Is Intellect related to happiness?

[Heather]

Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
- Ernest Hemingway, author and journalist, Nobel laureate (1899-1961)


Excepts from an article attempting to explain Hemingway’s thoughts:

Western society is not set up to nurture intelligent children and adults, the way it dotes over athletes and sports figures, especially the outstanding ones. While we have the odd notable personality such as Albert Einstein, we also have many extremely intelligent people working in occupations that are considered among the lowliest, as may be attested by a review of the membership lists of Mensa (the club for the top two percent on intelligence scales).

Adults tend to believe that intelligent kids can deal with anything because they are intellectually superior. This inevitably includes situations where the intelligent kids have neither knowledge nor skills to support their experience. They go through the tough times alone. Adults don't understand that they need help and other kids don't want to associate with kids the social leaders say are outsiders.

Moreover, they tend to see more of the tragedy in the communites and countries they live in, and in the world, than the average person whose primary source of news and information is comedy shows on television. Tragedy is easier to find than compassion, even though compassion likely exists in greater proportion in most communities.

Read the entire article here.

Considering this, one must wonder if part of this unhappiness may, at least in childhood, stem for a lack intellectual stimulation that is on par with that particular child’s intellectual level.

Do you think that people with a higher intelligence than what is considered average are more likely to be unhappy in their lives. Why or why not?

[Autolykos]

I do think that people with higher-than-average intelligence are more likely to be unhappy. Why? It has everything to do with expectations.

One of the greatest abilities of the human mind is to imagine. Aside from pure flights of fancy, imagination also allows us to extrapolate future outcomes. If we're not careful, we'll come to find that those extrapolations have morphed into expectations. Then, if those expectations are not met by reality, we are unhappy.

People with higher-than-average intelligence have a higher-than-average ability to imagine and extrapolate. Thus, they have a higher-than-average ability to create expectations. Since, more often than not, expectations are not met by reality, such people are more likely to be unhappy as a result.

- Rob

[Praxius]

Most who are considdered high in intelligence are sometimes depressed or not as happy as others, sometimes because they are more fixed on the negatives in life that other's don't care as much about and feel there is no hope, etc.

Ignorance is bliss for some.

I feel that the less intelligence you have, the more happy you are...... if you're a goldfish who can only remember the last 30 seconds of your life, all you care about is water to swim in and food....

[rcne]

Intellect is disproportional to happiness. The higher the IQ the more prone to depression and feeling of isolation a person becomes.

During the formative years, a pressure to fit in with your peer group begins. Many gifted children hide their intelligence, or dumb down, just to fit in. Those who don't succumb are classified as the weird kid and are isolated. In each case the gifted kid carries a bit of a "not right feeling".

The school systems strive for mediocrity. They have special classes and programs for the slower learners, but few schools identify and support the gifted.

So what you have are gifted kids falling through the cracks in the educational system, never knowing, much less reaching their potential, trying to fit in to a system that they know is less than what could be.

So, a short answer to your question: the higher the intellect, the less happiness a person experiences.

[phoenix_fire]

Intelligent people tend to be far more conscientious. In a cruel combination of circumstances, insults and other social cruelties hurt more and intellectuals tend to receive these more than most. As the article said, they are often also carrying the emotional burdens of other people, knowing about and having empathy for the plight of others. This is not universally true. I know a really smart guy that's totally selfish. But that may have more to do with his current infatuation than anything else. But back on topic, intelligent people are also conscientious of their own situation and can tend to obsess over their their own misfortunes more, being able to understand their nature to a far greater extent. Those with a decent understanding of human nature and with a certain degree of empathic ability can soon find themselves becoming very cynical and insulated. I have this problem. Right now, those in my peer group are at the age where they start seriously thinking about marriage (I'm talking about a group of mostly single people). Knowing the depths of manipulation, selling out, and betrayal that the other girls almost universally stoop to makes me want to vomit and consequently I don't like being around those of my own gender. And the older women are sitting there trying to arrange marriages among us, largely based on superficial traits. That's so annoying. And then, knowing how superficial most of the guys are (they really try (pretend?) not to be, but ask some of them the last time they dated a girl over a certain weight...) it just makes me angry to be around them sometimes. I know a guy that has a numerical rating system and won't date girls under a certain number...somewhere in the 7 point range. And he actually made the mistake once of telling a girl honestly what number he gave her. And then he made the mistake of telling me (another girl) about it. I've concluded that ignorance truly is bliss.

[phoenix_fire]

Quote by: rcne Intellect is disproportional to happiness. The higher the IQ the more prone to depression and feeling of isolation a person becomes. During the formative years, a pressure to fit in with your peer group begins. Many gifted children hide their intelligence, or dumb down, just to fit in. Those who don't succumb are classified as the weird kid and are isolated. In each case the gifted kid carries a bit of a "not right feeling". The school systems strive for mediocrity. They have special classes and programs for the slower learners, but few schools identify and support the gifted. So what you have are gifted kids falling through the cracks in the educational system, never knowing, much less reaching their potential, trying to fit in to a system that they know is less than what could be. So, a short answer to your question: the higher the intellect, the less happiness a person experiences.

Have you ever heard of "mainstreaming"? This is a great example of what you are saying. It's the prevailing educational philosophy that you should stick every kid, from the kid with the 210 IQ to the one trying to see how many sharp objects he can jam up his nose in the same class. And for some reason, this is supposed to be beneficial to everyone. So the smart ones are bored, and they get the bonus effect of being traumatized by the thug in the back that has suddenly identified them as new targets of bullying. And on top of that, the teacher has the added burden of trying to make a lesson that can work for all of these different people, which is pretty much impossible. I can attest that I really liked the "gifted and talented" and AP programs throughout school because, though other smart kids still bullied the smartest kid in the class, at least they only used verbal abuse. In the few classes that I had to take like health, some of those kids were downright scary. At least three were in the local gang, and there'd be a few trading drugs (although I'd only hear about that kind of thing later). But yeah. I disagree with the idea fundamentally.

[Athena]

My IQ doesn't test that high, but I am intellectual, and for me that means social isolation. I am very thankful for the Internet because it enables me to access information and get some mental stimulation in discussions. Before this wonderful invention I was intellectually starved, with no one to write to but myself. We need the thinking of others to develop our own thoughts. But if all we have in our lives is people who are not informed and don't care to become informed, it is intellectual starvation. And might I say, these people seem to attack intellectual people, because they feel offended or threatened by them.

What Pheonix-fire writes of is pretty painful. I disliked being left with these bullying kids when I was left in a day care. I think they were happier than me, but then the physical activity is what they wanted. No was reading books and sharing ideas of doing experiements such as making adding vingar to soda.

People who have jobs that demand thinking and lead to association with others to share the thinking with will have the benefit of stimulating their minds and learning. I think they will be happier than say the full time wife and mother, who has no one to converse with, but her children and nieghbors who care nothing about the world beyond their own backyards. So how happy we are, depends much on the situation we are in.

Finally, philosophy can be very important to happiness. We can learn to be happy. If kids have parents who are good at teaching how to be happy, and are meeting the child's needs, I think this one will grow up happy. On the other hand, if the child's parents do not relate well to the child, and s/he feels too different from others in the family, the child is apt to be unhappy. It isn't pleasant to feel like one doesn't fit in, and it is awful to have a negative reaction when we express ourselves. Like when a parent thinks being popular is more important than reading and enjoying a good book.

[castille]

Quote by: Athena but I am intellectual, and for me that means social isolation.

Out of curiosity, why do so many "intellectuals" view themselves as isolated from society?

I think that kind of attitude tends to be the sole reason why many intellectuals find themselves alone.

Like when a parent thinks being popular is more important than reading and enjoying a good book.

Both are just as important. Someone who spends their whole day sitting in a dark basement reading is not healthy, physically and psychologically.

Finally, philosophy can be very important to happiness

I don't like philosophy, but I'm pretty happy. In fact, my happiest moments are also my least intellectual moments.

[CoffeeSaint]

I don't know, folks. I'm pretty intellectual, as in introverted and interested in learning and knowledge and philosophy and literature and such; I am also fairly smart. And, in addition to that, I'm generally quite happy. My neighbor, as far as I can tell (we don't hang out) is often not very happy: he seems pretty sullen, pretty bored, and he does the same thing over and over, most notably mowing his lawn and washing his cars. I know he takes pride in the end result, but since I don't see him singing a happy song as he mows, I can't think the actual work is pleasurable -- so overall, I doubt he's very laden with bliss.

But me? Sure, I hate my job a lot of the time, and I do suffer from some bouts of angst and ruined expectations and cynicism and such. But at the same time, my job gives me endless opportunities to amuse myself, usually at my students' expense; it also makes me feel like I'm occasionally doing something important. and fulfilling. I love my wife and my dog, and they are the only family I want or need, at least for now. I'm proud of my accomplishments, and hopeful that the future holds even brighter things for me.

And I enjoy what I do in my free time. I like coming on this forum and trading both ideas and witty repartee with all of you. I like rolling my eyes at what some of you say, and I like shaking my head in wonder at others. Sure, the state of the world depresses me, but I'm smart enough to realize that my lifetime will not seriously affect things, and thus neither will external forces affect my life except as I allow them to. I do what I can and then I ignore it.

I don't think I'm a terrible freak. I think most of you are happier than you think you are, especially in comparison to non-intellectual people. You just think too much about the bad stuff. So look on the bright side: at least you're smarter than my neighbor.

[Jack]

I don't think Dorothy enjoyed Oz nearly as much after she'd seen behind the curtain.

[Osborn F Enready]

When did Dorothy talk about me? That kiss and teller!

I think intelligent people are more likely to be unhappy, and agree with the argument about expectations by Autolykos, and part of the breakdown there by RCNE.

[Slevin57]

I think intelligent people are more likely to analyze themselves and end up with a less than desirable result.

Most people don't critique themselves with positive comments. They critique themselves with negative comments. I consider myself a realist, positive comments don't help me. Negative/neutral comments about myself enable me to fix things I perceive as wrong about me.

I would say I'm in a state just before happiness most of the time. I don't really think this is a bad thing. It enables me to be efficient, organized and when necessary lead. People think just because I'm not hoping around with a smile in my face and a song in my heart, I must be angry and depressed.

I'm depressed for different reasons

They say ignorance is bliss, and it really is. How can you be sad if the thought just doesn't' occur to you?

You go through life with required reading and multiple choice tests. You get a 4.0, but don't have the ability to think.

That's probably what makes me cynical. I know people that are book smart, but the thought doesn't occur to them to apply it in life. They leave the knowledge in the classroom and spend there time buying skateboard accessories instead.

[Jack]

When did Dorothy talk about me? That kiss and teller!

I heard it from Penn and Teller.
Conversations on topics like this remind me of their "Bullshit" series. It also makes me think of a line from one of my all-time favorite books, "The Outsider" by Colin Wilson. In describing the classic outsider personality, Wilson sums up by saying, "they're those who have seen too much too deeply." There is a darkness at the heart of reality. Some people aren't comfortable with that and seek to ignore it or explain it away.

[phoenix_fire]

Heck. I still believe in redemption and eternal Heaven and divine purpose and a loving God, but I still see things as being very dark. Perhaps I'm too horizontally focused these days. But then again. The Bible was never really big on sunshine and daisies and bunnies and guys that don't utterly depress you. This is all making me feel somewhat emo.

[StrongHeartsWin]

In general, I would say that the more intellectual, intelligent, and artistic a person is, the more depressed they would tend to be. Instrospection and self examination could bring one to dwell on failures or roads not taken.

Look at some of the great poets and other artists. Lots of depression there.

Interesting thread.

[iahag]

Actually, reading this thread really struck me. I am the only intellectual in my family (as far as maths/physics/philosophy/computing/politics goes) and the fact is that I cannot stand being in my families house for no more than 2 days. Its not that I dont love my family, its just that I am completely indifferent to all of them. None of them understand me and it makes me sick that they constantly try to read me. My mother has done her best to bring me up happy but fact is she was attempting the impossible. Its only now in my first year at university do I really feel like I mildly fit in to the social scene. Never before have I felt like this. It is the reason I left my house from easter vacation 2 weeks early to return to a set of flats completely empty to do nothing but study. I am very lonely in my hometown and much of the world is indifferent to I. I have come to accept that there are just some people (well actually, I feel like its most people) who I will never relate to and the most comfortable thing to do is just not associate with them. This may not seem morally correct, but I see no other course of action. Anything else is just obligating ones self out of some self righteous moral principle to do that which you wouldnt have done in the first place.

In my previous educational establishment, I actually felt like if you were an intellectual then you were supposed to be quiet - kind of like a trade off if you will. The many people I have met here made me think otherwise. I feel sorry for my little cousin, who is very much like me, simply because he is going to go through the same thing. Hopefully it wont be so bad in a grammar school.

[iclaudius]

This kind of reminds me of that misconception that everyone seems to have about geniuses being statistically more likely to suffer from mental illness (ie schizophrenia, chronic depression (chemical), bipolar, etc.). For the record, that is horrendously untrue; statistically speaking, people with genius IQ ratings are not only less sick, but that also tend to be better in virtually every category than us average folk. For example, they're generally more happy, less bothered, harder working, more productive, more successful, they eat healthier, they are less obese, they hold jobs for longer, they have more satisfying personal relationships, they are more satisified with their lives.... although admittedly not in that specific combination. As far as I can tell, there is no evidence of observable correlation between intelligence and unhappiness, if for no reason other than the fact that the human race has yet to provide a reliable standard for the determination and/or measurement of such a thing in the first place. If you don't know what it is, how can you tell if people who have it are unhappy? Answer: you can't.

First, let's get something out of the way: so-called "intelligence testing" (I'm looking at you, IQ test) is grossly mislabeled and almost universally misunderstood, even by so-called experts. In the first place, all variations of this monstrosity presuppose to some extent that potential ability to learn and actualized ability to learn are the same things, when they are clearly not. That's because, in order to test at all, you have to test using concepts that have been introduced outside of the test. (Reading instructions, for example.) In addition, these tests do not account for the various important parts of learning and learning development; a person's learning potential is not the same in childhood and adulthood, or even from day to day. Emotions factor in, too -- some people just suck at taking tests, for example. Because these tests have no way of differentiating actual intelligence from contextual hangups (or advantages), they just end up measuring a vague comparative propensity to do something a certain way (and very loosely indicate how successful that particular person will be in life). There are entire books written by reputable social scientists on why these tests are unreliable for measureing intelligence -- if you don't want to take my word for it, I would suggest picking any number of these up. IQ tests aren't without merit, but they definitely shouldn't be called IQ tests.

The other thing I want to address is this: introspective != intelligent. Plenty of amazing scientists, artists, inventors, etc. are merely curious people. True, many are constantly absurdly brilliant, but most are not Isaac Newton. Measuring intelligence by behavior (ie "smart things," like reading or doing math) is just stupid. Not all people who are smart are intelligent, and not all people who are intelligent are smart. It's important to make that distinction, because when people complain about introspectiveness causing unhappiness, it's not the same as saying intelligence causes unhappiness. On that note, I see no reason to link negativeness and reality, or intelligence and pessimism. In spite of what Mrs. Crabtree told you in 4th grade, things are not half-full or half-empty... they are half and half. Facts and truths in this universe are neutral; people choose to interpret them as "depressing" or "bad," and that choice differentiates the intelligent from the simply unhappy. If you see everything in a bad light and are intelligent, it isn't because you're intelligent, it's because you are unhappy. That I am an introspective person does not mean that I am also unhappy, or that I see things in a negative light. I can personally attest to that, because I am introspective and very happy.

Furthermore, I see a good many of us have taken the liberty of making the mental leap between "intelligent people are unhappy" and "intelligence makes you unhappy." That's a huge fallacy. (For the record, those of you who have not made this mental leap, but have not said what I am saying are equally in the wrong; if we're debating intelligent people being unhappy without establishing causation, we are not debating anything, being that there are unhappy people in all forms: religious, gay, intelligent, black, short, Asian, ugly, lower-class, paraplegic, you name it...) It's true that human nature by and large is to want to be accepted, and it's true that high intelligence can put you in a fringe group that could lead to you being outcast, but that DOES NOT mean that intelligence itself is to blame. If you are unhappy because "normal" people have discarded you, then you are unhappy because you have been discarded, and not because you are smart. Do you think the problem would go away if you were not intelligent? If you answered "yes," go sit in the corner; the only thing that would change is the symptom of the problem would be gone. You would still be dependent upon other people for your own emotional support, and would have that root of self-doubt stuck inside you. I see no reason to accept that something in common with all intelligent people causes them to be unhappy, or at least moreso than other people.

In short, the real question is, "who isn't unhappy?" Many people cover it up by living unexamined, overly-emotional lives. Many people examine things obsessively to find some sort of truth. We all have ways of coping, and in the end, intelligent people are no worse off than any other type of person. In the real world everyone struggles with the same things. This is guaranteed by the fact that everyone has the capability to change: there is always the potential that your life will be uprooted and you will be forced to do some deep psychological sorting out; the fact that it never comes to be does not mean that there are no circumstances under which you would be unhappy. It is specifically because you have the capability to be sad that you will never, ever be 100% purely happy. The trick is to put it all into perspective.

[CoffeeSaint]

Quote by: iclaudius This kind of reminds me of that misconception that everyone seems to have about geniuses being statistically more likely to suffer from mental illness (ie schizophrenia, chronic depression (chemical), bipolar, etc.). For the record, that is horrendously untrue; statistically speaking, people with genius IQ ratings are not only less sick, but that also tend to be better in virtually every category than us average folk. For example, they're generally more happy, less bothered, harder working, more productive, more successful, they eat healthier, they are less obese, they hold jobs for longer, they have more satisfying personal relationships, they are more satisified with their lives.... although admittedly not in that specific combination. As far as I can tell, there is no evidence of observable correlation between intelligence and unhappiness, if for no reason other than the fact that the human race has yet to provide a reliable standard for the determination and/or measurement of such a thing in the first place. If you don't know what it is, how can you tell if people who have it are unhappy? Answer: you can't. First, let's get something out of the way: so-called "intelligence testing" (I'm looking at you, IQ test) is grossly mislabeled and almost universally misunderstood, even by so-called experts. In the first place, all variations of this monstrosity presuppose to some extent that potential ability to learn and actualized ability to learn are the same things, when they are clearly not. That's because, in order to test at all, you have to test using concepts that have been introduced outside of the test. (Reading instructions, for example.) In addition, these tests do not account for the various important parts of learning and learning development; a person's learning potential is not the same in childhood and adulthood, or even from day to day. Emotions factor in, too -- some people just suck at taking tests, for example. Because these tests have no way of differentiating actual intelligence from contextual hangups (or advantages), they just end up measuring a vague comparative propensity to do something a certain way (and very loosely indicate how successful that particular person will be in life). There are entire books written by reputable social scientists on why these tests are unreliable for measureing intelligence -- if you don't want to take my word for it, I would suggest picking any number of these up. IQ tests aren't without merit, but they definitely shouldn't be called IQ tests. The other thing I want to address is this: introspective != intelligent. Plenty of amazing scientists, artists, inventors, etc. are merely curious people. True, many are constantly absurdly brilliant, but most are not Isaac Newton. Measuring intelligence by behavior (ie "smart things," like reading or doing math) is just stupid. Not all people who are smart are intelligent, and not all people who are intelligent are smart. It's important to make that distinction, because when people complain about introspectiveness causing unhappiness, it's not the same as saying intelligence causes unhappiness. On that note, I see no reason to link negativeness and reality, or intelligence and pessimism. In spite of what Mrs. Crabtree told you in 4th grade, things are not half-full or half-empty... they are half and half. Facts and truths in this universe are neutral; people choose to interpret them as "depressing" or "bad," and that choice differentiates the intelligent from the simply unhappy. If you see everything in a bad light and are intelligent, it isn't because you're intelligent, it's because you are unhappy. That I am an introspective person does not mean that I am also unhappy, or that I see things in a negative light. I can personally attest to that, because I am introspective and very happy. Furthermore, I see a good many of us have taken the liberty of making the mental leap between "intelligent people are unhappy" and "intelligence makes you unhappy." That's a huge fallacy. (For the record, those of you who have not made this mental leap, but have not said what I am saying are equally in the wrong; if we're debating intelligent people being unhappy without establishing causation, we are not debating anything, being that there are unhappy people in all forms: religious, gay, intelligent, black, short, Asian, ugly, lower-class, paraplegic, you name it...) It's true that human nature by and large is to want to be accepted, and it's true that high intelligence can put you in a fringe group that could lead to you being outcast, but that DOES NOT mean that intelligence itself is to blame. If you are unhappy because "normal" people have discarded you, then you are unhappy because you have been discarded, and not because you are smart. Do you think the problem would go away if you were not intelligent? If you answered "yes," go sit in the corner; the only thing that would change is the symptom of the problem would be gone. You would still be dependent upon other people for your own emotional support, and would have that root of self-doubt stuck inside you. I see no reason to accept that something in common with all intelligent people causes them to be unhappy, or at least moreso than other people. In short, the real question is, "who isn't unhappy?" Many people cover it up by living unexamined, overly-emotional lives. Many people examine things obsessively to find some sort of truth. We all have ways of coping, and in the end, intelligent people are no worse off than any other type of person. In the real world everyone struggles with the same things. This is guaranteed by the fact that everyone has the capability to change: there is always the potential that your life will be uprooted and you will be forced to do some deep psychological sorting out; the fact that it never comes to be does not mean that there are no circumstances under which you would be unhappy. It is specifically because you have the capability to be sad that you will never, ever be 100% purely happy. The trick is to put it all into perspective.

Will you be my friend?

:)

[iclaudius]

oooooh... if I have to... :)

[Heather]

I think everyone has brought some interesting perspectives to the table here. Personally, I think one must understand, that happiness can be a product of environment, but not necessarily so. As we all well know, one can have a genetic predisposition towards depression as well. Considering this, one must question the environmental factors that intellectual people face, both in childhood as well has into adulthood. I think for most, this alone can become and encumbersome factor to achieving happiness. I also question at what age some of these people who are "brighter" than average realize that there is nothing wrong with this. I think it may be very easy for an intelligent child, growing into an intelligent adult to not realize why they're different from those around them, and ultimately, blame themselves for not fitting, for not being comfortable in a society, an environment, etc., where others seem to feel at home.

I have noticed a lot of comments about IQ as well. While IQ was and can measure a persons aptitude for learning, it can not be the only factor to consider when speaking of someone's intelligence level. I think an IQ does have some value, however, is only one small part of a larger piece.