ayn Rand, but he still focuses on creating a balance between two opposing forces.
The phrase tit-for-tat is built into human nature. Be nice on the first round of contact, but after that do to others whatever they did to you on the previous rounds. Chapter 3 of Haidt’s book represents the ideas of reciprocity. One example of reciprocity found in animals, is vampire bats. Vampire bats hunt for their food, so some nights one bat may find an abundance while another will have no food at all. To become a likely survivor of chance, one will regurgitate blood into the mouth of another if that one had abundance while the other had none. The reason for this is that the bats keep track of who has helped them, and who they have helped, so that they know who to continue to share with and who to shun. In this way, having others around is a method of survival on those unsuccessful, hard nights. This pattern of behavior supports the idea that people that are altruistic may have egoistic motivations to help them survive. In addition to reciprocity, another method that Rand has failed to acknowledge is also brought up in chapter 3.
To Haidt, gossip is a key factor in recognizing who and who not to trust. He explains the ways in which gossip is beneficial, and how it often goes underappreciated. After doing a study with a student in his department, they found that when people share “juicy” gossip, they feel more potent, as if they have a better sense of what is right and wrong, and closer to their gossip partner. Without others to gossip, people won’t know who is truly trustworthy and they would get away with selfish, rude, and antisocial acts. This pushes the idea that Rand must interact with and help others to be able to survive longer, for it would be in her best self-interest, bringing back the idea of altruism and egoism acting together to survive.
Buddhism and Stoicism teach that searching for happiness by external goods is like chasing after wind. However, Haidt believes that happiness comes in part from outside of yourself. In chapter 5, Haidt brings up the adaptation principle, which can also be known as the hedonic treadmill. This principle expresses the idea that one’s “natural and usual state of tranquility” can never be changed, and any riches that are accumulated will end up raising one’s expectations and they will end up feeling like they did before. Haidt continues to describe a situation where there are two completely different people: Bob and Mary. Bob is a mid-thirties, single, white, fit, and attractive man, while Mary is in her sixties, black, overweight, plain, and married woman. Although Bob earns $100,000 a year and Mary’s household earns $40,000, she is found to be happier because Bob lacks strong connections with others. This is Haidt’s main point against Buddhism, Stoicism, and Rand: there are external conditions that affect happiness, the main one being relationships. So while Rand’s view can more closely be related to the teachings of Buddha and Stoicism on this particular subject, Haidt shows that relationships are a key feature of happiness and therefore survival.
Ayn Rand and Jonathan Haidt can both agree that knowing one’s self is very important; however Haidt would also push the idea that the external conditions of relationships are necessary to live a happy and fulfilled life. So, when Ayn Rand states that she is “done with the monster of ‘We’” and instead proposes a new “god, this one word: I,” Haidt would not agree as she is missing a key point in the “we” and that people need others to truly find happiness. By highlighting the divided mind, Haidt proves that balance between I and we needs to be found. Through revealing the concept of the Attachment theory, he describes how people are naturally born with the need for others. In analyzing the principles of reciprocity and gossip, he demonstrates that helping others are in one’s best interests. Lasting, after explaining hedonic treadmill, he clarifies that people are found to be happier when with others. Everyone needs “we.” To quote John Donne, “No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main.”