In brief, I think: (1) subjective measures of well-being don’t tell us the full story about whether progress is real, and (2) the measures we have are actually inconsistent, with some showing positive benefits of progress, others flat, and a few slightly negative (but most of them not epidemics).
To elaborate, on the second point first:
The Easterlin Paradox, to my understanding, dissolved over time with more and better data. Steven Pinker addresses this pretty well in Enlightenment Now, which I reviewed here: https://rootsofprogress.org/enlightenment-now
Regarding rates of mental illness, the data don’t show a consistent increasing trend, and certainly nothing like the “epidemic” we sometimes hear about:
But to return to the first point, I think we have to be careful in using metrics like self-reported life satisfaction to evaluate progress.
Emotional responses tend to be short-term and relative. They report a derivative, not an integral. That does not, however, mean that the derivative is all that matters! Rather, it means that our emotions don’t tell us about everything that matters.
In the last few hundred years, we have eradicated smallpox, given women the ability to control their reproduction and choose their careers, liberated most of humanity from back-breaking physical labor and 80+ hour work weeks, opened the world to travel and cultural exchange, and made the combined knowledge, art, and philosophy of the world available to almost everyone. (And that’s just a small sample of the highlights.)
I think these things are self-evidently good. If a subjective measure of well-being doesn’t report that people are happier when they aren’t sentenced to hard labor on a farm, when they aren’t trapped within a few miles of their village, when they and their families don’t starve from famine caused by drought, and when their children don’t die before the age of five from infectious disease… then all that proves is that people have forgotten what those things are like and don’t know how good they have it.
First, there are a few different versions of the Easterlin paradox. The most relevant one, for this discussion, is whether economic growth over the long-term (i.e. 10+ years for economists—longer than the business cycle) increases subjective well-being. This version of the paradox holds in quite a few developed nations (see linked paper). That leaves it open what we might find for developing nations.
Second, the only paper I know of that looks globally at SWB over time is Neve et al. (2018). Those authors use affect data from the Gallup World Poll and find:
The level of (log) per capita GDP is not significantly related to the day-to-day emotional experience of individuals within countries over time. However, emotional well-being is significantly related to macroeconomic movements over the business cycle
Which indicates we should not expect further global growth will increase happiness. At least, there’s a case to answer.
Third, the OWID point about flat rates of MH is interesting. I’d not seen that and I’ll see if I can find out more.
Fourth, you make this hypothetical point along the lines of “if SWB data told us this, we should disbelieve it” and then you sort of assume it does show us that. But it doesn’t. If you look at the causes and correlates of SWB they tell a pretty intuitive story, for the most part: higher SWB (measured as happiness or life satisfaction) is associated with greater health and wealth, being in a relationship, lower crime, lower suicide rates, less air pollution, etc. The only result that’s puzzling is the Easterlin paradox. But if you think SWB measure get the ‘wrong’ result with Easterlin, that implies the measures aren’t valid, e.g. life satisfaction measures don’t actually measure life satisfaction. But then you need to explain how they get the ‘right’ answers basically everywhere else.
I should add, though, that I think there is an important truth in the concern about whether progress makes us happier. Material progress doesn’t make us happier on its own: it also requires good choices and a healthy psychology.
Technology isn’t inherently good or bad, it is made so by how we use it. Technology generally gives us more power and more choices, and as our choices expand, we need to get better at making choices. And I’m not sure we’re getting better at making choices as fast as our choices are expanding.
The society-level version of this is that technology can be used for evil at a society level too, for instance, when it enables authoritarian governments or destructive wars. And just as at the individual level, I’m not sure our “moral technology” is advancing at the same rate as our physical technology.
So, I do see problems here. I just don’t think that technology is the problem! Technology is good and we need more of it. But we also need to improve our psychological, social, and moral “technology”.
In brief, I think: (1) subjective measures of well-being don’t tell us the full story about whether progress is real, and (2) the measures we have are actually inconsistent, with some showing positive benefits of progress, others flat, and a few slightly negative (but most of them not epidemics).
To elaborate, on the second point first:
The Easterlin Paradox, to my understanding, dissolved over time with more and better data. Steven Pinker addresses this pretty well in Enlightenment Now, which I reviewed here: https://rootsofprogress.org/enlightenment-now
Our World in Data has a section on this, showing that happiness is correlated with income both within and between countries, and over time: https://ourworldindata.org/happiness-and-life-satisfaction#the-link-between-happiness-and-income
Regarding rates of mental illness, the data don’t show a consistent increasing trend, and certainly nothing like the “epidemic” we sometimes hear about:
Mental health and substance abuse disorders, flat since 1990 in many regions: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-with-mental-and-substance-disorders?tab=chart
Global suicide rates are significantly down since 1990: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/suicide-death-rates-by-sex (see also How have suicide rates changed?)
OWID also concludes that there is no loneliness epidemic: https://ourworldindata.org/loneliness-epidemic
But to return to the first point, I think we have to be careful in using metrics like self-reported life satisfaction to evaluate progress.
Emotional responses tend to be short-term and relative. They report a derivative, not an integral. That does not, however, mean that the derivative is all that matters! Rather, it means that our emotions don’t tell us about everything that matters.
In the last few hundred years, we have eradicated smallpox, given women the ability to control their reproduction and choose their careers, liberated most of humanity from back-breaking physical labor and 80+ hour work weeks, opened the world to travel and cultural exchange, and made the combined knowledge, art, and philosophy of the world available to almost everyone. (And that’s just a small sample of the highlights.)
I think these things are self-evidently good. If a subjective measure of well-being doesn’t report that people are happier when they aren’t sentenced to hard labor on a farm, when they aren’t trapped within a few miles of their village, when they and their families don’t starve from famine caused by drought, and when their children don’t die before the age of five from infectious disease… then all that proves is that people have forgotten what those things are like and don’t know how good they have it.
Hello. Thanks for engaging!
First, there are a few different versions of the Easterlin paradox. The most relevant one, for this discussion, is whether economic growth over the long-term (i.e. 10+ years for economists—longer than the business cycle) increases subjective well-being. This version of the paradox holds in quite a few developed nations (see linked paper). That leaves it open what we might find for developing nations.
Second, the only paper I know of that looks globally at SWB over time is Neve et al. (2018). Those authors use affect data from the Gallup World Poll and find:
Which indicates we should not expect further global growth will increase happiness. At least, there’s a case to answer.
Third, the OWID point about flat rates of MH is interesting. I’d not seen that and I’ll see if I can find out more.
Fourth, you make this hypothetical point along the lines of “if SWB data told us this, we should disbelieve it” and then you sort of assume it does show us that. But it doesn’t. If you look at the causes and correlates of SWB they tell a pretty intuitive story, for the most part: higher SWB (measured as happiness or life satisfaction) is associated with greater health and wealth, being in a relationship, lower crime, lower suicide rates, less air pollution, etc. The only result that’s puzzling is the Easterlin paradox. But if you think SWB measure get the ‘wrong’ result with Easterlin, that implies the measures aren’t valid, e.g. life satisfaction measures don’t actually measure life satisfaction. But then you need to explain how they get the ‘right’ answers basically everywhere else.
What’s more, the Easterlin Paradox isn’t that surprising when you try to explain it, e.g. that effect of income on SWB is mostly relative.
I should add, though, that I think there is an important truth in the concern about whether progress makes us happier. Material progress doesn’t make us happier on its own: it also requires good choices and a healthy psychology.
Technology isn’t inherently good or bad, it is made so by how we use it. Technology generally gives us more power and more choices, and as our choices expand, we need to get better at making choices. And I’m not sure we’re getting better at making choices as fast as our choices are expanding.
The society-level version of this is that technology can be used for evil at a society level too, for instance, when it enables authoritarian governments or destructive wars. And just as at the individual level, I’m not sure our “moral technology” is advancing at the same rate as our physical technology.
So, I do see problems here. I just don’t think that technology is the problem! Technology is good and we need more of it. But we also need to improve our psychological, social, and moral “technology”.
More in this dialogue: https://pairagraph.com/dialogue/354c72095d2f42dab92bf42726d785ff