In the past two lectures of Systems Dynamics (a discipline that aims to explain the behavior of systems through simple diagrams and feedback loops), our professor, John Sterman, used some very convincing models of human society and the economy to show that without radical change, human society is headed for a period of population collapse and great suffering. The simple fact of the matter is that we cannot continue to grow (in population and in economic terms) indefinitely while consuming finite or slow-to-regenerate resources without a severe crash. The dynamics of the system lead to no other conclusion. No amount of tweaking the inputs (amount of resources, technological innovation, market dynamics, etc.) results in any significant change in the outcome.
But what does that have to do with us as individuals in the system? In today’s lecture, he presented the results of a survey to the class asking how much money you would want to receive every year until you die to satisfy your consumption needs. In other words, how much money would you have to be able to spend each year to be satisfied? The results were astounding -- the median value was $200,000 per year, with an average that was even higher. This was apparently typical for the dozens of times he’s done the survey in an MBA class. (We’re talking consumption here, not income!)
We then explored the dynamics of consumption, and how it relates to life satisfaction. We came across the familiar “hedonic treadmill” and a few other dynamics that prevent us from ever being satisfied with what we currently have, and lead to more and more striving for money and “success.” Everyone nodded their heads in agreement -- the idea that once you get used to something you enjoy it less and less is both simple and obvious. (Remember how awesome it used to feel when you looked at your new iPhone/computer/car/anything?)
The problem here is that even if the concept makes sense in academic terms, nobody behaves as though they understand. I was amazed to be sitting in a room with a slice of the world’s smartest people (at one of the top academic institutions on the planet), and realize that almost none of them actually understand the dynamics of their own happiness/life satisfaction. They simply don’t have the knowledge to effectively improve their life satisfaction without a large amount of misdirected effort. $200,000 per year of spending cash is ludicrous, and won’t bring you happiness to any significant degree -- you’ll adjust and simply want more.
The fact of the matter is that money and the things it buys are just that -- things. It is our minds that determine whether those “things” make us feel good, bad, or neutral. There is nothing objectively desirable about money. To a man lost in the woods, $100 bills are nothing more than fuel for a fire to keep him warm. The key here to remember is that whether we feel good or bad at any time is entirely determined inside our minds. I challenge you to come up with one example to the contrary.
(really, try it! Post in the comments if you’ve got something)
So anyways, what does this have to do with the doomsday model of the world Professor Sterman presented on Monday? It’s that there’s one assumption in the model that we presume cannot be changed -- that we must always consume more and more to sustain our happiness. If we were somehow able to change ourselves to be satisfied with what we currently have, a crash would no longer be inevitable.
We’ve all heard this kind of thinking before -- we need to live more sustainably, save energy, recycle, blah blah blah. But in reality, that’s not enough. The outcome doesn’t change with a 20% savings in energy, or 30% less oil consumption. It only changes when we defeat the effects of adjustment by learning to be satisfied with very little, and without continuing to push for more at an accelerating pace.
Now, most people find this kind of talk distasteful. They don’t want to have to cut back on something like shopping or travel or anything else that incidentally increases consumption of non-renewable resources. It’s taking away the things in life that often give us the most pleasure and joy. Plus, if my neighbor isn’t conserving, then why should I? The world will collapse anyways because of him.
The simple fact is this -- relinquishing the need for external things like money/houses/hobbies/careers/success to be happy is NOT giving up your happiness. It is the path to complete freedom. It is the path to unconditional satisfaction with life. It is the path to true and lasting happiness. And this kind of happiness is without cost to the sustainability of the planet, and of the human race.
(pause)
I think that a lot of people might scoff at that paragraph or question the practicality of it. The only reason I’m so confident, and the only reason I bother writing this stuff, is because I’ve experienced that transition for myself. I went from insecure, overly ambitious, fearful of death, and somewhat prone to depressive bouts to become one of the happiest people I know. The answer didn’t come from the outside. I didn’t win the lottery, I didn’t sell my company for $1B, and I didn’t become a respected figure in the business community. Almost nothing changed in my day-to-day situation. It was my mind that changed.
At some point, I decided that if I wanted to live a good life and make the world a better place, it made sense to focus on happiness. By becoming happier, my life would be much more pleasant, and I would be able to focus on helping others instead of trying to address my insecurities (by constantly striving for money and success through business). And with that resolution, I found a way to change.
The truth is that different things will work for different people when they’re looking for sustainable happiness. Some people find it enough to try to spend more time expressing gratitude for everything they have and everything others give them. Other people find it by developing a deep devotion to their religion. Personally, I find that meditation is the most powerful and direct method to change the mind to make it work for my happiness (instead of against it).
But whatever the method, the point is that you’re never going to get to a deep, sustainable happiness (that doesn’t harm the rest of the world) unless you focus on it and develop it.
Develop your happiness. Find your method. It is the most important thing you can do for yourself, and for the world.
