Fall 2021 Reading Schedule and Class Notes

Return to Happiness and Wisdom

2: SEP 8 - 1. Introduction to Wisdom

Assigned

• Hall, C2 – “The Wisest Man in the World” (18)
• Labouvie-Vief, "Wisdom as Integrated Thought"(27)

3: SEP 13 - 2. Introduction to Happiness

Assigned

• Haybron, C2, “What is Happiness?” (16 short)
• Haybron, C3, “Life Satisfaction” (10)
• McMahon C1, “Highest Good” (19-40)

In-class

• Sample reading quiz
• Short ungraded informal writing assignment starts today, due 9/14
• Some lecture notes on text sources in Plato and Aristotle for H&W.

SUI: Short Ungraded Informal Writing Assignment (10 points)

• Prompt: (200 words)

• [(google form link here) Follow this link when you are ready to write.] Please turn in your writing by Wednesday, September 15.

McMahon, "Chapter 1: The Highest Good"

1. Classical Greek Models of Happiness

Key theme: Greek cultural break with accommodation to destiny. Recognition of possibility of control of circumstances determining happiness.

Implicit historical narrative: Classical Greek philosophy has a point of connection with Periclean Athens, but develops Athenian cultural values in a radically new way. This begins a distinctive kind of narrative about happiness in the West.

1. The Greek Cultural Model

• Connection of the culture with tragedy, appreciation of fate, happiness as gift of gods.
• Dionysian culture
• Post-Socratic Schools -- Hellenism and Hellenistic culture (we'll be returning to some of these schools later in the course)

2. The Greek Philosophical Models in Greek Philosophical culture: Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, and Zeno.

A. Plato - Symposium gives us picture of Plato's view.

• Contrast the Symposium with the cult of Dionysius
• Reasoning our way to the Good (Happiness). Symposium as purification ritual (Summary including Alcibiades twist). bad desire/good desire. We will find real happiness in the pursuit of transcendent knowledge.
• Object of desire is transcendent. (Reminder about Platonic metaphysics.) "intellectual orgasm" (36)
• McMahon: "radical reappraisal of the standards of the world" 37

B. Aristotle (note McMahon pp. 41ff and Aristotle reading)

• end, function, craft, techne. Hierarchy of arts.
• end vs. final end -- the universal good is the final end, not relative. sec. 6-7.
• happiness as activity of the soul in accordance with virture (def., but also consequence of reasoning from nature of human life)
• Section 13: nature of the soul. two irrational elements: veg/appetitive and one rational. Note separation/relationship.
• As M notes, Aristotle's focus on the rational part of the soul leaves him with a similar problem as Plato -- a model of happines that few (not the Alcibiades in the world) will attain.

• Is the Greek Classical model of happiness (as seen in the Symposium and Aristotle's thought), a revelation of truth about happiness or the beginning of a repressive line of thought in happiness studies?
• If happiness requires a disciplined practice, how do you maintain solidarity with those who do not maintain the discipline (the Alcibiades problem)? Possible weakness of an individual enlightenment model of happiness.

Haybron, Chapter 2: What is Happiness?

• takes us into a rich phenomenal account of emotional state happiness

• endorsement -- some difficulty understanding this: not a judgement, but a feeling from satisfying criteria you accept as counting toward the claim, "my life is positively good"

• examples -- feeling from actual endorsements, but also from savoring accomplishment or appreciating need fulfillment (parents seeing contented children, a full pantry...)

• engagement - vitality and flow
• attunement -- peace of mind, tranquility, confidence, expansiveness

• Is Haybron making a recommendation or describing objective, transcultural features of emotional happiness?

• Problem of "false happiness" -- discrepancies such as Robert's (also Happy Frank) -- adaptive unconscious might be part of the explanation -- interesting that we can go wrong in this way. mood propensity or dispositional happiness.

• Can you also be happy and not know it?

• The Haybron discussion also gets at the idea of superficial vs. deep happiness. Ricard, or the sage, presumably have it.

Haybron, Chapter 3, "Life Satisfaction"

• More cases of lives that require narratives to understand: Moresse "Pop" Bickham. Note what Bickham says. It's possible that Bickham has deployed a powerful version of the "internal strategy".
• Haybron considers whether we should infer from his life satisfaction that he was happy

• Claim: You can judge your life favorably no matter how you feel. (Probe this.)
• Claim: (33) There may be a diff between being satisfied with your life and judging that it is going well.

• Comment: Bickham is the extreme case in which its hard to get our intuitions around the idea that Hs and Hl could go together. But let's do our own investigation of this.

• Was Wittgenstein's "wonderful" life plausibly happy or satisfying?

• LS defined at p. 35: "To be satisfied with your life is to regard it as going well enough by your standards."

• That's a puzzling definition since early he convinced us that you "satisfied" and "going well" can be judged separately.

• Claim: It's a mistake to call life satisfaction a hedonic good because it is "not just a question of pleasure"

• Comment: This doesn't tell us that it doesn't also involve a kind of feeling. The fact that it involves judgement doesn't mean emotion isn't involved.

• Small Group Problem: How do you make life satisfaction judgements? How will you decide if your life is "going well" in the coming 2-3 years? Can you be satisfied with your life even if some aspects are not going well? When you think of what is good in your life, do you experience a kind of affect?

• Problems with LS judgements:

• they are global judgments of complex sets of events over time. too reductive a judgement to make 1 - 10.
• it sounds like a simple judgement of the relationship between expectation and outcome (like ordering a steak), but it isn't, really, now is it?

• Good point: more like assessing a "goal-achievement gap" -- example of tenure happiness study

• determining "well enough" is pretty subjective (variable). -- maybe, but that could be explained within the "goal-achievement gap" model since we're always "resetting" in one direction or another ("Things won are done." or "I guess that's not working") recall point about hedonic structure of this.
• most people seem to be able to assert satisfaction with their lives independently of whether they were "choiceworthy"

• For Haybron, this implies that Hl judgements are basically much less relevant to assessing happiness than emotional states. He even suggests with the Calcutta workers reports that they are not grounded judgements.

*kidney patients, colostomy patients.

4: SEP 15

Assigned

• McMahon C1, “Highest Good” (40-50)
• Epictetus, Enchiridion (12)

In-class

• Lecture notes on modern stoicism (Irving)

5: SEP 20

Assigned

• Epicurus, Letter and PD (9)
• McMahon C1, “Highest Good” (50-65)

In-class

• We will start a series of reading quizes today and for the next three classes.

6: SEP 22

Assigned

• McMahon C3, “From Heaven to Earth” (141-164)

In-class

• Start short ungraded formal writing practice assignment (10 points): due 9/27
• Some notes on Perpetua and Felicitas.

SUF: Short ungraded formal writing practice assignment

• Stage 1: Please write an 400 word maximum answer to the following question:

• Advice about collaboration: I encourage you to collaborate with other students, but only up to the point of sharing ideas, references to class notes, and your own notes. Collaboration is part of the academic process and the intellectual world that college courses are based on, so it is important to me that you have the possibility to collaborate. It's a great way to make sure that a high average level of learning and development occurs. The best way to avoid plagiarism is to NOT share text of draft answers or outlines of your answer. Keep it verbal. Generate your own examples.

• For this practice assignment, you will lose points if you do not follow the instructions below. Prepare your answer and submit it in the following way:

1. Do not put your name in the file or filename. You may put your student id number in the file. Put a word count in the file.
2. In Word, check "File-->Info-->Inspect Document-->Inspect. You will see an option to delete author information. (For this practice assignment, you will lose 4 points for not removing your name from the Word document.)
3. Format your answer in double spaced text in a 12 point font, using normal margins.
4. Save the file in the ".docx" file format using the file name "IntuitionsFirst".
5. Log in to courses.alfino.org. Upload your file to the Points dropbox.

7: SEP 27

Assigned

• McMahon C3, “From Heaven to Earth” (164-195)

8: SEP 29 - 3. Some Wisdom Research Paradigms

Assigned

• Hall C3, “Heart and Mind” (18)

9: OCT 4

Assigned

• Baltes and Smith, "Toward a Psychology of wisdom and it ontogenesis"(27)

10: OCT 6

Assigned

• Hall C4, “Emotional Regulation: The Art of Coping” (17)
• Carstensen, “The Influence of a Sense of Time…” (3)

In-class

• Rubric training

11: OCT 11

Assigned

Ardelt, “How Wise People Cope with Crises and Obstacles” (11)

In-class

• Starting SW1: Short writing assignment #1 (400 word)

SW1: Short writing assignment #1

• Stage 1: Please write an 400 word maximum answer to the following question by October 18, 2020 11:59pm.

• Topic: Assessing Wisdom Paradigms

• Advice about collaboration: I encourage you to collaborate with other students, but only up to the point of sharing ideas, references to class notes, and your own notes. Collaboration is part of the academic process and the intellectual world that college courses are based on, so it is important to me that you have the possibility to collaborate. It's a great way to make sure that a high average level of learning and development occurs. The best way to avoid plagiarism is to NOT share text of draft answers or outlines of your answer. Keep it verbal. Generate your own examples.

• Prepare your answer and submit it in the following way:

1. Do not put your name in the file or filename. You may put your student id number in the file. Put a word count in the file.
2. In Word, check "File-->Info-->Inspect Document-->Inspect. You will see an option to delete author information. For more information, consult the document, "How to remove your personal information from a Word Document", on SharePoint or do a search based on your version and platform of Word.
3. Format your answer in double spaced text in a 12 point font, using normal margins.
4. Save the file in the ".docx" file format using the file name "AssessingWPs".
5. Log in to courses.alfino.org. Upload your file to the Points dropbox.

• Stage 2: Please evaluate four student answers and provide brief comments and a score. Review the Assignment Rubric for this exercise. We will be using the Flow and Content areas of the rubric for this assignment. Complete your evaluations and scoring by October 22, 11:59pm.

• Use this Google Form to evaluate four peer papers.

• To determine the papers you need to peer review, I will send you a key with saint names in alphabetically order, along with animal names. You will find your saint name and review the next four (4) animals' work.

• Some papers may arrive late. If you are in line to review a missing paper, allow a day or two for it to show up. If it does not show up, go ahead and review enough papers to get to four reviews. This assures that you will get enough "back evaluations" of your work to get a good average for your peer review credit. (You will also have an opportunity to challenge a back evaluation score of your reviewing that is out of line with the others.)

• Stage 3: I will grade and briefly comment on your writing using the peer scores as an initial ranking. Assuming the process works normally, my scores will be close to the peer scores. Up to 14 points.

• Stage 4: Back-evaluation: After you receive your peer comments and my evaluation, take a few minutes to fill out this quick "back evaluation" rating form: [1]. Fill out the form for each reviewer, but not Alfino. Up to 10 points, in Points.

• Back evaluations are due October 29th, 2021.

12: OCT 13 - 4. Some Happiness Research

Assigned

• Haybron C4, “Measuring Happiness” (10)
• Gilbert, C2, “The View from in Here” (26)

In-class

• Research from Argyle and Diener and Suh in lecture.

Gilbert, Chapter 2: The View from in Here

• Twins: Lori and Reba. How to assess their preference?

• Types of happiness: emotional, moral, judgement happiness.

• How can the twins be happy? What is the role of "objective conditions"?

• Subjectivity of Yellow, 32. Nozick's experience machine, 35. Happy Frank, p. 37. (Perhaps goal of this analysis is to see that normal understanding of happiness includes life happiness, virtues, and perfective activities.)

• 40: How similar are two people's experience of happiness? How would you know?

• problem: we don't compare experiences, we compare memories of experiences.

• Describer's study on memory of color swatch, 41. What do we access when we make happiness judgements?

• How reliable is our judgement from one minute to the next?

• Interviewer substitution studies Daniel Simon's Lab: [2]. Other perceptual aspects, 43-44.

• Conclusion: 44-45: read. Not so much about how bad we are at noticing change, but how, if we aren't paying attention, memory kicks in.

• Happiness scales

13: OCT 18

Assigned

• Haybron, C5, “The Sources of Happiness” (24)
• Csiksentmihalyi, C2, “The Content of Experience’ (17)

14: OCT 20 - 5. The Enlightenment, American Experience, Money and Happiness

Assigned

• McMahon, C6, “Lib and discontent” (313-331)
• "Economics of Happiness" [3]

Lecture

• Introduction to Easterlin Paradox

15: OCT 27

Assigned

• McMahon, C6, “Lib and discontent” (331-343)
• Aspen Institute discussion of Easterlin Paradox: Wolfers, Gilbert, and Frank (about 40 minutes) [4]
• Clive Crook, "The Measure of Human Happiness" (3) (comments on Aspen Institute video)

16: NOV 1

Assigned

• McMahon, C6, “Lib and discontent” (343-362)
• Gallbraith, “Dependency Effect” (6)
• Harvard Business Review, "The Economics of Well-Being" [5]
• Bruni, "Why GDP is not enough"

In-Class

• Start SW2: Short Writing Assignment #2: Assessing Liberalism and the Money/Happiness connection

SW2: Short Writing Assignment #2: Assessing Liberalism and the Money/Happiness connection

• Stage 1: Please write an 400 word maximum answer to the following question by November 5, 2020 11:59pm.

• Topic: Assessing Liberalism and the Money/Happiness connection

• Advice about collaboration: I encourage you to collaborate with other students, but only up to the point of sharing ideas, references to class notes, and your own notes. Collaboration is part of the academic process and the intellectual world that college courses are based on, so it is important to me that you have the possibility to collaborate. It's a great way to make sure that a high average level of learning and development occurs. The best way to avoid plagiarism is to NOT share text of draft answers or outlines of your answer. Keep it verbal. Generate your own examples.

• Prepare your answer and submit it in the following way:

1. Do not put your name in the file or filename. You may put your student id number in the file. Put a word count in the file.
2. In Word, check "File-->Info-->Inspect Document-->Inspect. You will see an option to delete author information. For more information, consult the document, "How to remove your personal information from a Word Document", on SharePoint or do a search based on your version and platform of Word.
3. Format your answer in double spaced text in a 12 point font, using normal margins.
4. Save the file in the ".docx" file format using the file name "AssessingLiberalism".
5. Log in to courses.alfino.org. Upload your file to the Points dropbox.

• Stage 2: Please evaluate four student answers and provide brief comments and a score. Review the Assignment Rubric for this exercise. We will be using the Flow and Content areas of the rubric for this assignment. Complete your evaluations and scoring by November 10, 11:59pm.

• Use this Google Form to evaluate four peer papers.

• To determine the papers you need to peer review, I will send you a key with saint names in alphabetically order, along with animal names. You will find your saint name and review the next four (4) animals' work.

• Some papers may arrive late. If you are in line to review a missing paper, allow a day or two for it to show up. If it does not show up, go ahead and review enough papers to get to four reviews. This assures that you will get enough "back evaluations" of your work to get a good average for your peer review credit. (You will also have an opportunity to challenge a back evaluation score of your reviewing that is out of line with the others.)

• Stage 3: I will grade and briefly comment on your writing using the peer scores as an initial ranking. Assuming the process works normally, my scores will be close to the peer scores. Up to 14 points.

• Stage 4: Back-evaluation: After you receive your peer comments and my evaluation, take a few minutes to fill out this quick "back evaluation" rating form: [6]. Fill out the form for each reviewer, but not Alfino. Up to 10 points, in Points.

• Back evaluations are due November 17th, 2021.

17: NOV 3 - 6. More Philosophical Paradigms for Happiness and Wisdom

Assigned

• Hall C7 “Compassion” (18)
• Siderits, “Early Buddhism: Basic Teachings” (16)

18: NOV 8

Assigned

• Pali Cannon, “The Greater Discourse on the Foundations of Mindfulness” (16) (rec)
• Ricard, C6, “The Alchemy of Suffering” (20)

19: NOV 10

Assigned

• Ricard, C7, “The Veils of the Ego” (16)
• Miller, Barbara, “Introduction to Patanjali’s Yoga” (25)

20: NOV 15 - 7. Gratitude and Savoring

Assigned

• Bryant, Fred, C1, “Concepts of Savoring: An Introduction” (23)
• Bryant, Fred, C8, “Enhancing Savoring” (27)

21: NOV 17

Assigned

• Emmons C23, “Gratitutde, SWB, and the Brain” (17)

22: NOV 22 - 8. Some Obstacles to Happiness and Wisdom

Assigned

• Wilson, Strangers to Ourselves, C8, “Introspection and Self-narratives” (24)

23: NOV 29

Assigned

• Gilbert, "Why we Make Bad Decisions" (Ted talk) [7]
• Gilbert, C4, “In the Blind Spot of the Mind’s Eye” (21)
• Gilbert, C6, “The Future is Now” (16)

Gilbert, Chapter 4: In the Blind Spot of the Mind's Eye

• Comparions of Adolph Fisher & George Eastman. Point: Need to 2nd guess how we impose seemingly objective criteria on others' lives.

• Just because it's easier for us to imagine that a certain kind of future will bring happiness, and what we imagine might even be in line with objective research, it doesn't follow that other futures won't.

• Brain reweaves experience: study with cars and stop signs/yield signs. Information acquired after the event alters memory of the event.
• Two highly confirmed results: Memory fills in. We don't typically notice it happening. Word list excercise. 80 -- literal and metaphorical blindspots. experiments with interrupted sentences. We fill in.

• Model of Mind (84) Prior to 19th century:

"philosophers had thought of the senses as conduits that allowed information about the properties of objects in the world to travel from the object and into the mind. The mind was like a movie screen in which the object was rebroadcast. The operation broke down on occasion, hence people occasionally saw things as they were not. But when the senses were working properly, they showed what was there. This theory of realism was described in 1690 by the philosopher John Locke: brains "believe" they don't "make believe" .

• Model of Mind brought in with Kant at beginning of 1800's:

Kant's idealism: "Kant's new theory of idealism claimed that our perceptions are not the result of a physiological process by which our eyes somehow transmit an image of the world into our brains but rather, they are the result of a psychological process that combines what our eyes see with what we already think, feel, know, want, and believe, and then uses this combination of sensory information and preexisting knowledge to construct our perception of reality. "

• false belief test -- [8]

• Still, we act like realists: truck moving study-- we are first realists, but we learn to adopt an idealist perspective in social communication.
• We experience the world as if our interpretations were part of reality. We do not realize we are seeing an interpretation.
• We fill in details: imagine a plate of spaghetti. Very important for thinking about how we fill in the future. We carry out the exercise of imagining, and even make estimates of satisfaction, but the result depends upon which of the family of experiences picked out by "plate of spaghetti" we have in mind.
• point for happiness theories: p. 89.
• closes by giving you the narratives that make sense of the Fisher/Eastman comparison.

24: DEC 1

Assigned

• Wilson, Strangers to Ourselves, C9, “Looking Outward to Know ourselves” (20)
• Wilson, Strangers to Ourselves, C10, “Observing and Changing our Behavior” (18)

25: DEC 6

Assigned

• Gilbert, C8, “Paradise Glossed” (21)
• Gilbert, C9, “Immune to Reality” (23)