Choice, Freedom and Happiness
By John Taylor; 2009 Mar 05, 'Ala 04, 165 BE
I just posted on the Badi' Blog two lectures from the TED Conference by sociology professor Barry Schwartz. In one video, he argues that in America capitalism has multiplied choice at the expense of happiness. Behind commercialism is a lie. Choice, we are told, equals freedom. The more selection we are presented with the freer we will all be.
In reality, the reverse is the case. The true secret of happiness is low expectations. If we have fewer choices and expect less, then occasionally when things go just the way we want them, then we are surprised and delighted. This lift contributes to our overall happiness more than a thousand options. Studies have shown that the more choices we are given the more we tend to regret what we chose. Even when we make a very good choice, we look back on what might have been. The fact is that we are made for limited options, and we are happier that way. This reminded me of the long obligatory prayer, where it says:
"Thine is the command at all times, O Thou Who art the Lord of all names; and mine is resignation and willing submission to Thy will, O Creator of the heavens!" (Baha'u'llah, Prayers and Meditations, 320)
We are only truly happy when our will is absorbed in the Will of God. Otherwise, the will is diffused by many forks in the road. Without simplicity we feel miserable about what might have been instead of content with what is. The more choices we have, the worse our sense of loss.
The other TED lecture by Schwartz proposes that we are all better served by selflessness, virtue and wisdom than by rules, technical sanctions and incentives. The powers that be are messing up when they offer employees benefits such as stock options, rather than the much more fulfilling knowledge that we are doing good in this world. An example he uses is a survey that found that when asked, half of home owners said that they would be willing to have a nuclear storage dump built nearby. However, a similar question suggested that they might be paid a substantial sum to agree to have such a facility in their neighbourhood. It found that far fewer would agree to such a sacrifice of property values. This is because the latter question took it out of the realm of civic responsibility. We are happy to contribute to the general good. People comply. But redefine it as a profit or loss issue, they balk.
This qualifies Schwartz's ideas as "obvious sociology." The apparent paradoxes are the bread and butter of religion. No adult gets paid for going to Feast or synagogue or church. We do it for its own sake, or out of love and duty toward our Creator.
Today I want to talk about how Comenius treats choice, freedom and duty. This means discussing it in biblical terms, though clearly all world religions have similar views of freedom.
First of all, freedom is at the core of religion, starting with the example of the Manifestation of God in sacrificing life and limb for the good of all. Comenius points out that the example of Christ on the cross offers lessons in three things otherwise neglected, universality, simplicity and agreement.
(1) "Universality, by serving all men, giving his life for all men, and ordering the Gospel to be preached to all men,
(2) Simplicity, by instituting no pompous ceremonies, and by recalling men from a host of occupations to the ONE THING NEEDFUL,
(3) Agreement, by refraining from the use of force and leaving men with freedom of choice, merely advising everyone through his Word and example to deny himself and make a habit of following God." (Panorthosia II, Ch. 10, para 46, p. 171)
One of the most startling points that Schwartz makes is that in most real-world situations prescribing ethics courses as a cure to lawlessness actually makes it worse. Rather than making people better, it shunts morality off into a corner as a thing for specialists to worry about. Actually morality is easy for the meanest intelligence to grasp. It can be summed up in three words: The Golden Rule. Do unto others ... This, as Comenius points out, is an affirmation of the freedom of others to choose. It is also responsible service born of how we feel, what we like. Treated technically, ethics becomes a mere set of rules, know-how rather than the natural outcome of our nature.
Schwartz complains that doing right by people is central to our dignity as human beings, yet it is never listed on job descriptions -- he uses the example of a hospital janitor who goes out of his way to accommodate patients and their relatives. This is not a qualification for his work, but it is still essential. We are moral only when we take responsibility for what is right upon ourselves, by ourselves. Instead, bosses emphasize technical qualifications and make a rule for every situation that comes along.
Comenius says that we should observe toddlers for guidance in this respect. As soon as they can make a few steps on their own they reject aid. They ardently wish to be left alone to stumble, fall and make mistakes without interference. This is basic to human nature at all levels of development. Comenius explains why we must have release from outside manipulation: it is our very nature.
"Again, nothing should be handled otherwise than its nature permits or requires. Metal is for melting, timber for hewing, the animal for taming, man for advising. For man was made completely free, not to be under compulsion either by any other Creature or by God Himself, if he does anything of his own free will, he is acting like God Himself, inasmuch as he is the image of God, made in His likeness." (Panorthosia, Ch. 11, para 20, p. 183)
It is pointless to talk about freedom without taking into account this point: our basic nature is to mirror God. The more we resemble Him and merge our will in His Will, the more brilliant the image will be, and the more freedom will reign.
Unlike many modern Christian thinkers, though, Comenius is not stuck on a simplistic assertion that "love is the answer." He recognizes that we need knowledge just as much as love -- just as Abdu'l-Baha treated love and knowledge as two sides of one coin when He said: "Knowledge is love... The soil must be fertilized before the seed can be sown." (SW, Vol. 20, No. 10, p. 314) Similarly, we cannot be free, no matter how much we pretend to love, if we remain sunk in ignorance. In order to be free, we must first know what we are thinking and talking about. To give freedom to an ignorant tyrant just enslaves others. Knowledge and experience can qualify us for rights and freedoms, but if an ignoramus insists wilfully on sticking to his whim, he has abdicated his right not to be interfered with.
"... if the question whether freedom of conscience should be allowed to all were still to be ventilated, one would have to ask 'What do you mean by 'all'?' For if it is meant to include those who are uncivilised and ignorant, yet remain obstinate or headstrong or ungodly, the answer must be 'No' because of God's commandment `Thou shalt not allow thine enemy's ox or his ass to go astray' (Exodus XXIII, 4, Deuteronomy XXII, 1)." For no Conscience can be free where it is fettered by ignorance or obstinacy or impiety, and without full knowledge of justice and equity, there is no real freedom, only the most irresponsible licence. But if the question applies to Consciences normally conforming to the word of God, it should be the universal rule that no-one may presume to dictate the faith of his neighbour. Dictation in this matter must be left to God alone according to the Canons of the Apostles." (Panorthosia, Ch. 18, para 16, p. 248)
As for the illusion that multiplying choices is the same thing as promoting freedom Comenius is, if anything, more severe than Schwartz. Jesus began His ministry by being offered an infinity of choices by Satan, but He chose renunciation instead. So it is for every individual. We can enter into paralysis by making false choices, or put God first.
"For the goal of this first individual reform is that everyone should release himself from the powerful grip of external things and be restored to himself and God, for the purpose of asserting his freedom of thought, will and action upon things which make for his welfare here and to all eternity." (Panorthosia, Ch. 20, para 7, p. 22)
In his explanation, Schwartz uses the example of a time when he went shopping for jeans and, although he ended up with better fitting jeans than before there were so many choices, he was less content. The many other choices that he had passed up nagged at him. Rather than jeans, Comenius uses the example of books. Like his mentor Francis Bacon, the proliferation of pulp along with good publications bothered Comenius.
"Foremost among these burdens is the endless output of human books which is now beyond the world's endurance. It is true that the invention of writing (the one and only remedy for man's forgetfulness) is an inestimable gift of God, and we must gratefully acknowledge that wise men use it to place on record all their best observations for the benefit of posterity, but the foul abuse of this great boon (which has been creeping in since the time of Solomon) has now grown to intolerable proportions." (Panorthosia II, Ch. 9, para 19, p. 150)
Bad as this seemed when the printing press was new, the internet has multiplied our mental selection infinitely more. We not only have millions of choices in jeans, we must choose our entertainment, our casual learning, our serious work, our purchases, clothes, friends and spouses. The mass of choice clogs both mind and heart. Internet porn and superstitious junk spread as fast as information that edifies. As Comenius says, we need the three divine virtues of universality, simplicity and agreement far more than we need lifestyles and choices.
The only way to solve the urgent crises that face us, like war and global warming, is to come to agreement. Yet the many choices before us eat up our time and cloud our vision. We need clarity to agree upon universals but choices act as time vampires, leaching our leisure to look at what is before us.
"For men's minds are so infinitely divided that there is no hope of ever reaching any agreement, even if the world were to last for a million years. On the other hand, if we shelve all human books and resolve to appoint God alone as our leader with His three books, (i.e. nature, scripture and the mind) and if we all keep to this One Way, we shall live in sure and certain hope, inasmuch as the Heart and Voice and Hand of God are incapable of disagreement." (id.)
--
email: badijet@gmail.com
blog: http://badiblog.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment