Dan Gilbert on how we rarely manage to accurately forecast how happy we will be in the future:

Even if you are not a hedonic utilitarian, you’d probably agree that genuine human happiness is a significant good. Any discussion of a future action, event, or technology carries at least an implicit judgment about its effect of people’s wellbeing. The biases Gilbert indicates suggest that we are overly cautious about negative events and overly optimistic about positive ones.

Futurist reactions to technology provide a clear example of this tendency to exaggerate benefits and harms. Futurists tend to be Luddites or technophiles. A publication bias might be assisting this phenomenon — opinions expressing indifference aren’t as viable for publication — but both biases play a part in shaping the landscape of thought. Numerous anecdotes chronicle how individuals have underestimated the impact of technologies like cars, computers, or microwaves on the way we conduct our life. Despite this mistake, we often overestimate how the change created by a specific technology will alter our wellbeing.

Even though this argument mirrors what Gilbert had to say about technology, he is still too negative about technology in general. I agree that there is no one device that allows us to spend more time with our families, but technologies that increase worker productivity also increase the overall level of wealth, which gives individuals the chance to consume more leisure time. Occupants of wealthier countries report higher levels of satisfaction, (2), and individuals rate themselves about 1 point higher on a 10 point scale for each doubling of wealth. If technology continues to develop at the rate it has over the past 150 years, happiness levels will rise, particularly in poorer nations.

In the case of specific technologies, two cases are worth considering. First of all, gadgets of the type usually featured in magazines like Popular Science do not significantly change our state of wellbeing. As cool as they might initially seem, we become accustomed to them and soon return to our level of happiness prior to having them. On the other hand, more mundane innovations that alleviate chronic problems are more likely to improve our lives. Even though we quickly adapt to one-time events like winning the lottery, losing a limb, or purchasing a home theatre system, we don’t adapt to long commutes, continual noise, or long bouts of bad weather. Given this, flush toilets and air-conditioning have probably done more to improve our wellbeing than consumer electronics ever have.

Hat tip to Will Wilkinson, who has done some wonderful research on the significance of happiness research, for the video.
——————————————–
blejkrajli is currently shopping for a laptop, despite the knowledge that brand-new circuits and transistors do not bring happiness.