http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2011/02/happiness_work_sleep_and_bicyc.html
The government is trying to find out what makes us happier. I'm delighted the question is at least finally being asked in the UK, this bastion of gloom. Of course, there is plenty of room for cynicism, and there are plenty of people who are willing to provide it. Presumably they fall firmly into the category of people who would benefit from being happier.
According to the article: 'Basically, we have become a whole lot richer but no happier'. My understanding is that unhappiness decreases with wealth up to a certain point but then tails off. If you can't afford a loaf of bread, you're unlikely to be bouncing off the walls with happiness; at the other end of the scale, getting your fifth yacht is unlikely to make you much happier than your fourth did.
The article, which is brief, mentions three areas, as you can probably guess from the title. Unemployment is bad for happiness. No money, no structure to the day, no self-respect, no social interaction, no status. No surprise there.
'A number of studies have shown strong correlations between well-being and getting enough good quality sleep.' Again, not an enormous shock, but as is often pointed out, correlation is not causation. Are people happier when they sleep well, or do they sleep well because they're happy? The probable answer is: both.
The bicycle aspect has to do with commuting. According to a NEF (New Economics Foundation) report: "A wealth of literature from researchers studying stress and related effects reveals 'persistent and significant costs associated with a long commute through heavy traffic'. By contrast, studies comparing the experiences of commuting by bicycle and car report that cyclists find their mode of transport at least as flexible and convenient as those who use cars, with lower stress and greater feelings of freedom, relaxation and excitement."
That's hardly a huge revelation. If a long commute through heavy traffic is stressful, which there is no reason to doubt, since it involves long periods of concentration, frustration and boredom in exchange for little reward, a journey on a bicycle by comparison, where you have a certain amount of flexibility to weave through traffic, are on the move for longer periods, are taking exercise and feel a greater level of control, would no doubt be less irritating.
That assumes, of course, that it wasn't constantly raining, you didn't have a flat tyre, didn't have a headache from traffic fumes, or had just had a fight with an angry driver. I think we can safely conclude that in itself cycling through traffic to work during the rush hour isn't the greatest source of happiness known to mankind.
The problem with all this is that there has been no attempt to define the human situation or to spell out what is meant by happiness and well-being. Making individual observations is all very well, but without guiding principles it's a recipe for failure.
Leaving aside any evolutionary or theological arguments, we are inarguably human animals. We share with other mammals, especially primates, many factors including hormones, nervous systems, limited lifespan, methods of reproduction and so forth. Of course there are differences, a primary one being a more developed cerebral cortex of the brain which gives us the ability to ponder these questions, the power of speech which means we can communicate complex thoughts, and opposable thumbs granting us the ability to use tools with ease.
Let me state my position here, simply and directly: the aim of most therapy, as I see it, hypnotherapy included, and by extension the aim of life, is not to create happiness or even contentment. It is to create spontaneity. Happiness is an elusive butterfly which cannot be grasped directly. Human unhappiness, by contrast, can be systematically reduced. How? By getting rid of negative thoughts, beliefs and feelings associated with the past, and giving the person the greatest flexibility possible with which to respond to the present.
Again and again I've seen that when you neutralise an emotion, the thought processes which were associated with it can then be safely, easily and quickly dismantled and the person can move forward in their lives, and live in the present. Jesus's exhortations to be 'as little children', Eckhart Tolle's 'Power of Now', the Sedona Method, Zen Buddhism, and the precepts from many other traditions, are primarily about spontaneity and living in the moment.
Emotions are antique survival mechanisms, without them we wouldn't be here, as our ancestors would not have escaped predators or fought back against aggressors. However, once basic survival and physical needs are assumed, emotions become a double-edged sword. If a trauma from the past or childhood resentments remain unresolved, then a person is not really living in the present, but constantly responding to the past.
There is not space and time enough here to go into this in any depth. I'll have to content myself with saying that you can have all the yachts and Ferraris you want, but if you were orphaned at a young age, there will almost certainly still be a gaping chasm in your life which motivates and underlies your every action, thought and belief, unless it's resolved with carefully targeted and competent therapeutic work.
Of course it's possible to 'just get on with it', be grateful for what you have, and so on, and some people have a natural talent for letting go of the past. For most, however, the possibility of spontaneity and enjoying life in the present will be unattainable if there are traumas and resentments and shocks from the past still encoded in the nervous system.
No one is happy all the time, and it is worshipping a false god to want to be so. The opposite of happiness is arguably boredom, and the opposite of unhappiness contentment. Unhappiness, over the short term, can motivate us to change and improve our situation, so it's not necessarily all bad. It's when it translates into a paralysis and inability to take action or slithers into depression that it becomes a liability.
There seems to be a happiness 'set point'. As Abraham Lincoln put it, "People are about as happy as they make up their minds to be." Modern research proves him right: lottery winners and people involved in disabling accidents tend to return to their previous levels of happiness within a year or so.
A partial list of the usual precursors to happiness which people mention includes: gratitude, absorption in activities (the 'flow' state mentioned by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, whom I mention in order to improve my typing skills), religious beliefs, a sense of meaning and control over our lives, a strong social network, a sense of contribution towards the greater good, a feeling of belonging, and good health and energy.
Work, sleep and bicycles key into the above list: work can provide the flow state, social network, belonging and, by giving structure to a person's life, better health and energy; sleep and bicycles will also probably produce better health and energy, and bicycles also will impart some sense of control and possibly contribution (towards the environment). Yet they are not in themselves the solution; that would be mistaking the branch for the root.