Lisa Napoli's Blog, page 27
September 14, 2011
Radio Shangri-La, #Bhutan, @KPBSnews @adventurebybook
If you're in or around San Diego on Friday September 29th, please come hear KPBS' Maureen Cavanaugh interview me about Radio Shangri-La and Bhutan at the beautiful KPBS studios.
Deets: http://www.adventuresbythebook.com/radioshangri-la.html
Alternative mandala
Just as sacred as one made with sand and by monks? You decide. (We can thank our Mauritius correspondent for this, too:)
#Tibetan Anatomical Paintings
Painted in Nepal by various Himalayan artists twenty-plus years ago. (With special thanks to our Mauritius correspondent, the divine Gada.)l
Can we increase Gross National Happiness by Peter Singer/NationChange
(Thanks, Judi!)
Can We Increase Gross National Happiness?
By Peter Singer
The small Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan is known internationally for two things: high visa fees, which reduce the influx of tourists, and its policy of promoting "gross national happiness" instead of economic growth. The two are related: more tourists might boost the economy, but they would damage Bhutan's environment and culture, and so reduce happiness in the long run.
When I first heard of Bhutan's goal of maximizing its people's happiness, I wondered if it really meant anything in practice, or was just another political slogan. Last month, when I was in the capital, Thimphu, to speak at a conference on "Economic Development and Happiness," organized by Prime Minister Jigme Y. Thinley and co-hosted by Jeffrey Sachs, Director of The Earth Institute at Columbia University and Special Adviser to United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, I learned that it is much more than a slogan.
Never before have I been at a conference that was taken so seriously by a national government. I had expected Thinley to open the conference with a formal welcome, and then return to his office. Instead, his address was a thoughtful review of the key issues involved in promoting happiness as a national policy. He then stayed at the conference for the entire two and a half days, and made pertinent contributions to our discussions. At most sessions, several cabinet ministers were also present.
Since ancient times, happiness has been universally seen as a good. Problems arise when we try to agree on a definition of happiness, and to measure it.
One important question is whether we see happiness as the surplus of pleasure over pain experienced over a lifetime, or as the degree to which we are satisfied with our lives. The former approach tries to add up the number of positive moments that people have, and then to subtract the negative ones. If the result is substantially positive, we regard the person's life as happy; if negative, as unhappy. So, to measure happiness defined in that way, one would have to sample moments of people's existence randomly, and try to find out whether they are experiencing positive or negative mental states.
A second approach asks people: "How satisfied are you with the way your life has gone so far?" If they say they are satisfied, or very satisfied, they are happy, rather than unhappy. But the question of which of these ways of understanding happiness best captures what we should promote raises fundamental questions of value.
On surveys that use the first approach, countries like Nigeria, Mexico, Brazil, and Puerto Rico do well, which suggests that the answer may have more to do with the national culture than with objective indicators like health, education, and standard of living. When the second approach is taken, it tends to be the richer countries, like Denmark and Switzerland, that come out on top. But it is not clear whether people's answers to survey questions in different languages and in different cultures really mean the same thing.
We may agree that our goal ought to be promoting happiness, rather than income or gross domestic product, but, if we have no objective measure of happiness, does this make sense? John Maynard Keynes famously said: "I would rather be vaguely right than precisely wrong." He pointed out that when ideas first come into the world, they are likely to be woolly, and in need of more work to define them sharply. That may be the case with the idea of happiness as the goal of national policy.
Can we learn how to measure happiness? The Center for Bhutan Studies, set up by the Bhutanese government 12 years ago, is currently processing the results of interviews with more than 8,000 Bhutanese. The interviews recorded both subjective factors, such as how satisfied respondents are with their lives, and objective factors, like standard of living, health, and education, as well as participation in culture, community vitality, ecological health, and the balance between work and other activities. It remains to be seen whether such diverse factors correlate well with each other. Trying to reduce them to a single number will require some difficult value judgments.
Bhutan has a Gross National Happiness Commission, chaired by the prime minister, which screens all new policy proposals put forward by government ministries. If a policy is found to be contrary to the goal of promoting gross national happiness, it is sent back to the ministry for reconsideration. Without the Commission's approval, it cannot go ahead.
One controversial law that did go ahead recently – and that indicates how willing the government is to take tough measures that it believes will maximize overall happiness – is a ban on the sale of tobacco. Bhutanese may bring into the country small quantities of cigarettes or tobacco from India for their own consumption, but not for resale – and they must carry the import-tax receipt with them any time they smoke in public.
Last July, the UN General Assembly passed, without dissent, a Bhutanese-initiated resolution recognizing the pursuit of happiness as a fundamental human goal and noting that this goal is not reflected in GDP. The resolution invited member states to develop additional measures that better capture the goal of happiness. The General Assembly also welcomed an offer from Bhutan to convene a panel discussion on the theme of happiness and well-being during its 66th session, which opens this month.
These discussions are part of a growing international movement to re-orient government policies towards well-being and happiness. We should wish the effort well, and hope that ultimately the goal becomes global, rather than merely national, happiness.
This article was published at NationofChange at: http://www.nationofchange.org/can-we-increase-gross-national-happiness-1315929789. All rights are reserved.
September 13, 2011
Cinema in @Bhutan: Corrected link
Watch this film trailer of an upcoming blockbuster in Bhutan, produced by my friend Pema: it better work this time.
Cinema in #Bhutan : Ata Yongbba
Very proud of my dear friend Pema Lhamo who produced this upcoming movie in Bhutan, Ata Yongbba: Even if you don't understand a word, there's gorgeous photography of Bhutan and wonderful music, too. Besides: When was the last time you saw people in gho and kira, dancing?) Look out Bollywood.
"It's Embarrassing to be Yourself": @fearlessstories
FearlessFrom the editor of the online magazine, words of wisdom:
"Fear.less contributor and fellow writer Po Bronson blew my mind when he
spoke of the "fantasy bubble" in which we encase our dreams. We hide our
most sacred ideas and most comforting desires because it's easier to shelter
them on our shoulders as angels. To make them a reality, whether that means
opening a blank document or starting a conversation, is to make them vulnerable.
In our minds and when we are alone, our thoughts and fantasies are perfect,
whole and insulated. As soon as you take the first step to making them real,
they are just a fraction of themselves. It's disorienting, it's not quite like you
imagined, you're confused, you don't want to get caught, you shouldn't have
done it in the first place.
This is true of just about everyone, even if you're type of person who says
"I don't have guilty pleasures because there's nothing to feel guilty about" or
"I am comfortable with who I am". I started this by saying it's embarrassing to
be yourself, but it's not, really. What's truly embarrassing, and vulnerable, and
exposing, is to show yourself. To show your enthusiasm and your sensitivity. If
at your work, at your home or on your website, it serves you to be a 90% or
80% version of yourself, it's easy to keep doing that.
It's awkward to be the one who shows compassion to someone crying in the
hallway, even though it's probably worse to, you know, be the one crying.
It's humiliating to divulge that what inspires or validates you is unusual for your
age, gender or some other social norm, even if it really helps.
It's embarrassing to confess that your fears and insecurities just keep coming
back, even though it seems that way for most other people, too.
It's shameful to admit that you haven't taken any impressive steps toward what
you really want, even though no one can support you if they don't know, and even
though it might not even be true.
This doesn't always happen, and that's actually what's so bad about it. When we
win a few easy victories, we can trick ourselves into thinking "Woohoo, authentic
living! All eight cylinders ablaze!" Not to take anything away from small victories,
which should be celebrated. But getting comfortable with less than we can achieve
is less than we deserve. There is great satisfaction, fulfillment and power awaiting
us on the other side of honest self-expression and deliberate vulnerability and that
can be hard to keep in mind. What is your current level of sincerity doing for you?
What would happen if you dialed it up?
Also, "authenticity" is a dodgy word that messes people up. I'm not trying to accuse
anyone of being "phony" when I don't even know you personally. But I do want to see
what happens when people, including myself, don't dial themselves back as much
and surround themselves in support. Like Po Bronson says, "You need to be around
people who think it's okay."
I'm glad we could talk about this. Well, I'm off to play some video games marketed
toward children. It's where I get my best ideas."
Matt
http://fearlessstories.com/
My $10k storage unit mistake by Amy Gutman @salon_life
A lesson in letting go of stuff, one of my favorite topics, from my friend Amy Gutman on Salon:
My $10,000 storage unit mistake
As I sift through junk I've held on to for decades, I wonder why I'm willing to pay so much to avoid letting go
September 12, 2011
Radio Shangri-La, continued
I heeded the advice of my dear wise literary agent Dan Conaway:
"Lots of people write books. Not everyone gets to be on the radio."
You can hear me on the coolest radio station in the world (after Kuzoo FM,) KCRW, starting this afternoon.
