7 Dec 2008
Happiness, Csikszentmihalyi's Concept of "Flow"
(via mills):
……because laughter is the convulsive aftermath of a comic moment, it reflects the sudden absence of reason, the absence of self-control.
Indeed, laughter is literally ecstatic: it takes us outside ourselves, and while the historic ideal of a human was a man or woman in perfect self-control, dutiful and reserved and composed and purposive, the present ideal is the opposite: the “natural” person, freed of all duties and purposes, pleased by everything, hedonistically enjoying themselves, beyond reason and duty and “conformity” to “values” and in a world of laughter.
Thus: photos were once taken of stars and presidents as they sat rigid, projecting an identity completely of their determining, looking stern as they faced you and the world: ready to do what they must. Photos are now of guffaws, exposed mouths, easy laughter, “natural” laughter (often posed!), the laughter of people who “don’t let things get them down” and who know that life is to be enjoyed.
Your great-grandparents might have said: “The purpose of life is to be a good child, spouse, parent, employee, neighbor, and friend.” Happiness was incidental, or rather a result of devotion, not the object of devotion. Thus if they were unhappy in marriage, they didn’t necessarily divorce: happiness wasn’t the goal, marriage was the goal. One hoped that happiness came from it.
I only observe that the human ideal used to be a person who was in control of herself or himself and whose value was in deeds and doings. Now our ideal is one who is happy. Happiness is a state, not a deed (although deeds may contribute to it), and is expressed not through facial solemnity but through the abandonment of control of the face: the laugh.
I believe there was a time when people in America were, in many regards, much happier than they are now, and this is probably the reason why. “Being good” - especially with a clearly defined definition (he, a steady breadwinner, she, an excellent cook and mother) is, I think, much more attainable and ultimately more satisfying than defining and attempting to attain “happiness” through constant focus on one’s self.
.
Working in a field that focuses on helping people fulfill their potential and live fuller, happier lives, I felt compelled to respond to this, although fully aware that this post is far too long to expect anyone to read. Also, I can’t possibly cover the gamut of this topic in such a post, it would require pages and pages and I would love to study and contribute more on “happiness” at some other time. But for now, the things that popped into my mind immediately:
This is what I would like to focus on primarily: “I only observe that the human ideal used to be a person who was in control of herself or himself and whose value was in deeds and doings. Now our ideal is one who is happy. Happiness is a state, not a deed (although deeds may contribute to it), and is expressed not through facial solemnity but through the abandonment of control of the face: the laugh.”
Firstly, I disagree that the human ideal is one who is simply happy. I believe it is both someone who is in control and happy. Granted, it is romanticized in popular culture when individuals are deliriously, even ignorantly happy; for example, people love to see the smiles on homeless persons’ faces, and say, “aww, look, even when you’re a schizophrenic or a prisoner, you can STILL be happy,” but would never wish such an outcome on themselves: they couldn’t live without the control they feel they have on their own lives. I don’t understand where your argument that “photos today are of…” happiness and therefore that’s the current ideal comes from; how do you come to such a conclusion, based on an assumption? I would like to include philosophical arguments against happiness as life’s ultimate aim (Mill, Aristotle, Aquinas, Kant) and for virtue, overall well-being, and morality, but that would keep you scrolling for days.
I agree that perhaps a shift in the understanding of and manifestation of happiness has occurred in recent history, but this may just be a product of the media and an increasing interest in ways to be happy, which may further be simply a result of the substantial increase of attention on widespread psychological disorders like depression. With diagnosis comes discovery: i.e., depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, anxiety and panic disorder, PTSD and everything else has always existed, but when these psychological disorders are studied, researched, and treated, psychopathology and overall unhappiness now have an avenue in which to present themselves. Therefore, with their increasing visibility in the public, their antithesis, happiness and subjective well-being, obviously garner much more attention. Being that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders was first published in 1952, the past fifty years have seen psychotherapy in all its forms come to the forefront of individual well-being, especially, perhaps, in the last twenty years with the advent of positive psychology. Positive psychology as an academic and research field specifically is largely unknown outside those who study it, but its influences are more than pervasive.
I work with people in trying to help them to achieve “flow” more in their lives. This state of consciousness, termed by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, is essentially the state of “being in the zone.” He writes,
When goals are clear, feedback relevant, and challenges and skills are in balance, attention becomes ordered and fully invested. Because of the total demand on psychic energy, a person in flow is completely focused. There is no space in consciousness for distracting thoughts, irrelevant feelings. Self-consciousness disappears, yet one feels stronger than usual. The sense of time is distorted: hours seem to pass by in minutes. When a person’s entire being is stretched in the full functioning of body and mind, whatever one does becomes worth doing for its own sake; living becomes its own justification. In the harmonious focusing of physical and psychic energy, life finally comes into its own.
It is the full involvement of flow, rather than happiness, that makes for excellence in life. When we are in flow, we are not happy, because to experience happiness we must focus on our inner states, and that would take away attention from the task at hand. If a rock climber takes time out to feel happy while negotiating a difficult move, he might fall to the bottom of the mountain. The surgeon can’t afford to feel happy during a demanding operation, or a musician while playing a challenging score. Only after the task is completed do we have the leisure to look back on what has happened, and then we are flooded with gratitude for the excellence of that experience—then, in retrospect, we are happy. But one can be happy without experiencing flow. We can be happy experiencing the passive pleasure of a rested body, a warm sunshine, the contentment of a serene relationship. These are also moments to treasure, but this kind of happiness is very vulnerable and dependent on favorable external circumstances. The happiness that follows flow is of our own making, and it leads to increasing complexity and growth in consciousness.
There are a lot of creative and talented people on tumblr, all you artists, writers, and musicians, and I’m sure you all know exactly what Csikszentmihalyi is talking about. Achieving happiness through flow—by doing what we love most—is a much deeper, enduring satisfaction than happiness through self reflection and especially the most transient of all happiness that exists in laughter. The whole idea is to not seek out happiness, like you point out seems to be the case today; but rather to seek out experiences that are rewarding for their own sake, experiences that make us feel most alive, which will make us happy in result. This flow is therefore more than happiness, it is excellence; it is living consciously in the highest form possible.
