Teaching for Happiness

The so-called American Dream is, without a doubt, the leading cause for cynicism, nihilism, and hopelessness among young people today.* We're assumed to achieve good grades in middle school, to get into good classes in high school, to get into a good college, to get a good degree, to get a job that pays for a house and car, to marry someone we're pretty happy with, to have kids, and to teach them the whole process, while somehow retiring in Florida on the beach. In this approach to life, we leave zero room for variety and any delineation from the status quo leaves the rest of society puzzled and questioning. By following this process, we've reached the American Dream - regardless of actually being happy (or not). 

When one decides they don't fit into this cookie-cutter mold of what it means to be an American, they are rejected by culture (we wonder why the Depression rates in this country are through the roof).

By placing irrational standards of success on our youth, we end up equating success with happiness. 

To separate happiness from success, we need not lower the standard of success. We must alter the standard of success. Instead of expecting young people to fall into a predetermined mold of what it means to be successful, celebrate what they're doing to be happy, celebrate their interests, celebrate that fact that they're doing anything - celebrate the process, celebrate the struggle.

Contrary to popular belief, happiness requires struggle - the American Dream won't teach you that. Happiness requires the struggle to come to terms with one's own desires - to negate societal claims of success and make decisions based on one's own true best interest. 

We, as a society, as young people, have become so familiar with self-doubt and second-guessing. So much so, that self-doubt has ridden us anxious and stressed out to the point that nothing is actually ever accomplished. We then stray back to the American Dream comfort zone and perpetuate the cycle for the next generation.

In order to make a difference on the planet, we must critically analyze the status quo and be okay with the outcome. In order to be okay with the outcome, we must reevaluate our values and graciously introspect within. 

*Not based on any actual scientific findings.

A Revolution In Imagination

“A symptom of how underdeveloped our sociological imagination is relative to our ecological imagination is the recent finding that more Americans can imagine the “end of the world” than can envision a switch from using fossil fuels or an economic order other than capitalism.”

           

This week’s reading by Kari Marie Norgaard, “Climate Change Is a Social Issue,” explains that an ecological imagination is no longer enough for the world we live in today and rather an imagination that looks at the sociological outcomes is just as essential. We have seen and heard about impacts on the earth’s systems due to human actions but we have never really looked deeper into the relationships that are making up this degrading social structure. Norgaard calls for more sociological theories and insights as she states, “When individuals are detached from their social context, we cannot account for where values or beliefs come from, and thus how they might actually change.” By only listening to scientific experts, we are missing the whole picture on how society itself can change course.

           

One question I felt was very important to me was when Norgaard brought up the increase in amount of wildfires and she basically said, “What is this going to mean in your lifetime?” Yes, we have policies that have been implemented, and have recently reached a new agreement, but once the damage is done, have we really fixed the issue? Is it already too late? Do we want to live in a scorched world with climate change policies only implemented afterwards by government as a result of what happened? A world run by the government? Or rather a world where individuals are taken into context? Where values and beliefs are engaged in the conversation? Where we are able to see this social structure at its core and know exactly what to do even at the local level before the issue takes root? This sociological imagination is a new form of seeing that can make it possible to imagine ecological changes transitioning into social, political, and economic outcomes, can reroute society down the right path, and get rid of this “end of the world” mentality.  

"Imagination is Power"

Climate change... immediately most of us think of the 'gloom and doom' narrative, politicians in denial, scientists at the forefront of the 'debate', and of course, extinction. Solutions that have been put forward consists mainly of individual consumption decision making. Focusing on the individual and not the social structure behind clime change only places a temporary bandied on the problem, allowing the root cause to remain hidden. In Kari Marie Norgaard's article Climate Change is a Social Issue, Norgaard identifies the difference between our two imaginations. First, the ecological imagination, which is "see[ing] the relationships between human actions and their impacts on the earth's biophysical system." This type of imagination is well developed, especially in our Western culture. On a hierarchy of disciplines, science always comes first, (which remains justified by natural scientists) so it is important for us to notice how the 'hard' sciences are taken more seriously than any other discipline. Next, Norgaard describes the sociological imagination, which is "see[ing] the relationships that make up this environmentally damaging social structure." This type of imagination goes unnoticed by society, where the social and political conversation about climate change remains inadequate. These two imaginations are on two different platforms, creating once again another barrier we must acknowledge.

A recent finding showed that "more Americans can imagine the end of the world than can envision a switch from using fossil fuels or an economic order than capitalism." So the big question we face - "how society can change course," goes unanswered. Yes, we need a more present sociological imagination in order to attempt to answer this big question, but more importantly, we need a holistic imagination. We need an imagination that seeks to dismantle hierarchies of all kind, human domination, and promotes a more intersectional lens. Having a more holistic imagination will also allow interdisciplinary studies to flourish. Embracing this type of imagination will not only bring scientists and sociologists together, but artists, activists, writers, and many others as well. It seems like a big leap to go from a 'room full of scientists' to a room that is open to everyone, but in order for us to challenge the current social structure, we must all have a seat at the table. I can imagine it - can you?

The Planet is fine; Humans are in trouble.

    We as citizens of the United States are told stories everyday of our lives. Some stories are for our own protection while others are flat out lies that do us harm rather than good. Is it our right to know every single detail about this country? I believe that when it comes to environmental atrocities such as Hurricane Katrina, the water crisis in Flint Michigan, the Love Canal tragedy, the BP oil spill, and countless others who have not reached the headlines we have every right to know what is going on. This act of lying and betrayal is not only prevalent in the United States but worldwide.  Why do certain governments and corporations fail to bow their metaphoric heads and claim responsibility? Is it an inherent fear of getting in trouble? Is it pure negligence? Or is it a combination of many different variables? It seems that very few responsible parties ever come right out and state that there is an issue. I think if these entities took responsibility for their mishaps or actions it could be a hell of a lot better than lying for a period of time until an environmental issue is discovered down the road and is subsequently far worse than when it was originally discovered.  Klein talks about the BP oil spill and how oil leaked into the Gulf of Mexico for 3 months. The general public was told by BP that the oil would never reach shore. We were also told that the oil would stay at the bottom of the ocean and it would affect the organisms and natural processes of the area. We all know what really happened. Klein suggests that we can no longer take what we are told at face value. We must do our own investigation into these matters. Educate yourself and get many different perspectives for many different news sources. Who is to blame for the way these corporations and governments are? Is it the economy or capitalism? Again it is a very complicated situation and these questions that I pose will not be answered overnight. Treat each situation as singular event because just like anything in this world we have to make individuals care in order for something to get done in these situations. Certain people may not care about one issue but care very deeply about another. This is due to a number of different factors.

Mark Mason’s article entitled “You probably know to ask yourself, “What do I want?” Here’s a better question” poses some great questions that the reader should take to heart. One of these questions is poised as people willing to struggle or suffer for the things they care about most. If you are willing to pass through hell-fire to obtain a goal, does that end goal make you happy? If so, Mason is suggesting that you should go through these struggles, because what is life without struggle? When you suffer to obtain something great (like we college students are doing to obtain a degree) it gives you a sense of pride and accomplishment. I am willing to fight for certain social and environmental justice causes because I believe it is every persons right to breathe clean air, drink clean water, be treated as equals regardless of race or gender or sexual preference, and to live a life which makes them happy. Why should certain people use the backs of others in order to achieve more power? Why should people destroy the environment in order to gain more and more profit? Again, these questions are not easily solved.  There is one major theme I am picking up from reading Klein’s, “Blockadia” and it is that, “The climate movement has found it’s nonnegotiables.” This means that the members who make up this movement have a moral compass and intend to fight for what is right and just in regards to environmental and social change which is so needed in the present. The planet does not care if we live or die because it is going to be there regardless. We must find a way to get along and save our own lives on earth, because the earth is not in trouble, it will always find a way to fix itself. We are the ones who are in trouble.