How to Thrive: Insights from a Conversation with best-selling author Dan Buettner

Dan Buettner is the New York Times best-selling author of The Blue Zones: Lessons for Living Longer from the People Who've Lived the Longest (with a terrific second edition just out) and Thrive: Finding Happiness the Blue Zones Way. He is one of those rare people who is simultaneously a reflective thinker and a super-charged ball of positive energy. A National Geographic Fellow, he’s thought hard about, and traveled the world to explore, questions that matter to all of us. Are there genuine secrets to living longer, healthier lives? And can we foster happiness and well-being? He’s sought to answer these questions by examining the behaviors and lifeways of people in “Blue Zones”, that is, exceptional pockets of the world where, statistically, people live the longest or report greater life satisfaction than the average.

Recently, Dan was good enough to speak with me about his work, and the lessons we can extract from it to think about what really matters in creating a good life. While the whole conversation was fascinating, I thought I’d post one of the segments that I found most compelling, where Dan talks about the choices we can make to promote well-being in our own lives, and the importance of cultivating belonging.

LMR: What do you see as the fundamental relationship between health and happiness?

DB: Happiness is worth about 8 years of additional life expectancy. There are a few behaviors that contribute to both. For example, we know that the happiest Americans are socializing six hours a day. We also know that loneliness takes years off your life. Loneliness is as bad for you as a smoking habit. So by proactively going out and surrounding yourself with healthy friends, it’s not only going to make you healthier – because health is a positive contagion – it’s also likely to make you happier.

And also physical fitness. Going out and taking a walk. It triggers endorphins. It makes you feel good. But we also know that walking is associated with anywhere from 4-6 extra years of life expectancy.

I didn’t set out to find these things, but both books were kind of worldwide meta-analyses of populations who are the paragons of happiness and longevity. So I tried to get all the data in the world and find the best. And then distill down what they do. And if you boil down longevity, and you boil down happiness, and you overlay them, you see about an 80% overlap.

LMR: Do you feel, when you see that overlap, you’re seeing something about what it means to be human?

DB: I see the overlap of what it takes to have a rich life. What it means to be human is to procreate, from a strictly evolutionary point of view.

LMR:  So when I hear your stories, I wonder if they’re telling us something about the nature of our humanity. The kinds of things are so deeply or necessary to us they tell us something about our nature or being?

DB: One easy answer is socializing. We’ve succeeded as a species because somewhere along the evolutionary arc, we’ve figured out that collaborating increases our chance of survival. And, like so many things, when you satisfy that thing that increases our chances of survival, our bodies are hardwired to reward us. When you’re thirsty and we drink, it feels good. When you’re hungry and you eat, it feels good. When you’re horny and you have sex, it feels good. And these are all things that make it more likely that we’ll have kids. I think it’s this reward loop. Well, the same thing with socializing. We cooperate. When you look at the Blue Zones around the world, they typically are in pretty harsh environments. And the reason they survived is because they cooperate. You look at the Sardinian shepherds, for example. They don’t even all own their own parcel of land. But they live in tiny villages and they get together. So, when it comes to our humanity where…it’s realizing that there is a genetic satisfaction that comes from good social connections. And we should always favour that over consumption.

LMR: When you were in doing research…this is primarily directed at the longevity populations, did the people you were talking to ever have an articulation of the good life the way we would use it? Was there a sense of what life was all about that they collectively shared?

DB: Yeah, I think it’s a profound sense of belonging to where they came from. And if you look at the Sardinians, life is about my kids. I work, not to get ahead in the world, not to buy a second vacation home, not to have a nicer car. I don’t…if I have free time, it’s never at the expense of my family. And we heard this over and over. I don’t have massive data, other than…I have an N of about 50 people. And you saw the emphasis of the family among those populations.

LMR: Interesting. The sense of…going back to what you said about having a profound sense of belonging to where they came from…do you mean from within a familial lineage, or also within a cultural or even an environmental, like a connection to place?

DB: The latter. In other words, they weren’t just rebels without a cause. They’re not the type of people who bounce through life, move around. They’re planted.

LMR: I also wondered if you think that not having an icki gai [a purpose in life] can cause people pain? And I ask that because clearly having one is the presence of a positive, so is not having one just the absence of that positive, or is it the presence of a negative? Do people wind up feeling…I mean, I guess this is just going into hypothesis-land, but more lost, or feeling like there’s something absent in their life that causes them pain?

DB: Yeah, I think there’s an existential pain in that unrootedness.

LMR: And, with the work that you’re doing with the Blue Zones communities [“a systems approach that brings together the citizens, businesses and institutions of a given community to foster well-being”], are you saying that we can self-consciously create some of these things?

DB: Yes. First of all, you can choose where you move and I think that’s…people dismiss that. “Oh…I’m not going to move.” Well, the average American, and probably the average Canadian, moves ten times in a lifetime. So you can choose to live out in some culturally barren suburb, or you can find a neighborhood where neighbors know each other and there are parks and playgrounds full of people. And a place where you’re going to be nudged into social…you can walk down to a café, or a store…. That’s going to have a bigger impact on your happiness, and I argue your longevity, than just about anything else you can do. So, OK, well, what else? All right, your husband lives in a suburb and he ain’t moving. The next line of proactivity you can pursue is finding…build your own social network. You don’t have to hang out with the toxic woman who bitches about her life, or the friend that sits and watches reruns of Gossip Girls all day long and drinks Diet Coke. We can all create our own social networks and support that give energy to the positive.

books

Towards a New Model of Health and Well-Being: Practice Makes Perfect

Anthropology News published an article of mine today as part of their series on health, well-being and happiness.  It argues that the dominant, consumption-based vision for the good life in North America is making us sick and that, moreover, our individualist model for understanding health and well-being all too often compounds rather than helps the problem. That’s the bad news.  The good news is that there’s a new way of thinking about the good life that actually sets us on to a much better path for health and well-being.  We can see it in the work of writers like Mark Bittman and Laurie David, and articulated brilliantly by the philosopher Albert Borgmann.  Theirs is a vision of a good life characterized by activities that engage and connect us to each other and the world around us.

The article is publicly available at this link http://www.anthropology-news.org/index.php/2012/03/15/towards-a-new-model-of-health-and-well-being/ if you’d like to read more!

Is Happiness the Goal?

Well, someone’s got to ask it. We are in the midst of an explosion of interest in happiness.  The UK and Canada, among other countries, are now measuring their citizens' well-being as earnestly as they do GDP.  Books about how to get and stay happy sit contentedly on best-seller lists.  Happiness think tanks are springing up like mushrooms, like the Wellbeing Programme at the London School of Economics.  The introductory statement on their website says, "People want to be happy.  But do we know what makes us h appy, or how society is best organised to promote happiness?"  They take it as axiomatic that happiness is the goal:  the only question is how.

Even if one is supremely disinterested in this movement, it’s coming for you. The other morning, I received a new magazine called “What Makes You Happy” inserted into my Globe & Mail newspaper.  I’m professionally immersed in this subject, and even I was amazed at the breadth of happiness articles:  happiness at work, raising your children to be happy, global happiness averages, etc, etc.

On the face of it, questioning whether we really want to be happy seems absurd.  Look at it the other way:  “Do you want to be unhappy?” Of course not!  And yet, as the get-happy steamroller bears down on us, it’s worth digging in our heels a little, at least long enough to ask an important question:

What exactly do we mean by happiness?

This is where it all gets a bit woolly.  In some respects, happiness is one of those things that we’re just supposed to “get” because everyone has experienced happiness and unhappiness at some time.  This is presumably why the LSE can so boldly state that all people want to be happy, and also why there really isn’t any social pushback or qualification to the happiness trend.

But look a little more closely, and one sees that there are a lot of hidden assumptions at work in all this happiness business.  First, everyone seems to be running with Aristotle’s argument that, no matter what goal we believe ourselves to be striving for, like financial success or building a family, we’re really doing it because we believe that it will make us happy.  Thus, happiness is the real goal.  While more than a little hesitant to take on Aristotle, I’m not actually 100% convinced of that.

But whatever the case, based on my recollections from my undergraduate years and a quick refresher at the website of The Pursuit of Happiness, a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting human happiness, Aristotle also said that we don’t really know we’ve achieved happiness until the end-game, when we’ve lived our whole life and can look back on it.  It’s not a temporary state of happy-happy-joy-joy at all, it’s a life goal.

My sense is that the majority of the merrily bubbling happiness literature doesn’t look at it this way at all…mostly it seems to be promoting happiness right here, right now.  And this is where I begin to get a little uncomfortable.  In this vision, it seems like it’s too easy for happiness to devolve into the ultimate individualist, consumerist quest.  It’s all about me!  And we elevate our feelings to the level of obsession, using fleeting moments of what we perceive to be happiness as sort of a litmus test for the worth of an activity or commitment.  There’s a fair argument to be made that this is just plain narcissistic.  But more than that, I’m not sure it’s making any us feel better.  It may even be perpetuating the problem.

So what else can we develop that elevates the discussion beyond individual happiness?  This is where the idea of an excellent life, a rich life, comes in.  To me, this implies something beyond an individual’s feelings, because, as I see it anyway, a rich life is one defined by interconnection.  You can also assess it in a much more clear-cut way than happiness…is your life rich with people, work, community engagement, purpose, ideas, activity, connection to place and so on?

To be fair, a few of the well-being indices do some version of this.  For example, the Canadian Index of Wellbeing, based at the University of Waterloo, measures factors such as living standards, community vitality, health, environment, time use, democratic engagement, leisure and culture and environment.  This is a step in the right direction.  But I’d love to see us take the idea of interconnectedness head on, and measure the worth of activities and pursuits by how much they connect us to things.

Because I think this is the goal.  Yes, as individuals we’re mired in our own feelings and experiences, and we’ll all do our final reckoning about our lives at the end.  But in the meantime, we can passionately seek connection…to others, to this beautiful world of ours, to creative expression, to all the things that can elevate our humanity, and that really are worth striving for.