The surprising science of happiness | Dan Gilbert

What people said

carlossouza · 2023-06 · Strong recommendation

[VIDEO] “The surprising science of happiness”, from Dan Gilbert, is one of the best TED talks of all time (over 4M views). In his amazing & funny 20’ presentation, he explains how our brains are wired and how it relates to happiness. The article reminded me of this great content

Read the original HN comment ↗

jodrellblank · 2022-07 · Recommendation

> " What can be more important than life partner? " My favourite TED talk pairing is Dan Gilbert's Surprising Science of Happiness[1], where he offers evidence upon evidence that we humans grow to like what we are stuck with and can't change. A year after winning the lottery and a year after losing the use of their legs, lottery winners and paraplegics report being equally happy with their lives, one of his studies shows, for example. And Barry Schwartz's Paradox of Choice talk[2] where he argues that the more choice we have, the less happy we will be after we made the choice, full of doubt whether we could or should have chosen better, questioning if we should choose again, and seeing any flaw in the choice as a reason to blame ourselves for choosing it. In the USA there's over two million marriages every year[3], that seems a lot for people making the most important decision of their lives, to me. > " I think that what people are actually implying when they say “picky” is that I’m materialistic , that I’m looking for a rich guy, for a hot guy, etcetera. " (I think that's different from common usage; a 'picky eater' is not someone looking for rich food or hot food, it's someone with a narrowband filter on what foods they will eat. By contrast, there's a joke about the shopkeeper who gets a bag of potatoes, splits them into two different containers, and marks one container "selected potatoes" with a higher price. 'Selective' means you selected, even people whose criteria is '

Read the original HN comment ↗

Joel_Mckay · 2026-06 · Reference

Indeed, indifferentism must recognize both positions with similar regard. Then address ambiguity with logic and wisdom. For example, Bayes' theorem projects a reasonable expectation given available data. =3 [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗