I strongly disagree. "Big problems" are the same as a misplaced "passion." To find happiness, learn what passion actually is. It's different from "interest."
In my own life and many of my friends', "passion" is often mistakenly replaced by "important, abstract idea that sounds good." As in "I am passionate about saving the environment." Of course the environment is important, and having an interest in it is one thing, but this is not the same as actually being called to work day-to-day on this issue.
The decision you should actually make is something like: I enjoy making sense of large, ugly datasets. Or, I like cold-calling businesses and convincing them of the value of something they would never think of. If you enjoy that day-to-day work, then sure, go ahead and use it for the environment. But don't get a degree and a job in "environmental studies" just because the issue is interesting.
A "passion" is the thing you do even when you're tired or sick, and practice even when you have better things to do. You don't always enjoy it, but you do it anyway. You would be happy working another job in order to keep doing it.
For many of us who found programming, the discipline and long hours of humiliating bug-hunting have taught us what "passion" really is. But many people never have the chance to do that. High school classes, college clubs, and even most Millennial-oriented "save the world" jobs are generally more about "interests," things that are impressive-sounding and interesting in the abstract, rather than "passions," gut-wrenchingly difficult disciplines that demand our attention each moment.
Happiness isn't about passion. Or interest. Or possessing something. Or accomplishing stuff.
Happiness is by definition a subjective state of mind. It can be easily manipulated.
Consider for instance someone riding on a bus on a normal day who gets a phone call telling her that she has won a $70 million dollar lottery. This individual proceeds to become ecstatically happy, even though nothing has been gained or lost in that moment. 5 minutes later she finds out that this is just a crank call, now her level of happiness will be lower than it was before she got the fake news. Even though nothing has changed objectively.
In the real world people generally accept that a rockstar, with many things going for him socioeconomically, can be depressed to the point of committing suicide. But don't seem to take seriously the notion that there are people who are incredibly happy but don't really have a lot going for them in socio-economic terms.
On the balance, the meme that there is some sort of objective circumstance that can lead to satisfaction and happiness is required for civilization to progress.
To me, being "passionate" about things seems like a very American thing (USA), or at least the extent to which it's encouraged.
I'm not sure that "passion" is usually a healthy thing at all. It's good to like things (playing the piano, going out with friends, writing novels, coding, etc.), and it's good to arrange your life in a way that you have the resources to do what you like.
But when I hear the word "passion" I think of CEO's who neglect their wives and families because they're passionate about their company, or of 35-year-old painters who realize they need to forgo ever having a family they can support because of their passion for painting, or musicians who write things only they themselves like, because of their passion for being authentic and non-commercial. Basically "passion" seems like unhealthy navel-gazing which is the antithesis of a healthy balance of things in your life.
And I think I'm at least somewhat justified in saying this, because passion comes from romantic passion, which is by definition a short period of time when you are infatuated by somebody else, usually to the detriment of other things in your life (friends, hobbies, etc.). There's a reason it's called "love sickness".
So maybe it's a semantic thing, that people now say "passion" when they actually just mean "things they like" -- but which cheapens the real meaning of "passion", because then how do you express that? And if people seriously encourage people to be truly passionate about things, I think that can be very unhealthy, and lead to a great deal of unhappiness.
Passion comes from the Latin deponent verb patior: to suffer, undergo, endure. (Whence the phrase 'Passion of Christ,' which doesn't mean 'Jesus was passionate about stuff.')
Anyway, there are a whole host of value assumptions built into that "healthy" word you're waving around. If I'm passionate about painting and don't care about having a family, then I'm going to paint. I'm not obligated to have a family just because it's a social norm.
""" If I'm passionate about painting and don't care about having a family, then I'm going to paint. I'm not obligated to have a family just because it's a social norm."""
And this attitude is exactly what the parent commenter was ranting about.
Especially if you DO have a family, and it's more like "I don't have to care for my family over my business just because it's a social norm".
Passion is what inspires people to do all kinds of things - healthy and unhealthy. But without passion we might as well just be worker drones leading a meaningless existence. The richness of our culture as a human race is all due to passion, for better or worse.
As far as the USA, feel like Europe, South America and many other places are known as more passionate cultures. Perhaps it is not as pragmatic as some other communist societies, but I don't think the USA is on the top of the "passion" scale.
I lived in Brazil for many years, and I can tell you -- for most people, if you told them you were "passionate" about your job, they'd look like you like you had mental issues. It's almost like, in the US, if you said you were passionate about doing your taxes. When I said that passion seems like an American thing, I should have limited it to say with regard to your income-producing work.
On the other hand, in Brazil, being passionate about football, and passionate about women -- now that's a given.
But as for:
> without passion we might as well just be worker drones leading a meaningless existence
Do you really think so? Can't you enjoy a beautiful garden, without being passionate about it? Can't you love you kids without saying you're "passionate" about them? Can't you enjoy a fine meal with fine wine, without having a passion for food and wine? I think you can do all of these things, and find great meaning in your life.
Why do you have to have passion, for something to be meaningful? I don't see the connection at all.
Passion could be viewed as the most extreme form of interest, motivation, and enjoyment. If you aren't passionate about something, you're missing out on the full depth of human experience.
I think that's a good definition, and that's my whole point -- passion is so extreme that, almost by definition, it means your whole life balance is out of whack, and other things are suffering as a result.
And sure, I might be missing out on the full depth of human experience, but I also don't know what it's like to be insane, or be manic, or addicted to cocaine, nor do I think it's worth the price to pay.
I'd rather forego all those "extreme" things, whether they be manias or "passion" about a cause, and just stick to normal, balanced human happiness. And this cultural norm which is very prevalent in the US, which says you're supposed to be passionate about things, frankly just annoys me. I don't think it's healthy, and I don't think it's something we should be encouraging in people.
I guess "follow a nice balance of things in your life, and be happy" just doesn't have the same ring to it as "follow your passion".
Life is hard. The generation before mine still remembers a time when in some parts of the USA, it took year-round back-breaking labor just to eke out a living. There was no asking them what they wanted to do. There was no telling them to follow their agricultural passions. Everybody was expected to do their share to ensure that the family didn't freeze or starve.
This is what life was like for all but the very wealthy for thousands of years.
How fortunate are we to live in this time when this is no longer necessarily true in the developed world. When things get tough and your basketweaving Ph.D. no longer opens doors for you, that's not betrayal. It's not a reason to Occupy anyplace. It's the default state of things. So sod your passions, your aspirations, your pie-in-the-sky dreams. Do what needs to be done. Wash dishes. Scrub floors. Stack boxes. Whatever.
This is exactly how I feel every time I read someone say "screw money, do what you love". How fortunate we live in a time where "do what you love" isn't a nonsensical statement! Invariably that statement comes from those who just happen to be passionate about a field that is lucrative at the moment. When the art major who busses tables to make ends meet years after graduation can say that, then I'll give it some weight.
The idea that somehow making a living from anything less than your "passion" is doing it wrong is just ridiculous. Sometimes your passion for basketweaving isn't what's going to put food on your family's table. Maybe you don't have a passion for engineering, but if you're capable at it, maybe you should consider that rather than living a life of passion out of your car.
If you go to solve real problems you have to forget your passion. This is typical western dualist mindset, choose one or the other, black or white.
The best you could do is to solve real problems AND be passionate about it. In my experience, it is not that difficult if you study yourself: know thyself.
If you are highly introvert, you better not work organizing parties, or an extrovert expend his life in front of the computer coding is not good, if you like to organize things you working on an ever changing work is going to crush you deep inside.
Common sense, but I see everyday people working against their self, and making their life and that of the people that surround them miserable.
It is also highly typical that people choose as jobs what takes more effort from them(they value what they are bad at). I had a friend that was very good drawing but decided to work on things that he was very bad at. I convinced him to start using their skills in a new job and he could not believe you could get paid for something as "easy"(easy for him, I don't know anyone else that could do what he does)
This post seems to be missing the point. There is a general misunderstanding that being happy and excited about what you are doing has to do with the activity itself. It has a lot more to do with meeting internal needs.
I've had a pretty wide variety jobs in my life: meditation teacher, chef, poker player, software engineer. I experienced passion and happiness in all of them.
Initially, this seemed to be by chance, but eventually I spent some time trying to identify what made me happy. I discovered my driving needs: the things that inspire me and bring me the most happiness.
Driving needs are unique: everyone needs different things to be satisfied and fulfilled. For some it is acknowledgement and respect, for others it is the thrill of challenge and overcoming obstacles, and for still others it is security and stability.
It is extremely valuable to understand what your individual needs are. If you are clear about them, you can find ways to fulfill those needs in many different professions. You are free to find the optimal "work" to fulfill those needs.
Someone who is fulfilled by challenges is not likely to be fulfilled working a 9-5 job, just like someone who needs security is not going to be fulfilled working at a startup. It isn't the 9-5 job or the startup that is making the person happy, it is the fact that their needs are getting met.
A clear understanding of your driving needs gives you the opportunity to meet them in whatever situation you find yourself in. Additionally, it gives you the flexibility to change your profession if circumstances dictate without sacrificing your happiness.
I think it is important to realise the difference between finding something you love and finding something that will benefit you economically. When those two things overlap it can be amazing! When they do not it can be hard. When you have nothing to be passionate about it is sad. For example:
- I love kitesurfing. Since 13 I have been insanely passionate about it. Right now I am sat in a hostel in Cape Town coding away just giddy with the excitement about the waves and wind that are coming in tomorrow. I am hoping to get another jump this big tomorrow: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVDgV7cbNjU. However, no one is going to pay me to kitesurf. Even the best guys in the world do not make much money at all. I am always going to lose money kiting. I love it; but I cannot make enough money from it to have a family and give them the life my father gave me. Therefore trying to pursue kitesurfing as a means to happiness and economic stability would be a terrible idea.
- I love the internet. I love the apps, sites, hacks, businesses, connections, possibilities and promises of the internet. The economies of the world love the internet. That is a great overlap. I can always make money by coding no matter how bad things get. And I will enjoy it. I may find the clients tedious or the projects dull but I enjoy the process of writing code. It is fun and although I am not very good; it fulfils me intellectually, economically, and professionally.
- I love making stuff happen. The satisfaction I got from running my last business and see all my competitors copy my model was amazing. I loved managing my staff and reading happy customers' emails and everything that involved improving our software. These are things that I am deeply passionate about and are extremely economically valuable. I have found happiness through my passion for business.
Think of it like a ven diagram. If passion and economic potential overlap - happy days.
At the same time, I'd prefer our generation to be raised to follow our passion to what the previous generation was taught: get a 9 to 5 job where you'll be miserable but make a ton of money and live a nice, safe, and boring life with your 2.5 children.
I hardly think that because one friends passion turned into a career that wasn't recession proof constitutes enough evidence to say we should give up on following our dreams. I know plenty of people who pursued the 'big problem' and have had successful careers, yet remain unfulfilled because they don't have a passion for their work.
I like the idea of finding the problems to solve, but I don't think this has to mean we leave our true passions behind. Life is short, pursue your passion. When you hit a wall use the knowledge and experience you have gained to solve problems within the field you are passionate about.
If Oliver wants to understand happiness, I think he should consider why his friend was extremely happy during her PhD. That she was unhappy later when she couldn't find work does not make her a counter example to following one's passion. When your needs aren't met, you can get unhappy. In my experience, happiness comes from your relationship to the present. Follow your passion or work on a "big problem" or work everyday at a job. All can make you happy or unhappy. Being happy lies in how you live your experiences while following your passion or working on a big problem or doing whatever it is that you do. How do you react to trouble? How do you handle success and praise? How do you go about doing what you do? Do you help people? Do you compete? Are you satisfying your basic needs? From what I can tell, barring the effects of illnesses like depression, happiness lies in how you choose to go about your life and how you handle its ups and downs. Unfortunately, I haven't yet figured out the nuances of the above questions and others like them, so I don't know which answers result in happiness, but that's life, I guess. Some random things I've read on the topic: http://goo.gl/xxvklhttp://goo.gl/fKYlM
The premise of the author is the separation of economical benefits from what you are passionate about. Sure, if you are making money (more than just making ends meet) by doing what you love, you can have your cake and eat it too.
The simple truth is do you want to enjoy the journey following your passion, knowing very well there is a slim* chance of financial success or do you want to find a comfort zone and derive "borrowed" happiness. The borrowed happiness is from all materialistic things, safety, comfort, peace etc.. that you can afford/buy.
-*I am sure there are people who have passions that also have tangible financial success guaranteed. Good for them!
"It's about what you can do and how you can be a valuable contributor."
Certainly.
"Look into problems that affect you in a very personal way."
This sounds very much like things you are likely to be passionate about, and the title is therefore quite misleading.
Passion is a fire that is in your heart and that will forever try to get you do something you must do. Passion makes you alive—otherwise you'll spend decades withering away. Passion is never an idea, it's always something that you actually do. Passion is orthogonal to happiness, happiness may or may not come with or without passion.
Interestingly, From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 [gcide]:
Passion \Pas"sion\, v. i.
To suffer pain or sorrow; to experience a passion; to be
extremely agitated. [Obs.] "Dumbly she passions, frantically
she doteth." --Shak.
[1913 Webster]
In my own life and many of my friends', "passion" is often mistakenly replaced by "important, abstract idea that sounds good." As in "I am passionate about saving the environment." Of course the environment is important, and having an interest in it is one thing, but this is not the same as actually being called to work day-to-day on this issue.
The decision you should actually make is something like: I enjoy making sense of large, ugly datasets. Or, I like cold-calling businesses and convincing them of the value of something they would never think of. If you enjoy that day-to-day work, then sure, go ahead and use it for the environment. But don't get a degree and a job in "environmental studies" just because the issue is interesting.
A "passion" is the thing you do even when you're tired or sick, and practice even when you have better things to do. You don't always enjoy it, but you do it anyway. You would be happy working another job in order to keep doing it.
For many of us who found programming, the discipline and long hours of humiliating bug-hunting have taught us what "passion" really is. But many people never have the chance to do that. High school classes, college clubs, and even most Millennial-oriented "save the world" jobs are generally more about "interests," things that are impressive-sounding and interesting in the abstract, rather than "passions," gut-wrenchingly difficult disciplines that demand our attention each moment.