I blame Bob Hawke,who once hit the headlines for saying that economics was about happiness. Though many economists today may deny it,he was right. He meant that economics was about helping people maximise their “utility” – the satisfaction they derive from their consumption.
“Happiness” is a word used by ordinary people,so journalists use it freely. Although some economists study it,most would never use such a frivolous word. “Welfare” is the closest they come. They’ve stopped talking about “utility” because they can’t measure it.
It’s psychologists who take most interest in happiness,but even they prefer to call it “subjective wellbeing”. Sounds more scientific.
A recentarticle from the British Psychological Society says that “people who are happy – who enjoy ‘hedonistic wellbeing’ - experience plenty of positive emotions and are generally pretty satisfied with life”.
But that’s just a psychologist’s way of saying that happy people have been shown to be ... happy. It doesn’t tell you how to become happy – nor whether happiness is what we should be shooting for.
The article does go on to quote the finding of a review of many studies that,while some strategies recommended for boosting happiness – such as taking time in the day to reflect on what you are grateful for – are far from bad in themselves,if you expect them to make you feel noticeably happier,you’re likely to be disappointed.
The social commentator Hugh Mackay – a man from whom I’ve learnt much – is very critical of the modern preoccupation with happiness. It’s that word “hedonistic” that offends him. It implies that it’s OK to make the pursuit of pleasure our primary goal. Seek out positive emotions and avoid negative emotions as much as possible.