The Good Life Book By Robert Waldinger and Marc Schulz

 

Books on happiness often seem like unrealistic exercises because the authors write in general terms about things that most of us find very specific and uniquely individual. But some of us keep reading them anyway. The Good Life book is worth reading for a couple of reasons other than happiness being a very tempting subject. The book is a summary of mountains of research with a heavy emphasis on some of the most longitudinal studies ever conducted. Good research can make for very compelling reading. 

The second reason that this book is good is that the authors are great story tellers. Not everyone can take decades of research and statistics and create a truly fascinating narrative. The authors have found a way to make this book conversational by including a smattering of personal anecdotes and opinions. The combination of statistical analysis and friendly chat are a part of what makes the book highly readable. If you love research and statistics, this book will be mind candy. 

If you are not a sociologist at heart, you can still be confident that the authors have made the information as palatable as any fiction you have ever read. One of the reasons for this similarity to fiction is that there are several people in the book that are followed for essentially their whole lives. The reader gets to know and care about these folks. And then there are useful happiness ideas, such as the meditation question: What's here that I have never noticed before? This book is a blend of philosophy, and research and it makes for rich and meaningful reading. The authors tell us that there is no way to make life perfect, and even if there were, then it would not be a good life. Because a good life is forged from the things that make it hard.

 

Think Again by Adam Grant

We would all probably like a conversational environment in which ideas were more vigorously and meaningfully exchanged. We imagine that there is (or was or could be) a time and place where people listen to each other, change their minds about various topics, and just generally appreciate the opportunity to share information and viewpoints. However, this is is such a rare exception that many people are reluctant to have a conversation without first ascertaining that their listener is already in complete agreement with them. This phenomenon is known as creating "silos," or forming "idea cults."

When confronted with differing points of view we veer toward one of three tendencies:

To preach - to prove we are right or that our cause is sacred

To prosecute - to prove someone else wrong or guilty

To politick - to look for approval

These tendencies turn out to be poor methods of persuasion. They nearly always cause a listener to solidify their position. There are more scientifically based approaches that might counteract the one-sidedness and blind spots of those conversational styles.

It turns out that information gathering or interviewing people about their convictions or opinions is a more effective way of eliciting a change. In a serious attempt to explain their own ideas, many people will find the gaps or flaws in their own logic and begin to reexamine those notions.

Recognizing that there are limits to persuasion and that we all need "time for our own confusion" is an excellent method for creating the space needed for change. Humans like to sort through information and draw their own conclusions. At least, most people think that they like to do this. If they feel less pressured, there is a greater chance that they will perceive they are moving through this process independently.

Methods that are good for learning to think are crucial to creating the kind of mind that has the flexibility to incorporate new information. No surprise - textbook reading and lectures are not the mainstay of these methods. People need practice in gathering information, recognizing legitimate and illegitimate sources, and looking at data from different angles.

People also require the personal and emotional support to develop something called Confident Humility. This is a mindset that helps us "improve ourselves rather than prove ourselves."

"Escalation of commitment" in spite of signs of failure is what an individual or an organization does when they want to save face or protect reputations. Despite mounting evidence that a thing is not going well, efforts are redoubled and problems are minimized or dismissed. On a personal level, this premature commitment can be a kind of identity foreclosure - closing ourselves off from options before we've had a chance to explore all the possibilities.

This nonfiction book is so good that I didn't want it to end. It felt more like a binge watch TV series was wrapping up than a nonfiction book was coming to an end. I will definitely be looking for what else Adam Grant has written.