Want to find out the secret to happiness? Then tune in to this week’s “Movie Monday” video/talk.
Click on the link to the right to view the movie/talk. Please REMEMBER to leave your course number in your comments.
Posted by: csucpsyc | November 3, 2008
Movie Monday #10: Dan Gilbert Why Are We Happy?
Posted in Positive Psychology, neuroscience
I thought this presentation was somewhat interesting. I found myself zoning out a lot. Dan Gilbert wasn’t the best public speaker and this definitely wasn’t my favorite video this semester. I thought his speech on synthetic happiness was interesting when he provided examples like the man who was in prison for a crime he didn’t commit and called his experience “glorious.”
By: Ashley Moyer Psyc 362 on November 3, 2008
at 6:17 pm
This isn’t really a shocker to me to be honest. It feels like he put data to something I already knew, and I think everyone knows, at least everyone who is happy. I guess it’s a good message to people that need it.
By: Trevor Hill on November 3, 2008
at 10:44 pm
Ya I also felt that Gilbert was just speaking on a subject that I think everyone knows about but maybe some people don’t want to admit it. I felt like I couldn’t concentrate on it because I understood what he was talking about from the beginning and I just kept zoning out. He wasn’t really that interesting to me. In general if someone hadn’t thought about this before then Gilbert covered i with good examples such as the man who was in prison.
By: Cinthia Orozco(psyc 362) on November 4, 2008
at 1:44 am
I enjoyed Dan Gilbert’s talk very much. Although the material he talked about felt very familiar and all he did was back it up with scientific data. I would like to point out that a lot of scientific discoveries have seemed fairly obvious. Nobody would tell Sir Issac Newton that everybody knows that gravity existed and that his three laws of motion were things that everyone knew and that all he did was back it up with mathematical equations.
I also found Gilbert’s talk fascinating because the idea of synthetic happiness has been a popular subject in art, literature, and film. If anyone who has seen “American Beauty”, or read anything by Chuck Palahniuk finds the characters either unable to synthesize happiness in order to cope with life; or they find a more taboo outlet to
create synthetic happiness which ostracizes them from society.
My final contribution is that Dan Gilbert is a great example of what Ken Robinson discussed in the previous Movie Monday segment. The man was a high school drop out and a father by age 19. He originally wanted to be a writer (which he still does) and ended up taking psychology classes at a local community college. This eventually led to him obtaining his PHD. from Princeton and then becoming a professor at Harvard. To me I feel that Ken would agree that if Gilbert had someone to guide him when he was younger maybe he could have avoided some of his decisions. I point this out because a lot of people loved Robinson’s talk and that man pointed out the obivious with zero scientific data to support his claims.
I am only suggesting alternative views to the previous comments. I respect their views and I do not want to come across as giving a scathing critique about their opinions. However it seems that the only things that can really be debated are opinons. If they were not debatable, they would be facts. Have a good day.
-Michael Garcia Psychology 362
By: michael garcia on November 4, 2008
at 5:25 am
I loved this talk! I related one hundred percent to what he was saying. Especially the study with the harvard students who were offered the photography class and only allowed to take one of their two favorite shots. The ones who got the choice to switch photos were less happy in the end. I am soooo bad with decisions and i always wonder what if i chose the other choice. It was also interesting that when they offered the class again sixty six percent of the students wanted to have the choice between the two photos. I would have been one of the sixty six percent even though it would have led to my unhappiness with my photo! Crazy stuff!
By: Molly Conrado on November 4, 2008
at 5:48 pm
I found it interesting that those who wanted to have the choice between the two paintings were unhappy versus those who said they were going to just choose one and stick with it, were happy. If you think about it, it makes sense. But going into this decision you would probably think you would be more happy having the decision. I also found it interesting that the patients who had amnesia came up with the same results as everyone else as far as which Monet painting they preferred, choosing number 3 over 4 and then wondering if they should have chose the other one, not really happy with their results. But what they did differ with was the fact that they could not remember doing this experiment before and what their choices were versus those who already remember which paintings they chose. Lastly, I enjoyed Dan Gilbert’s enthusiasm during his talk. I love when you can tell people truly enjoy and find what they are talking about interesting!
By: Amy Parshall PSYC 414 on November 4, 2008
at 7:18 pm
Though Dan Gilbert’s presentation was a little bit of a let down compared to last week’s (Ken Robinson is a hard act to follow) the subject matter was intriguing. I rarely come into contact with positive psychology and looking at happiness, which is a little odd considering happiness is what we are all ultimately chasing. Gilbert broke happiness into two categories: natural and synthetic. Gilbert defines synthetic happiness “what we make when we don’t get what we wanted.” I, like most, thought that happiness is happiness is happiness, which in a sense it is, but these two categories prove otherwise. The Harvard photography class study was very interesting. It is essentially rather basic but supports the notion that freedom to choose is the enemy of synthetic happiness. I feel like research like this gives hope to people who feel down and out. More focus should be given to positive psychology; it is so refreshing!
By: Cassie Alcocer on November 4, 2008
at 9:03 pm
I liked this one; Dan Gilbert has an important message for all of us which is that more than anything outside of us, it is we who determine whether or not we choose to be happy. Someone who has experienced a great deal of loss can be just as happy as someone who has experienced a so called gain. The mind can make a hell out of heaven and a heaven out of hell.
Paul Hubbard Psyc 362
By: Paul Hubbard Psyc 362 on November 5, 2008
at 12:40 am
Dan was not my favorite presenter this semester, but did have interesting points. One example is when he talked about the human brain tripling in mass because of the prefrontal cortex. This structure was gained and does lots of things. Most importantly, it is an experience stimulator. This means humans can have experiences in their heads before they actually try them out in real life. He gave the example of having 2 pictures up on the screen and asking if we would rather win a million dollars (like depicted in the first picture) or becoming paraplegic (like the second picture). Obviously, people would rather win the million dollars and this part of our brain is what allows us to decide that rather than become paraplegic. That quiz was a fail. The simulator gives us false representation sometimes. He explained that happiness is not from the present, it is overall happiness with self. The example above showed that after a year each person was equally happy. I thought that that part of the presentation was very very interesting. It was stated that happiness is something we are always chasing. Happiness must come from within a person, and not because they chased it and got it for the time being.
PSYC 414
By: Ashley Hamilton on November 5, 2008
at 1:00 am
I found this talk by Dan Gilbert to be interesting, even though i have heard some of the research before that he presented. One thing that I found to be interesting was the fact that humans now have the prefrontal cortex, or the “experience stimulator,” which i was not aware of the fact that that characteristic of the brain was adapted over time. I enjoyed listening to Dan discuss the impact bias, the tendency for stimulation to work incorrectly and that most people do not understand synthetic happiness and its effects of them individually. The example of the free choice study with the Monet paintings I felt was predictable, however, I enjoyed how Dan explained it. Overall, i found this movie to keep my attention and did happen to enjoy it.
By: Sarah Shwedel (414) on November 5, 2008
at 1:15 am
Who would ever though that having too many choices gets on the way of happiness? It is good to know this, so when we are teaching we don’t give our students that many. If we do so they would be overwhelmed and would end up not performing as well as we want them to do. Like in class today, you gave us three choices, but within the third choice some of us thought we could retake the test again and if we didn’t do well on in we could keep our old score. However, you clarified it and say no. You set up boundaries to the choice. I think it is good to have limits because that way we can make up our mind right away and have less internal conflict on what our decisions should be.
By: Juana Barcenas 414 on November 5, 2008
at 2:37 am
Psych. 414
I found this talk to be not as interesting as the other one’s that we have listened to so far this semester, but Dan did have some interesting points to make about the brain and happiness. The most interesting thing I thought about Dan’s talk was when the Harvard students were given the choice to choose between two paintings were unhappy, unlike the other students who were able to just choose one of the pictures, and were suprisingly happy. I thought this was very interesting because when I am given too many choices, I also sometimes find myself unhappy because I am unsure about my decision and can’t make up my mind. Overall, I thought Dan’s talk was very insightful in helping people understand why and what really makes us happy.
By: Kristi Schroder on November 5, 2008
at 6:01 am
It’s really interesting that we tend to be more happy by having restrictions and boundaries than having completely free choice. I know I get perturbed and confused when faced with too many choices. It seems simpler to be happy with what you have then worry and be miserable about what you don’t have. From Professor Gilbert’s data most people don’t really understand this and I’m sure it’s definately a learned ideal.
By: Ryan Prior Psych362 on November 5, 2008
at 7:41 am
This subject of synthetic happiness totally “hit home” with me because I do this without realizing it, until now.
Since late Spring I’ve been researching, planning, and gathering admissions materials for graduate schools to attend next fall. I’ve been really excited and had my heart set on my plans, however I just found out that the only class I couldn’t add for next semester will not be offered again until next fall, so I can’t graduate in time to start grad-school as I had planned.
I told myself “well, I bet that just means that there is some other opportunity out there that I’m meant to fulfill before I head off to grad-school.” I didn’t realize that I was synthesizing my own happiness within this disappointing situation.
By: Megan Pendleton on November 5, 2008
at 5:51 pm
This talk about synthetic happiness verses true happiness was very interesting. The idea that people are just as happy when they dont get what they want as when they do, is strange, but understandable. When you have a choice, like the Harvard students did with their pictures, you tend to second guess yourself. So this idea makes since. I thought the experiment with the Harvard students was a great example of what he was trying to explain, and I believe all people could relate to this speech.
By: Erica Brick Psyc 414 on November 5, 2008
at 9:42 pm
that was one of the better speaches I think we have seen so far this semester. I thought the part where he explained his experiment was the most interesting. Often times I get to read about them but it is great to finally hear on described by the researcher. Also, i though his topic was very original and informative. It helps to explain human behavior and how diverse the mind is
By: jason amarena psyc 362 on November 6, 2008
at 12:50 am
I thought that his speech was very interesting. I always thought that you could make your own happiness, but I never thought that you could do it in an unconscious way. I thought that Harvard experiment was funny, but I understand what it’s like when you have a choice to exchange something and you beat yourself up wondering if you made the right choice. I guess in a way it’s like looking for the good in the bad, and ultimately having faith that you made the right choice.
By: Ashley McGinty (414) on November 6, 2008
at 2:52 am
This video was pretty interesting. Most people would defintely think that winning the lotto would make them a lot happier, but apparently it wares off afer you have nothing to work for. It’s an interesting concept to basically fake yourself into being happy. He had a lot of energy during his presentation and I liked his quote towards the end of the movie.
Psyc 362
By: Jena Wagner on November 6, 2008
at 5:07 am
Overall, the topic was interesting, but his humor was not. I thought this clip was actually quite boring. Some parts were interesting and informative and some parts put me to sleep. I dont know if this is because I have been studying for the passed five hours or this guys was just really boring…? I guess I’ll have to see it again when I dont have mid terms on my mind.
By: Jaime McComas PSYC 362 on November 6, 2008
at 5:19 am
It is so similar with what we watched on week # 2. This film reminds me of positive psychology. I read a book called Optimistic Child, positive attiude was used to prevent depression. The film we watched this week used the similar attitude to look at things when we had no power to change. Psychologically, this attitude protects us from feeling depressed and powerless. However, no everyone feels this way all the time.
By: SHIH YA HUANG PSYCH 362 on November 6, 2008
at 6:17 am
I thought this talk was pretty interesting. I never imagined that “real” happiness had the same effects as “synthetic” happiness. It seems that most of the time we are trying to find the positive and create a “synthetic” world. Without this I think we all would be rather unhappy. However, because it is unconscious it almost seems that the two aren’t so different. Maybe there isn’t real happiness at all. Maybe all of it is actually a coping mechanism for ourselves. That’s sounds a little too pesmisstic but it is worth pondering.
By: Jennifer Cissell on November 6, 2008
at 6:17 am
I really enjoyed the enthusiasm and sarcasm that Dan put in to his talk. I felt that it really did keep me more interested in his speech. Thinking back, I feel like a large part of my own happiness is synthetic happiness and I am actually really ok with that.
By: Brittany Tom on November 6, 2008
at 6:52 am
I really enjoyed this movie. I thought he was very interesting and you can tell he really enjoyed talking about the the subject. I thought it was so interesting that there is synthetic happiness and real happiness. The fact that something that you would think would make someone so happy like winning the lottery, may not really may you as happy as you may think. I really found this movie to be interesting.
By: Danielle Pallavicini on November 6, 2008
at 6:05 pm
This talk for me was ok. I liked how there is synthetic happiness and real happiness. Talking about the Harvard students having to choose between two paintings and the others having to choose only one ended up being happy. I feel like there are so many choices to be made and the feeling like you made the wrong one happens to me a lot. I really liked listening to what he said about people being happy. It was good.
By: Megan Webster - psyc 414 on November 6, 2008
at 9:10 pm
I really enjoyed the energy in Gilbert’s presentation. I thought his energy was great, and I really liked the topic of his discussion, as I find it incredibly applicable in terms of my approach to things in everyday life. I enjoyed his humor in explaining the evolution of the human brain, calling our current brains “fat heads”. I thought it his information regarding synthetic happiness and genuine happiness was valuable, and liked when he said, “psychological immune system works best when we are totally stuck.” His example of this with the date and the marriage was funny too. I thought the Harvard experiment was interesting, and took both parts as kind of proving that boundaries lead to happiness and no limits leads to inner conflict. I thought his ending statement was powerful: “our longings and our worries are to some degree overblown because we have the capacity to manufacture the very commodity we are chasing through experience.”
By: Maggie Toole on November 6, 2008
at 9:36 pm
I forgot, psyc 401
By: Maggie Toole on November 6, 2008
at 9:37 pm
psych 401
Good talk, although I did find it hard to focus on what he was talking about at some points, just seemed to drag on. The part about synthetic happiness did seem interesting, that a lot of times it comes down to our expectations and choices that can make us happy or unhappy. We put too much emphasis on real happiness, and not enough on synthetic happiness, while it seems like synthetic happiness is most important.
By: jack coplen on November 6, 2008
at 11:03 pm
I thought that this speaker had some really good studies and information about what happyness is really about. The Statistics he gave were almost always suprising… such as who is happier after a year-a lotto winner, or a handi-capped person? it was the same! He has alot to teach about how our synthetic world makes us worse off overall, a message we should keep in mind with christmas around the corner. Overall a very good speech.
By: Chris Bunt(401) on November 6, 2008
at 11:45 pm
i actually liked this speech. it is sometimes really hard to be able to chose to be happy in your life. i feel that this speech is about the understanding that you do have that ability to chose. you are capable of being happy in any situation if you want. it is unfortunate that there are so many times that the impact bias, that Gilbert describes, plays such a big role. he says that as humans we have the freedom to create this natural happiness. “Tis nothing good or bad but thinking makes it so.” this quote is something that i have really thought about before and i am sure i am not alone. things that are bad in my life is because of the way that i thought that they were. all in all happiness is in your control and is your choice…
By: stephanie insler on November 6, 2008
at 11:46 pm
I wasn’t terribly impressed with this video. I thought Gilbert was definitely passionate about his topic, but I found much of the presentation kind of preachy. I thought the idea of synthetic happiness was very interesting and thought provoking. However, I don’t know that I completely agree with the whole concept entirely. I totally do agree that life is what you make of it, but there is definitely a difference between synthetic and genuine happiness.
By: Liz Simmons on November 7, 2008
at 7:17 am
2
By: Liz Simmons on November 7, 2008
at 7:18 am
So I feel like the idea that Dan Gilbert is presenting with “synthetic happiness” is a good one, but I feel a little weird about the name, “synthetic” happiness as if it is artificial. I guess it does kind of seem like a cop out or giving in–fine, I didn’t want that one anyway. I look at more as accepting what you cannot change, making the best of a bad situation, counting your blessings, that kind of thing.
I mean if you think about it, if you were to hold onto and be upset about every little thing that didn’t turn out just like you wanted it, or everytime you didn’t get your way, you would be miserable. I think it is just natural to look for a way to be happy with what you have, love the one your with rather than longing and pining for what you don’t have or lost. We want to return to equilibrium, it is uncomfortable to always be distressed.
I see myself applying this idea to helping people in counseling all the time, looking at what you can change and what you don’t have control over and can’t change (like the past or other people’s reactions) and maybe could just accept and move on from in order to be more content and not waste time and energy moping over it. I think this only really comes after you have been allowed to feel whatever emotion happens, rather than suppressing or stuffing it down.
This whole idea really reminds me of the prayer that goes something like…”God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference”
So true, you could spend a lot of time trying to change what you can’t control without realizing where you can make changes, even mental ones–you attitude in order to be happier…
Psy362
By: Emma Schutz Fort on November 10, 2008
at 8:51 am
It was interesting how we have the capacity to be happy about something that originally wouldnt have satisified us. Its uplifting in a way.
By: Joanna LaFrancesca on November 13, 2008
at 5:53 am
I loved Dan Gilbert and thought that he was a wonderful speaker/presenter. I think that he definitely nailed “happiness,” and he kept me very interested the entire time!! I loved his comment about the date with the guy picking his nose, and then the boyfriend/husband picking his nose. Hilarious and so true! hahah.. You choose what you want to get over and not hold you back from happiness. Over the years I have totally watched my develop into such a happier person and it is all because of what Dan said, if you choose to be unhappy and let the little things bother you than you will be unhappy, but if you choose to let those little things just slide, it will lead to a much easier and happier life!!
Very good movie Monday!
By: Morgan on November 13, 2008
at 6:23 pm