Why Be Happy When You Could Be Interesting?
"We don't really want what we think we want," says philosopher Slavoj Žižek. It's a strange, almost exotic thought at a time when many of us are inundated daily with the prospect of infinite choice.
You can no longer buy a product, it seems, without expressing your opinion. (Do you want whiter teeth or a toothpaste that acknowledges the sensitivity of your gums? Dish soap that smites bacteria, or one that's free of environmental toxins?) For better or worse, customization has infiltrated our daily lives to an unprecedented degree and the message is clear: Live your best life. Find happiness here and now.
But what if happiness isn't actually all that fulfilling? Watch the video:
In this second video from our interview with Žižek, the author of Big Think's most recent Book of the Month argues that happiness is a conformist category. And moreover, none of us really want it. Which is a good thing, since the pursuit of happiness is an Enlightenment value that gets at only one aspect of what it means to live a good life.
"Let’s be serious: when you are in a creative endeavor, in that wonderful fever--'My God, I’m onto something!' and so on--happiness doesn't enter it," he says. "You are ready to suffer. Sometimes scientists, I read in a history of quantum physics... were even ready to take into account the possibility that they [would] die because of radiation. Happiness is, for me, an unethical category." It's also boring.
You can be happy without being moral. You can be happy without being interesting or engaged in the world around you. You can be happy without having a single creative idea or interest or passion. You can get everything you desire, and still not be happy. So why even focus on finding bliss?
Tell us: Would you rather be happy or inspired?
Research in plant neurobiology shows that plants have senses, intelligence and emotions.
- The field of plant neurobiology studies the complex behavior of plants.
- Plants were found to have 15-20 senses, including many like humans.
- Some argue that plants may have awareness and intelligence, while detractors persist.
Most people think human extinction would be bad. These people aren't philosophers.
- A new opinion piece in The New York Times argues that humanity is so horrible to other forms of life that our extinction wouldn't be all that bad, morally speaking.
- The author, Dr. Todd May, is a philosopher who is known for advising the writers of The Good Place.
- The idea of human extinction is a big one, with lots of disagreement on its moral value.
Since the idea of locality is dead, space itself may not be an aloof vacuum: Something welds things together, even at great distances.
- Realists believe that there is an exactly understandable way the world is — one that describes processes independent of our intervention. Anti-realists, however, believe realism is too ambitious — too hard. They believe we pragmatically describe our interactions with nature — not truths that are independent of us.
- In nature, properties of Particle B may be depend on what we choose to measure or manipulate with Particle A, even at great distances.
- In quantum mechanics, there is no explanation for this. "It just comes out that way," says Smolin. Realists struggle with this because it would imply certain things can travel faster than light, which still seems improbable.