Search for Quality

[da_lj]

A recent conversation has had me thinking about two somewhat complementary and somewhat contradictory life philosophies concerning "quality"- by which I (think I) mean, things that are best-fit for your needs and desires

Comments

[dr_tectonic]

I think you should adaptively meld the two in different proportions depending on how good you are at finding/generating high quality in the particular venue under consideration.

[da_lj]

Yes, if one can be aware of the difference.

Part of the motivation here is being in situations where I realize after the fact that had I been more assertive, I might have been happier with the outcome.

More later- gotta go to work now. ;)

[mary919]

I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately too. I quit something recently-- Toastmasters. I can't think of anything else that I've ever just up and quit. But I am very bad at public speaking and wasn't getting any better (after 6 months), and I was stressing about it a lot. I was lying awake at night, turning speeches over in my head, writing them and discarding them and rewriting them and fretting

[da_lj]

You've gotten at many of the same thought-processes I've been thinking about- from an interestingly different perspective, so thanks! I totally get what you mean about changes over time- but I'm curious about contentedness versus happiness- it's something I hadn't been thinking about at all- I wonder if that might be a cyclic ebb/flow sort of change, involving less or more driven-ness as, say, you decide different things make you happy

[da_lj]

Hm- would you be happy if happiness could be *qualified*? Or, at least *satisfied*? ...I think I can say "I'm happier than I was" or "I'm happier than I was, while he says he's unhappy."

In trying to describe philosophies I think I've seen in action: I'm taking the somewhat lazy tack that this only needs to be relevant in the small sphere centered, say, around the readers of this LJ. I won't even claim "north american culture."

[epi_lj]

I don't know if I can agree with the statement, "neither seems a foolish strategy for maximizing happiness." I think that any strategy that advises me to be unhappy in a circumstance that *could* be happy is a foolish strategy for maximizing happiness.

That said, the two seem a false dichotomy. I don't think that just because I'm happy with mediocre that that implies that I can't strive as hard for the best as the person who's unhappy with mediocre does. Why couldn't I be adept at finding high-quality things and strive hard to find high-quality things but still be happy even if that doesn't pan out?

[da_lj]

First point: taken; but what if it's not advising unhappiness, but describes the unhappiness that is felt when life doesn't match up with expectations? I don't know how to formulate that better. Yet. :)

Yes: maybe they are a false dichotomy and most people blend the two to a satisfactory mix. My observation is mostly concerning people who seem to be unhappy with the medium-range.

[epi_lj]

Yes, I see what you mean in the first part. I think what I'm essentially saying is that the key to happiness is probably to strive for the best but somehow not be disappointed when that doesn't happen. If we're looking for strategies, that seems like the best bet. (So I'm essentially saying that the key strategy is to overcome feeling unhappy when life doesn't match up with expectations rather than to best-fit the expectations.)

[dr_tectonic]

Hmm... another take on it:

Trying to figure out a life philosophy to follow a priori is kinda silly. As a happiness-seeking creature, you should use the tools at your disposal to figure out empirically what philosophy makes you happiest, and do that. You may discover that your happiness in many circumstances has nothing to do with quality at all.

[da_lj]

Yes- I should've been upfront that I'm describing observations of peoples' actions and trying to describe the thought-processes that are behind them.

Heh, I'm not so great at epistemology. :P :)