September 1, 2023 - 6:00pm
How can we be happy? This question has preoccupied thinkers from Aristotle to the present day, in various disciplines encompassing philosophy, science and religion. In his latest book, The Saad Truth about Happiness, the Canadian evolutionary behavioural scientist Dr. Gad Saad takes on the subject through a scientific and practical lens. He spoke to UnHerd’s Florence Read about how happiness correlates with our politics, our religious beliefs, and the importance we place on play.
Having emigrated to Canada in 1975 to escape the Lebanese Civil War, Saad ascribes the West’s “victimhood narrative” to “a form of existential decadence”, comparable to our preference for fatty food now that we have plenty of it. Despite being surrounded by millions of people and myriad potential pleasures, humanity has become increasingly lonely, with many now occupying a “less than happy state”.
Saad cited the thought system of postmodernism as a central part of the discussion around how happiness relates to sex differences and beauty. Postmodernism, for the professor, hinders the happiness of both men and women by denying the universal differences rooted in sexual dimorphism. This leads to unhappiness all round as, within the context of mating, “men and women don’t have indistinguishable motives”. Saad argued that the negative consequences for women who engage in sexual activity with various partners outweigh the costs for men, so that it is easy to see why the two groups “over the past 40 years don’t have the same curve of happiness”.
Happiness is tied to politics, too, according to Saad. On average, conservatives have been found to be happier than liberals, something he puts down to the latter group’s interest in “implementing changes” to better the status quo. Conversely, by definition, conservatives recognise that there are “certain foundational values that are worthy of conserving”, which make them more content with their present reality.
Saad also noted the positive correlation between happiness and religion. Relating religiosity and the community gained from religious practice to Dunbar’s number — the theory that 150 is the “optimal number of relationships that any one person can have in their life” — Saad explained that there are “very earthly reasons” for why a community, of any kind, would make one happier.
The writer’s work emphasises the importance of play throughout a person’s life, as it “allows us to instantiate patterns of behaviour that are evolutionarily adaptive”. Saad argued that “play should be something that we immerse ourselves in until our dying days”, and that it can manifest itself through intellectual, professional and intimate pursuits.
Referencing Aristotle’s “Inverted-U” theory, according to which “too little of something and too much of something is not good”, Saad concluded that “life becomes nothing more than finding the sweet spot across many different domains” and that happiness occurs somewhere between “excessive risk taking and complete cowardice”.
What laws, if any, would Saad put in place to make people happier? Besides his intention to “ban all Beatles music and any public adulation of Cristiano Ronaldo”, he would always defend the absolute inviolable principle of freedom of speech. Indeed, the behavioural scientist would even defend the free expression of Holocaust deniers, as that falls within his “ethos of absolute freedom of speech”.
This philosophy, tied in with his promotion of community and intellectual play, is a necessary antidote to these benighted times. Through such prescriptions, Saad believes we can “ascend Mount Happiness”.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI have no doubt that postmodern cynicism contributes to people’s miserable state, and that has been amplified and turbo charged by the internet and social media. Just look at any comments section on the BBC and it immediately becomes full of people moaning, whatever the subject. And on that note – an instant solution to edge one’s happiness up a few notches: block out the news.
A rare example of agreeing with you.
I thought that was a fine interview where there was clearly a rapport between interviewer and interviewee that lead to an open and respectful line of questioning.
I was particularly interested in Dr. Saad’s comments about the need for an overarching set of shared values in any community, but especially a multicultural community. I believe the lack of shared values is at the root of America’s problems.
We used to be a predominantly Christian nation but that changed long ago. The other unifying factor was opportunity. The famous remark, ascribed to Coolidge, that “the chief business of America is business” sums up what held America together for much of its history.
The traditional American bargain for immigrants was opportunity in return for adhering to a shared set of social values, and often sublimating some of the beliefs and prejudices from your home country. But over the past thirty years of globalism America exported so many of its business opportunities abroad. At the same time we have a massive rise in illegal immigration and a social ideology that emphases group identity rather than national identity.
I believe the fundamental base of a stable society is economic opportunity and a culture of optimism and innovation. In my opinion, that is even more fundamental than, say, freedom of speech. So long as we have a country that fails to provide economic opportunity, indeed demonizes economic activity as inevitably harmful to the environment, I don’t believe we will have social stability.
I upvoted.
But over time, even innovative and wealthy societies that restrict freedom of speech always eventually atrophy.
Great chat with The Gadfather (look at Michaelangelo’s Sistine Chapel – it looks like Gad Saad is transmitting the spark of life to Adam!)
He has a YouTube channel, “The Saad Truth”, that’s well worth a visit – he has a good sense of humour as well as just plain old sense.
Pomo’s gone mainstream
The root of the problem.. as in postmodernism.. the dead end of thought, is in philosophy as pope Benedict XVI saw. We’ve lost our minds. Literally. With Descartes solipsistic inner cranium foundation and Kant’s denial of our mind’s ability to know reality.. don’t ask how he knew… And Hume’s absurd notion of causation which of course refutes Hume’s notion of causation. The answer? Aristotle.. Aquinas… Final causation.. the end or purpose of things. The necessary that underlies the contingent, the infinite ..ya.. God.. Who is the efficient and final cause of existence. Reality; the divine milieu. And this can all be known by reason and philosophical argument alone as philosophers like Ed Feser and Peter Kreeft are happy to show us. We can regain our sanity.
Vague handwaving to a magical view of otherwise OK evolutionary science as the ground of meaning is exactly the kind of stupid that leads to postmodern incoherence.
Anyone denying that a banana duct-taped to a wall isn’t High Art is NOT Post-Modern, and therefore must be watched VERY carefully for deviationist tendencies!
…Like following the practices of all Pre-Post-Modern societies everywhere.
The horribly sad fact, however, is that, unlike the Soviets, we lack the tools to correct this anomalous (i.e. universal) situation.
So give us the Tools–the Tools!–that Lenin and Stalin forged to make Socialism–er, Post-Modernism–great again.
Otherwise, “our banana” is doomed!
“What laws, if any, would Saad put in place to make people happier? ”
Has it come to this? We need governments to legislate happiness into existence?
The leader of the 2014 military coup in Thailand (recently departed in a peaceful transition of power) was widely derided for his slogan “Bringing happiness to the people”. Maybe it wasn’t so fanciful after all.