On commuting and value neutrality
Happiness research, to me, is an incredible window into the human psyche. David Brooks leverages this research:
If the relationship between money and well-being is complicated, the correspondence between personal relationships and happiness is not. The daily activities most associated with happiness are sex, socializing after work and having dinner with others. The daily activity most injurious to happiness is commuting. According to one study, joining a group that meets even just once a month produces the same happiness gain as doubling your income. According to another, being married produces a psychic gain equivalent to more than $100,000 a year.
Commuting is a fascinating test case — so many people choose long commutes over lower salaries, lower perceived position, or any number of other factors. But this research is widely known that this decision tends to decrease happiness.
Is the conclusion that people are misinformed, or have they simply valued money/status over happiness?
Brooks’ conclusion is that governments should start making happiness a policy goal (in addition to or in place of material well being). However, free people repeatedly choose those material goals over happiness. It seems that happiness is a point of legitimate value disagreement, one that the state should be more cautious in adjudicating.
-John
Related posts:
- Is frugality a virtue?
- Survey data permanently settles philosophical question
- Neutrality on sex education
- David Brooks for eternity
- Happiness is an elephant
ShareComments
Leave a Reply
