American psychologist Michael Steger was curious about how differently people lead their lives. In particular, he thought about two people — football player Pat Tillman and socialite heiress Paris Hilton.
The former gave up his career with the National Football League to join the army and fight in Iraq and Afghanistan, where he was killed. The latter, according to Steger, continually “pursues a public life of shallowness.”
The psychologist wondered what made a person happier, seeking pleasure or doing good. So he fashioned an experiment using volunteers and discovered that participating in meaningful activities made people happier whereas indulging in hedonism did not.
However, before jumping to conclusions perhaps it would be better to take a step back and examine the situation a bit more. Without being colossally judgmental about Ms Hilton’s “shallow” lifestyle and not having any idea whether she’s happy or not, it would still be a safe bet to say most people would agree that what she does is not “meaningful”.
That’s because participating in home-made sex videos, partying into the dawn, driving without a licence and being drop dead fashionable and obscenely wealthy are not generally perceived as being consistent with a high-end moral life. In fact if she’s still happy, she ought not to be. It’s a majority vote.
On the other hand there’s patriotism, duty and one’s service to the country. Yet America’s second outing in the Gulf was not able to retain the high moral ground it was conceived upon.
Its premise had always been riven with doubt even in the United States, its subsequent development became mired in controversy the world over, and its denouement predictably began to proceed the way Vietnam ultimately did. By the time the last American soldier left Saigon, more than 60 percent of his fellow citizens back home thought their involvement in the war was meaningless and wrong.
Meaning, if Tillman was happy doing what he did, he ought not to have been. It’s a majority vote.
No, the connection between doing something a person perceives to be good or meaningful and happiness should not be a causal one. Because in that case we’ll all end up doing such things only because it makes us feel nice, and some of those things stand on pretty shaky ground.
Instead, if we did what was right, there would be no trade-offs to worry about, seek or gain. Moreover, what’s right needs no majority vote. A single vote of one is enough.
(This piece first appeared in The Economic Times)