Some say money is the root of all evil. Others claim it’s rather the lack of money that leads to most misery. And when it comes to the question of money and happiness, the differences in opinion are equally diverse. Mankind’s bittersweet relationship with wealth is so deep-running that it has become part of human nature and therefore the subject of much scientific research.
Conventional wisdom, aided by religious teaching, holds that riches won’t make you happy but fulfilling family and social relationships as well as service to humanity will. Some religious views, which are probably excessively strict misinterpretations of original teachings, even seem to regard money generally as dirty and glorify self-imposed poverty. On the other hand, in spite of all the notions of filthy lucre generated by such thinking, society has a fascination with wealth so strong that most of us- at least covertly- crave it and sometimes make irrational sacrifices of other things dear to us to acquire more of it.
The reasons for this dichotomous approach are many: Foremost among them is the fact that wealth represents power. Those who possess it have the ability to afford not only many modern convenieces that would apparently make life more pleasant and enjoyable, but also status symbols that would announce to the world that they are somebody to reckon with. The inherent need of the human psyche to compare oneself favourably with others- and to stand out and get noticed- is served so effectively through the accumulation of riches that it often makes us forget there is more to life than just the pursuit of money.
This point illustrated by a study conducted by two Princeton University professors, economist Alan B. Krueger and psychologist Daniel Kahneman, the results of which demonstrate that we tend to make false assumptions and associations about ever increasing income. It does not say, however, that those who are poorer have a better life. The affluent seem to have more overall life satisfaction although they don’t have more moment- to-moment happiness; their main problem lies in that they generally spend more time in non-enjoyable activities and have- and accept- responsibilities that rob them of quality time.
Substantial data collected by Ed Diener and Martin Seligman, both professors of psychology and leading researchers of happiness, point out that rich people are on average happier with their lives than their poorer counterparts (probably the same thing meant by life satisfaction in the Princeton study) but that happiness operates on a principle of diminishing returns with income: it increases in ever smaller amounts as you earn more and more. After the central needs- based on one’s cultural backdrop- are met and a relatively comfortable life is achieved, further rises in income seem to contribute less and less to one’s feeling of well-being. Also, running after ever more complex desires with rising prosperity is likely to lead to disappointment.
A post in PsyBlog on the psychology of money also has quite a few eye-openers, with links to more detailed individual explanations, on how we deal with, or react to, money in various settings. We seem to put too mach value on ownership of items once our mind is set on them, be unable to compare alternative uses of our cash when they lie in different categories, become suckers for the word FREE, but sometimes operate in a social- rather than financial- mindset when we would voluntarily do more for others than if they paid us for it.
All in all, there seems to be no virtue in being poor. But going to the other extreme and amassing wealth giving short shrift to other aspects of life is no viable solution either. Taking care to carefully evaluate all the nuances involved is vital in tackling this very complex and ambiguous subject mankind has grappled with from time immemorial.
Tags: ambiguous, disappointment, happiness, life, money, satisfaction
