Haaretz wants to send you breaking

news updates

Why Nobel Prize winner Daniel Get only the most important updates and
interesting reads

Kahneman gave up on happiness -

Israel News
Amir Mandel
What did I consider more important about my meeting with Nobel Prize laureate
Daniel Kahneman? My enjoyment of the meeting, which was fascinating and
inspirational – or the photo that shows me talking with one of the world’s most
brilliant men? According to Kahneman, this is a complex question that has
caused confusion in happiness studies for many years.
He came to the study of happiness through a circuitous route, as an outgrowth
of research in which he sought to understand the connection between what we
experience in real time – that is, the life we lead – and what we remember of
these experiences (i.e., the narrative we carry with us and tell about our lives).
A Tel Aviv native and professor emeritus at Princeton, Kahneman, 84, is a
cognitive psychologist who won the Nobel Prize in economics in 2002 for
research conducted jointly with Amos Tversky (who died in 1996). The two
modeled a systematic, inbuilt set of cognitive biases and logical failures in our
method of thinking that influences contexts, conclusions and decision-making.
They then demonstrated how, as a result, we make decisions on the basis of
erroneous assessments and intuitions that are inconsistent with either statistics
or common sense.
The research and behavioral models derived from their studies had a significant
effect on the economic sciences, forcing it to change its models – which had
previously been based on the fundamental assumption of rational behavior.
Kahneman’s insights created the field of behavioral economics: A field that seeks
to evaluate the influence of irrational, impulsive human behavior.
In the 1990s, Kahneman studied another form of cognitive bias: That there is a
discrepancy between our experiences as we experience them while they’re
actually happening, and our memories of those
Haaretz wants sameyouexperiences.
to send breaking
news updates

Get only the most important updates and

interesting reads

Daniel Kahneman, another famous Israel-linked Nobel winner.Credit: Moti Milrod

Carlo Strenger / Analyzing the Status Quo
Psychological Obstacles to Peace
Books / We All Lie, Mainly to Ourselves
The subject of his initial research was not sexy and quite distant from the
happiness debate. The study documented, in real time, patients’ degree of
suffering during a colonoscopy (it was a painful procedure at the time, unlike
today).
It turned out there was no connection between the length of the procedure and
level of pain a patient experienced and described at the time, and the extent of
trauma he recalled afterward. The memory was based primarily on whether the
pain increased or decreased towardHaaretzthewants
endtoofsend
the procedure.
you breaking The stronger the
pain in the final stage of the procedure, the more traumatic it became in the
news updates

patient’s memory – with no connection to the question of how much pain he

Get only the most important updates and
interesting reads
actually experienced during it.
Positive experiences are processed similarly. In a 2010 lecture, Kahneman
related the story of a man who told him about listening to a symphony he loved,
“absolutely glorious music.” But at the end there was a “dreadful screeching
sound” that, the man said, ruined the whole experience for him.
But as Kahneman pointed out, it hadn’t actually destroyed the experience,
because the man enjoyed the music at the time. Rather, it ruined his memory of
the experience, which is something completely different.
“We live and experience many moments, but most of them are not preserved,”
Kahneman said. “They are lost forever. Our memory collects certain parts of
what happened to us and processes them into a story. We make most of our
decisions based on the story told by our memory.
“For example, a vacation – we don’t remember, or experience, the entire time we
spent on vacation, but only the impressions preserved in our memory, the
photographs and the documentation. Moreover, we usually choose the next
vacation not as an experience but as a future memory. If prior to the decision
about our next vacation we assume that at the end all the photos will be erased,
and we’ll be given a drug that will also erase our memory, it’s quite possible that
we’ll choose a different vacation from the one that we actually choose.”
A very vague concept
Kahneman’s studies of “What I experience” versus “What I remember” are what
led him to get involved in the study of happiness.
“I put together a group of researchers, including an economist whom I viewed as
both a partner in the group and its principal client,” he told me when we met
earlier this year. “We wanted to figure out what factors affect happiness and to
try to work to change conditions and policies accordingly. Economists have more
influence on policy.
“The group developed a model Haaretz
known wants
as DRM, or Day
to send you Reconstruction
breaking Method –
a fairly successful method of reconstructing
news updates
experiences throughout the day. It
gives results similar to those ofGet
‘What I experience’ and is easier to do.”
only the most important updates and
interesting reads

It turns out there are significant differences between the narrative that we
remember and tell, and the feelings of day-to-day happiness we experience at
the time – to the point that Kahneman believes the general term “happiness” is
too vague and can’t be applied to both.
He views “happiness” as the feeling of enjoyment a person experiences here and
now – for instance, two weeks of relaxation on the beach, or an enjoyable
conversation with an interesting person. What is described as happiness in the
“What I remember” is something Kahneman prefers to call – as he did more than
once in his series of studies – “satisfaction” or “life satisfaction.”

Amir Mandel speaking with Daniel Kahneman, March 2018. What did I consider
more important about our meeting? My enjoyment of the meeting or the photo?
Credit: Moti Milrod Haaretz wants to send you breaking
news updates
“Life satisfaction is connected toGetaonly
largethedegree to social
most important yardsticks
updates and – achieving
goals, meeting expectations,” heinteresting
explained. “It’s based on comparisons with
reads

other people.
“For instance, with regard to money, life satisfaction rises in direct proportion to
how much you have. In contrast, happiness is affected by money only when it’s
lacking. Poverty can buy a lot of suffering, but above the level of income that
satisfies basic needs, happiness, as I define it, doesn’t increase with wealth. The
graph is surprisingly flat.

Angus Deaton.Credit: AFP

“Economist Angus Deaton, the Nobel Prize laureate for 2015, was also involved
in these conclusions. Happiness in this sense depends, to a large extent, on
genetics – on a natural ability to be happy. It’s also connected to a genetic
disposition to optimism. They are apparently the same genes.
“To the degree that outside factors affect this aspect of happiness,” he
continued, “they’re related solely to people: We’re happy in the company of
people we like, especially friendsHaaretz
– morewants
so than withyoupartners.
to send breaking Children can
cause great happiness, at certainnewsmoments.
updates
”
Get only the most important updates and
‘I was miserable’ interesting reads

At about the same time as these studies were being conducted, the Gallup
polling company (which has a relationship with Princeton) began surveying
various indicators among the global population. Kahneman was appointed as a
consultant to the project.
“I suggested including measures of happiness, as I understand it – happiness in
real time. To these were added data from Bhutan, a country that measures its
citizens’ happiness as an indicator of the government’s success. And gradually,
what we know today as Gallup’s World Happiness Report developed. It has also
been adopted by the UN and OECD countries, and is published as an annual
report on the state of global happiness.
“A third development, which is very important in my view, was a series of lectures
I gave at the London School of Economics in which I presented my findings
about happiness. The audience included Prof. Richard Layard – a teacher at the
school, a British economist and a member of the House of Lords – who was
interested in the subject. Eventually, he wrote a book about the factors that
influence happiness, which became a hit in Britain,” Kahneman said, referring to
“Happiness: Lessons from a New Science.”
“Layard did important work on community issues, on improving mental health
services – and his driving motivation was promoting happiness. He instilled the
idea of happiness as a factor in the British government’s economic
considerations.
“The involvement of economists like Layard and Deaton made this issue more
respectable,” Kahneman added with a smile. “Psychologists aren’t listened to so
much. But when economists get involved, everything becomes more serious,
and research on happiness gradually caught the attention of policy-making
organizations.
“At the same time,” said Kahneman, “a movement has also developed in
psychology – positive psychology – that focuses on happiness and attributes
great importance to internal questions like meaning.
Haaretz wants I’mbreaking
to send you less certain of that.
news updates

Get only the most important updates and

interesting reads

Tourists in New York posing near a homeless man. "In general, if you want to
reduce suffering, mental health is a good place to start," says Kahneman.Credit:
Reuters
“People connect happiness primarily to the company of others. I recall a
conversation with Martin Seligman, the founder of positive psychology, in which
he tried to convince me I had a meaningful life. I insisted – and I still think this
today – that I had an interesting life. ‘Meaningful’ isn’t something I understand.
I’m a lucky person and also fairly happy – mainly because, for most of my life,
I’ve worked with people whose company I enjoyed.”
Then, referring to his 2011 best-seller “Thinking, Fast and Slow,” he added,
“There were four years when I worked alone on a book. That was terrible, and I
was miserable.”
Despite Kahneman’s reservations, trends
Haaretz in positive
wants psychology
to send you breaking have come to
dominate the science of happiness. One of the field’s most prominent
news updates

representatives is Prof. Tal Ben-Shahar, who taught the most popular course in
Get only the most important updates and
interesting reads
Harvard’s history (in spring 2006), on happiness and leadership.
Following in his footsteps, lecturers at Yale developed a course on happiness
that attracted masses of students and overshadowed every other course offered
at the prestigious university.
“In positive psychology, it seems to me they’re trying to convince people to be
happy without making any changes in their situation,” said Kahneman,
skeptically. “To learn to be happy. That fits well with political conservatism.”
I pointed out to Kahneman that Buddhism – including Tibetan Buddhism’s
spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, which whom he is in contact – also places great
emphasis on changing a person’s inner spiritual state. “That’s true to a large
extent,” he agreed, “but in a different way, in my opinion. Buddhism has a
different social worldview.
“But in any case, I confess that I participated in a meeting with the Dalai Lama at
MIT, and some of his people were there – including one of his senior people, who
lives in Paris and serves as his contact person and translator in France. I couldn’t
tear my eyes away from this man. He radiated. He had such inner peace and
such a sense of happiness, and I’m absolutely not cynical enough to overlook it.”
Tending to mental health
Kahneman studied happiness for over two decades, gave rousing lectures and,
thanks to his status, contributed to putting the issue on the agenda of both
countries and organizations, principally the UN and the OECD. Five years ago,
though, he abandoned this line of research.
 Haaretz wants to send you breaking
news updates

Get only the most important updates and

interesting reads

Two French women laughing at a cafe in Paris, April 2017. "We’re happy in the
company of people we like, especially friends," says Kahneman.Credit:
Bloomberg
“I gradually became convinced that people don’t want to be happy,” he
explained. “They want to be satisfied with their life.”
A bit stunned, I asked him to repeat that statement. “People don’t want to be
happy the way I’ve defined the term – what I experience here and now. In my
view, it’s much more important for them to be satisfied, to experience life
satisfaction, from the perspective of ‘What I remember,’ of the story they tell
about their lives. I furthered the development of tools for understanding and
advancing an asset that I think is important but most people aren’t interested in.
“Meanwhile, awareness of happiness has progressed in the world, including
annual happiness indexes. It seems to me that on this basis, what can
confidently be advanced is a reduction of suffering. The question of whether
society should intervene so thatHaaretz
peoplewants
will beto send
happier is very controversial, but
you breaking
whether society should strive fornews people to suffer less – that’s widely accepted.
updates

Get only the most important updates and

“Much of Layard’s activity on behalf of happiness in England related to bolstering
interesting reads

the mental health system. In general, if you want to reduce suffering, mental
health is a good place to start – because the extent of illness is enormous and
the intensity of the distress doesn’t allow for any talk of happiness. We also need
to talk about poverty and about improving the workplace environment, where
many people are abused.”
My interview with Kahneman took place as I started working on the Haaretz
series of articles “The Secret of Happiness,” and was initially meant to conclude
it. It was the key to the entire series. It’s interesting that Kahneman, one of the
leading symbols of happiness research, eventually became dubious and quit,
while proposing that we primarily address causes of suffering.
The “secret of happiness” hasn’t been deciphered. Even the term’s definition
remains vague. Genetics and luck play an important role in it.
Nevertheless, a few insights that emerged from the series have stayed with me:
I’m amazed by Layard’s activity. I was impressed by the tranquility of the
Buddhist worldview and the practices that accompany it. Personally, I’ve chosen
to practice meditation with a technique adapted to people from Western
cultures.
I learned to collect experiences and not necessarily memories, which can be
disputed. I don’t mind sitting for three hours in a Paris café or spending a day
wandering through the streets of Berlin, without noting a single monument or
having a single incident that I could recount. I gave up on income to do what I
enjoy – like, for instance, writing about happiness and music.
Above all, it has become clear that our best hours are spent in the company of
people we like. With this resource, it pays to be generous.