Table Of Contents
I was in a line for a burger and had trouble reading the sign. Lots of signs in the area were in English, but occasionally you found a spot in Stockholm not meant for tourists. In a few days I would be a tech conference, but right now I was hungry for a burger and couldn’t read Swedish.
Someone called out near me “I think that’s a lamb burger” in an unmistakably Australian accent. We spent the entire day talking. He was clearly really bright and we worked in similar trades. More than my interest in his vocation, this was the most fascinating man I had met this year.
I mean really. A background in activism and a career in technology had not withered his spirit - he was happy. Happier than he had reason to be, I thought. This was the first person I’d met anywhere near this niche of personality, hobby, and age who was happy.
“You should read ‘Enlightenment Now’ by Steven Pinker” he said.
And I did.
#The argument
Recently I found myself at a table surrounded by 5 people who were strangers only 20 minutes ago. We had some overpriced drinks and landed in a conversation which brought on some strong deja vu.
“It is actually and literally pragmatic to be an optimist if you’re not planning on doing anything”, I argued.
I have a way with words. A bad way - I’m not great at them. I get too technical; it hurts the point. I continued.
“You can be upset if you want to use that for something. If it helps you make a change, cool. I think most people are just sad because it’s seen as virtuous. It’s not, or at least it shouldn’t. You being sad helps no one.”
I was quoting that book. But also I wasn’t. It’s been a couple years now and I’ve internalized the contents. This was not the first time I’ve engaged in this exact discussion.
“You can be a Vegan and complain about meat consumption and feel bad and make your friends feel bad. And it’ll lower meat consumption by some appreciable amount and increase consumer demand for Vegan alternatives by some appreciable amount. Or you can strengthen federal law on animal cruelty. You can also do that.”
This time I was mixing in metaphors from my Australian friend. This was his background. It was also something I heard from an interview with Lewis Bollard. They call it “moralism” - focusing and agonizing over the morality instead of the practical effects. The Effective Altruism crowds bring this one up a lot.
“You can put your cans neatly in the recycling bin and also moderate emissions output from corporations. One is more effective, but you can do both. And neither requires you to be sad about it. You ever meet a sad person campaigning for office? They would get 2 votes total and it would be me twice, committing voter fraud because I think it’s funny.”
I was getting off topic now. A sad person campaigning for mayor would be pretty funny though.
“If you’re not campaigning right now, you have a moral obligation to be in the best physical and emotional health to make a change when you can. To be a force for good in the world. It really helps to be happy, I’m serious. You don’t help anyone being sad and doing nothing.”
That was the bar table argument.
It was as concise as I could make it while still being convincing. It almost felt rehearsed at this point, but you could still feel that I meant it and because of that people listened.
Today wasn’t much different from the previous conversations and it ended with someone newly open to being happy and a book recommendation.
#Proselytizing
I used to get nervous of the possibility that the path to true success was mean spirited.
Live long enough and you’ll realize that things become significantly easier if you’re kind. Kind doesn’t mean naive, it means kind. Do unto others and all that. This is really convenient. You can do generally the right thing and still turn out well.
The same fear popped up about being happy. This feels a lot more common, but it’s just as misguided. Moralism has done a number on the world and it’s just significantly less pragmatic. You won’t get into sad people heaven for the great dead of being oh so sad. You’ll just be sad and then one day you’ll die.
What is your material impact on the world? If you feel you’re not doing enough, being sad doesn’t change that. It really puts a damper on things in a way where no one benefits and now you’re also sad. It makes you worse at actually doing something.
You can serve yourself and secondly your community by being happy. What a wonderful coincidence!
It doesn’t feel guaranteed, this layout of things. Being happy and kind - the Epicurean model - it turns out to be a really effective framework. It’s not just a fun way to live, it is pragmatic.
It have a religious fervor of this now. I serve sermons to the needy with my book in hand. I have a duty now to spread cheer because that is the pragmatic path to change.
#The book
You should read it, it’s good. I’ve described it as a “self help book for intellectuals”. It’s been a few years now, but I remember it being mostly pages of charts and graphs of sorts.
The book tries to (I think successfully) argue that quality of life is consistently and predictably increasing. It does this on a couple different metrics including refrigeration, transit, shipping, information, insulation, textiles, medicine, food, and infant mortality among many others.
On any metric, stretched enough on the axis of time, the trend is upwards.
You can eat foods from foreign continents and sleep in soft beds. You can control temperature. You can reliably heal from illness. You can live to get cancer and see it treated. You can wear comfortable clothes and play games with friends hundreds of miles apart.
You can literally fly above the clouds.
The spikes of war and disaster sway the immediate direction and create local minima, but all you need to do is zoom out. We (a significant portion of the world) have luxuries unfathomable to generations only a few prior and we (that same portion) will be healthier than most who have lived before us.
The optimistic take on the world is (statistically i.e. factually) more often correct.
Notably, this same optimism is on the global scale and in the abstract. The quick retort is the obvious many examples of war, disease, and impoverishment. People are suffering and I’m here bragging.
Don’t fall into this trap. Do this mental dance with decorum, but do not fall prey to moralizing. There are many with less and they should have more. You should be okay with having less so they have more. That is moral. You should also care to be ready to help and that means avoiding the depression spiral that moralizing brings.
Being optimistic is more fun, less wrong, and puts you in a better position to promote positive change. It makes it easier to be happy and make others happy.
I want to also clarify here my language. No doubt “just be happy” will boil some blood and it is not the argument I’m making. Many people (present company included) believe they “should be” sad - that they deserve to be sad. If this is you (this was me), it shouldn’t. Your internal monologue is wrong.
If you have any control over your emotional state and are looking for some guidance, here is mine:
Be pragmatic.