Summary of "The Conquest of Happiness" by Bertrand Russell

The Conquest of Happiness by Bertrand Russell is a fantastic book that was published in 1930. True to its name, it discusses the concept and nature of happiness, and is split into two sections: the causes of unhappiness and ways to be happier. A great book, The Conquest of Happiness should be required reading for all humans.

The introduction to the book was written in 2012 by Daniel C. Dennett, a professor and philosopher at Tufts University. Dennett describes the two stereotypes of philosophers. The first envisions the philosopher as a highly sophisticated academic like Immanuel Kant who focuses on “questions so removed from everyday concerns that their answers could matter only to other philosophers, such as … ‘Is time an illusion?’” (9). While the first type of philosopher is usually involved in academic circles, the second kind can be found out in public, as the second stereotype involves philosophers who are extremely wise and whose advice should be taken by all sensible individuals. Dennett describes that Socrates was the embodiment of both stereotypes, as he was sentenced to death for teaching the youth everyday critical thinking, though his manner of questioning would lead to the formation of complex ideas that would be studied in soporific detail by those living centuries or even millennia after him. Aside from Socrates, there was Bertrand Russell. Dennett describes Russell’s wide range of expertise: “his technical work in logic created the field of mathematical logic (laying the foundations on which Alan Turing and others created the computer) and posed the central issues that have pre-occupied analytic philosophers in universities ever since. His three-volume work with Alfred North Whitehead, Principia Mathematica, consists of hundreds of pages of formal proofs designed to establish all of mathematics on a firm logical foundation, and is one of the most unreadable great books ever written. But he was also a passionate antiwar activist … who went to prison during World War I for his pacifism, was deeply critical of Communism (since a meeting with Lenin in 1920, when he visited Russia to investigate the revolution), supported the war against Hitler, an evil greater than war itself, but later was an ardent antinuclear polemicist and outspoken critic of the Vietnam War. His appointment to a professorship at City College of New York was reversed by the college administration, which declared him ‘morally unfit’ because of his boldly expressed views on sexual morality.” (10). Dennet then hilariously adds that although Bertrand Russell was never sentenced to drink a cup of hemlock like Socrates, it is likely, given his intellectual and moral honesty, that he would have done so in certain situations to protest the corrupt policies put in place by foolish people. If one is to summarize Russell, an apt summary will be that he was a genius of the highest degree, given all his interests, the depth of his knowledge, and the extent of his concern for others. This is seen in his publication history, as he published more than a book a year for over seventy years, sometimes publishing three or four in a single year. Indeed, The Conquest of Happiness was published alongside a few other writings in the same year. Dennett acknowledges that some of Russell’s writing may seem sexist or racist, though it should be remembered that Russell in his day was extremely progressive, as he championed women’s education, contraception, sexual liberalism, liberal democracy, and a humane morality in a time where there were hordes of people who desired and clamored for the opposites (ex. the continued repression of women, a ban on birth control that would lead to overpopulation, fascism, and communism). Thus, Russell should not be viewed negatively for his occasional biased statement, for in his time virtually everyone else said and, more importantly, did much worse things. Dennett masterfully concludes that we can learn from this instance the development and flexibility of morality: like how we view the past, future generations will view the present generation as excellent in some regards and backward in others. Dennett humorously alleges that Russell’s aristocratic background makes him a little clueless about the lives of regular people. For instance, his statement that claimed that those born into privileged situations are prone towards creativity is quite inaccurate, for “In addition to Lord Russell, how many can we count? Aside from Lord Byron’s brilliant daughter Ada, Countess Lovelace (who was the first to articulate the concept of a computer program in her work with Charles Babbage), and a few landed aristocrats who investigated novel methods of farming, the field seems rather deserted.” (12). Dennett ends his conclusion by rightfully describing Russell’s works as classics that hold much wisdom, making them relevant in today’s atmosphere.

Russell begins his book with a preface in which he sets in stone that his book is for regular people and that it includes no complex philosophical system, making it not for intellectual highbrows to analyze. Russell states that he hopes his book will allow regular people suffering from unhappiness to enjoy happier lives. Russell details that while animals are happy when their physical needs are met, humans (who are technically animals, though more developed in certain fields) require more than bare necessities to enjoy a good mood. Russell states that humans could be much happier than they currently are, as unhappiness can be spotted virtually anywhere, even in supposedly happy settings like parties and clubs. Russell attributes unhappiness to the existing social system as well as individual psychology: both add on to each other’s effects in a vicious cycle. When it comes to the social system, happiness can be dramatically increased if education systems based on kindness, learning, and rationality are established and war is abolished. Poverty should also be ended as soon as possible, though Russell notes that even wealthy people are frequently unhappy. Furthermore, since there is no sign that dramatic improvements will come soon, Russell calls for individuals to act on their own volition, for a better world won’t be handed to everyone to enjoy. Russell clarifies that when it comes to his book, it is not supposed to help people deal with tragedies. Instead, it tries to address the more mundane ills people feel: “In discussing this … I shall confine my attention to those who are not subject to any extreme cause of outward misery. I shall assume a sufficient income to secure food and shelter, sufficient health to make ordinary bodily activities possible. I shall not consider the great catastrophes, such as loss of all one’s children, or public disgrace. There are things to be said about such matters, and they are important things, but they belong to a different order from the things that I wish to say. My purpose is to suggest a cure for the ordinary day-to-day unhappiness from which most people in civilized countries suffer, and which is all the more unbearable because, having no obvious external cause, it appears inescapable. I believe this unhappiness to be very largely due to mistaken views of the world, mistaken ethics, mistaken habits of life, leading to destruction of that natural zest and appetite for possible things upon which all happiness, whether of men or animals, ultimately depends.” (23-4). Russell affirms that people can improve their fates, for many causes of unhappiness can be treated with some degree of effort. Russell provides himself as an example: when he was a young child and teenager, he was despondent and very depressed, as he grew up isolated and was an orphan. He says that he hated living and was “continually on the verge of suicide, from which, however, I was restrained by the desire to know more mathematics. Now, on the contrary, I enjoy life; I might almost say that with every year that passes I enjoy it more. This is due partly to having discovered what were the things that I most desired, and having gradually acquired many of these things. Partly it is due to having successfully dismissed certain objects of desire … as essentially unattainable. But very largely it is due to a diminishing preoccupation with myself.” (24). That is, Russell was given a relatively traditional Christian education in which he was taught that he was guilty of sinning and should focus on repentance and self-improvement. Russell eventually realized that self-absorption is a major cause of unhappiness, as when people believe they are all that matters, they are quick to fall into a pit of despair when things go awry. Consequently, those suffering from too much egoism and self-focus will do well to focus on external things, especially friendship, hobbies, and the performance of good deeds. Russell acknowledges that while it’s true that engaging in external things can lead to sorrow, seeing that there is always a chance things will go wrong, these issues do not in themselves make life unworthy of being experienced, a clear contrast to an existence focused only on oneself. Furthermore, getting involved in certain activities is likely to increase enthusiasm, which will keep ennui away and will increase one’s zest. “External discipline is the only road to happiness for those unfortunates whose self-absorption is too profound to be cured in any other way.” (25).

Russell says there are three types of self-absorbed people: the sinner, the narcissist, and the megalomaniac. The sinner is a person who is utterly obsessed with the notion that they have done something that is morally abominable, and this causes them to indulge in self-hatred and to degrade themselves while begging for forgiveness from an authoritarian figure, be it an elder, a religious authority, or an imaginary deity. Unfortunately, many have the mentality of sinners due to being indoctrinated in absurd beliefs and doctrines from infancy, as what children are taught has been demonstrated to affect them for the rest of their lives. This makes life harder to enjoy for many people, as even when they indulge in relatively harmless pleasures, their joy is decreased due to an unconscious belief that what they are doing is wrong. Narcissists have the opposite mentality of the sinner, as they admire themselves greatly. While it is perfectly fine for people to have some degree of self-love, an extreme amount of it is obnoxious to view and experience. For instance, rich people may desire only for others to admire and envy them: when they are sure some individual has come to do so, they will stop paying attention to them. Narcissists, despite being quite arrogant, aren’t genuinely happy, for every human being has, even in a minuscule form, the desire to help others and to get involved in their community: even if a person becomes convinced of their superiority, they will still feel empty. Megalomaniacs, as described by Russell, include “many lunatics and most of the great men in history.” (28). Russell writes that megalomaniacs are frequently control freaks and are utterly obsessed with attaining ever greater power due to being excessively humiliated in prior experiences: they wish to prove to others that they are to be feared and not mocked. Russell concludes that “There is no ultimate satisfaction in the cultivation of one element of human nature at the expense of all the others, nor in viewing all the world as raw material for the magnificence of one’s own ego.” (29). Russell further describes that although there is a multitude of factors leading to unhappiness, it can be noted with a large degree of accuracy that unhappy people are usually those who have been deprived a certain joy, leading to them becoming intemperate in another in an attempt to compensate for what they have missed. Russell writes that people who have felt their hopes and dreams being severely crushed sometimes turn to hedonism, for they try to make life easier to stand “by becoming less alive. Drunkenness, for example, is temporary suicide: the happiness that it brings is merely negative, a momentary cessation of unhappiness. The narcissist and the megalomaniac believe that happiness is possible, though they may adopt mistaken means of achieving it; but the man who seeks intoxication, in whatever form, has given up hope except in oblivion. In his case, the first thing to be done is to persuade him that happiness is desirable.” (30). A prominent kind of unhappiness is that of the Byronic category: academically educated but people inexperienced in practical affairs sometimes erroneously believe that the more knowledge one accumulates, the less happy one’ll be. After their many studies and readings, they will become disillusioned with life, though they’ll be proud of the fact, for they feel that is the true insignia of an educated human being. Russell points out that many intelligent people are happy at the same time, and people who say they are unhappy due to the nature of reality are actually “putting the cart before the horse: the truth is that they are unhappy for some reason of which they are not aware, and this unhappiness leads them to dwell upon the less agreeable characteristics of the world in which they live.” (32). Russell states that while certain pessimists are intelligent people, their beliefs are a direct result of not striving for necessities, as it takes much time and deliberation in sound and stable circumstances to reach the declaration from Ecclesiastes that it is better not to be born than to exist, seeing all the evil in reality (which is quite accurate in certain regards, for there is much malevolence in the modern world). Russell puts it himself, “The feeling [of pessimism] is one born of a too easy satisfaction of natural needs. The human animal, like others, is adapted to a certain amount of struggle for life, and when by means of great wealth homo sapiens can gratify all his whims without effort, the mere absence of effort from his life removes an essential ingredient of happiness. The man who acquires easily things for which he feels only a very moderate desire concludes that the attainment of desire does not bring happiness. If he is of a philosophic disposition, he concludes that human life is essentially wretched, since the man who has all he wants is still unhappy. He forgets that to be without some of the things you want is an indispensable part of happiness.” (34). Russell details that those who are pessimistic frequently believe that there is no such thing as improvement and that life is nothing but a Sisyphean punishment. However, he affirms that many new inventions have benefited the lives of existing people. Overall, it can be said with relative conviction that the belief that the present is only a means to an end (the future) is a very unhealthy mindset, for the present is all that people have. Russell writes, “There can be no value in the whole unless there is value in the parts … I live and have my day, my son succeeds me and has his day, his son in turn succeeds him. What is there in all this to make a tragedy about? On the contrary, if I lived forever the joys of life would inevitably in the end lose their savor. As it is, they remain perennially fresh … If therefore moods were to be decided by reason, there would be quite as much reason for cheerfulness as for despair.” (37).

Russell states that past beliefs like Stoicism and Christianity that supposed that humans can by their effort reach an ideal are quite unrealistic, for humans are social creatures that generally spend time with others to reach a certain goal. Russell mentions that some people turn to Byronic unhappiness for comfort when the world changes too quickly for their liking, which is in and of itself nonsensical. Russell states his opinion that it is not right for a few people to feel tormented by what they suppose to be their acute knowledge of the worthlessness of life while most people engage in intense labor for the sake of the livelihoods of all in the community. Thus, Russell mandates, “Literary coteries have no vital contact with the life of the community, and such contact is necessary if men’s feelings are to have the seriousness and depth within which both tragedy and true happiness proceed. To all the talented young men who wander about feeling that there is nothing in the world for them to do, I should say: ‘Give up trying to write, and, instead, try not to write. Go out into the world; become a pirate, a king in Borneo, a laborer in Soviet Russia; give yourself an existence in which the satisfaction of elementary physical needs will occupy almost all your energies.’ … I believe that after some years of such an existence, the ex-intellectual will find that in spite of his efforts he can no longer refrain from writing, and when this time comes his writing will not seem to him futile.” (46). Aside from Byronic unhappiness, another factor that causes unhappiness is competition. While competition, like most things, can lead to great benefits for all parties when pursued in moderation, hyper-competitive environments lead people to become exhausted as well as making them more ruthless and dissatisfied: even if their lives are good in regards to their self-actualization, likely, they won’t feel proud of themselves due to their perception that others are better than them in certain fields. This is especially applicable in the way people are employed in most areas, for people are told to work for the sake of working and to do so prolifically, which, over long periods, drains them emotionally and renders them unhappy due to a huge imbalance when it comes to work and leisure. Thus excessive competition can prove detrimental to the people involved: “Competition considered as the main thing in life is too grim, too tenacious, too much a matter of taut muscles and intent will … [competition] must produce nervous fatigue, various phenomena of escape, a pursuit of pleasures as tense and as difficult as work (since relaxing has become impossible), and in the end a disappearance of the stock through sterility … The kind of leisure which is quiet and restoring to the nerves comes to be felt boring. There is bound to be a continual acceleration of which the natural termination would be drugs and collapse. The cure for this lies in admitting the part of sane and quiet enjoyment in a balanced ideal of life.” (56). Boredom is another factor that works against happiness, and it has been with humanity to a large degree ever since the agricultural revolution, as people had to quell their natural impulses and zest for life once they were forced to work certain jobs for the benefit of society. While people in the modern era have infinitely more forms of entertainment than people in the past, boredom is still a significant factor to take into account. Russell explains that boredom is not always a bad thing, as it doesn’t harm people when it occasionally strikes, but it should be remembered that boredom can encourage undesirable behavior, for it can be so tormenting that people will wish to do bad things rather than nothing at all. “Wars, pogroms, and persecutions have all been part of the flight from boredom; even quarrels with neighbors have been found better than nothing. Boredom is therefore a vital problem for the moralist, since at least half the sins of mankind are caused by the fear of it.” (61). Russell defines good boredom as one in which people have time to relax and to perform introspection while undesirable boredom is filled with addictive pleasures and a desire to obtain something which may be outside one’s reach. Russell agrees that excitement is desirable, though it shouldn’t be taken to extremes: too much leads to tolerance and exhaustion while too little leads to continuous cravings, obsessions, and even perversions (especially when it comes to sexuality).

Along with boredom, a quiet, peaceful life is not to be feared, as it can include much self-awareness and quality. For instance, when one looks at famed books that have introduced innovative and powerful ideas, it will be quite simple to find boring parts within them. When it comes to people who have changed the world, many of them lived consistent, structured, yet satisfying lives: “Socrates … must have derived considerable satisfaction from his conversations while the hemlock was taking effect, but most of his life he lived quietly with Xanthippe, taking a constitutional in the afternoon, and perhaps meeting a few friends by the way. Kant is said never to have been more than ten miles from Könisberg in all his life. Darwin, after going round the world, spent the whole of the rest of his life in his own house. Marx, after stirring up a few revolutions, decided to spend the remainder of his days in the British Museum … No great achievement is possible without persistent work, so absorbing and so difficult that little energy is left over for the more strenuous kinds of amusement, except such as serve to recuperate physical energy during holidays, of which Alpine climbing may serve as the best example.” (63). Russell recommends that young people are educated on how to endure a certain degree of monotony, as those incapable of remaining still for long are likely to have trouble developing as people and doing worthwhile work. Russell then encourages people to take time to connect with the natural world (although, to be accurate, humans are technically still a part of nature due to our originating from it: we just have a cognitive bias that states that nature is the opposite of human-made structures, though our structures are, in a sense, just as much a formation of nature as the hives of bees the dams of beavers): “Many pleasures … have in them no element of this contact with Earth. Such pleasures … leave a man feeling dusty and dissatisfied, hungry for he knows not what … Those, on the other hand, that bring us into contact with the life of the Earth have something in them profoundly satisfying; when they cease, the happiness that they have brought remains, although their intensity while they existed may have been less than that of more exciting dissipations.” (65). Russell provides an anecdote in which a two-year-old child was filled with joy to see a countryside with recently fallen snow. This clearly explains why the mental health of many living in the city is poor: they are divorced from natural scenery, which worsens their moods and could make them feel lost and confused. Russell ends his discussion on boredom with the following sentence: “A happy life must be to a great extent a quiet life, for it is only in an atmosphere of quiet that true joy can live.” (66).

Russell moves on to discuss fatigue. While physical fatigue to a moderate degree can make people happier by encouraging better sleep and good appetite, in its extreme forms, which were prevalent in the past, it can maim and even kill people: “Peasant women in all but the most advanced communities are old at thirty, worn out with excessive toil. Children in the early days of industrialism were stunted in their growth and frequently killed by overwork in early years … Physical labor carried beyond a certain point is atrocious torture, and it has very frequently been carried so far as to make life all but unbearable.” (67). Fortunately, extreme physical fatigue nowadays has virtually gone extinct in many countries, though in its place has come nervous fatigue, which is a direct result of overwork and subsequent burnout. The working life of the modern human could involve much planning, noise, and hassle, not-mentioning office politics. Furthermore, a major contributing factor to nervous fatigue is the xenophobic nature of humans: for most of human history people lived in small communities, and people would examine others separately for the sake of safety. However, in the modern age, “This instinct has to be inhibited by those who travel in the subway in the rush hour, and the result of inhibiting it is that they feel a general diffused rage against all the strangers with whom they are brought into this involuntary contact.” (68). Yet another factor that leads to frayed nerves and a dysfunctional mind is the need to appear courteous to one’s boss and coworkers, even if they are acting insolently and foolishly. Even wealthy people may suffer from this, as those that are high up the corporate ladder usually have gone through years of intense competition which has left them with undesirable characteristics, and their offspring, who don’t have to work, will feel inclined to alleviate their boredom by engaging in destructive, masochistic behaviors like excessive gambling and careless hedonism, leaving them just as mentally weary as their parents. For regular people, nervous fatigue lies in worry, as there is a wide multitude of things to worry about in one’s job. Russell concludes that a person’s mind should be disciplined and orderly, as this will save them mental energy, which will enable them to deal with large problems, not small to moderate ones that are beyond one’s control to act: “It is amazing how much both happiness and efficiency can be increased by the cultivation of an orderly mind, which thinks about a matter adequately at the right time rather than inadequately at all times. When a difficult or worrying decision has to be reached, as soon as all the data are available, give the matter your best thought and make your decision; having made the decision, do not revise it unless some new fact comes to your knowledge. Nothing is so exhausting as indecision, and nothing is so futile.” (70). Russell then provides another personal anecdote: a great way people can decrease their anxiety is to realize how trivial and unimportant the things they fear are. When Russell first gave speeches to audiences, he was terrified he would underperform, which only became a self-fulfilling prophecy. However, Russell eventually reminded himself that it didn't matter how he gave his speeches, for “the universe would remain much the same in either case. I found that the less I cared whether I spoke well or badly, the less badly I spoke, and gradually the nervous strain diminished almost to vanishing point … Our doings are not so important as we naturally suppose; our successes and failures do not after all matter very much. Even great sorrows can be survived; troubles which seem as if they must put an end to happiness for life, fade with the lapse of time until it becomes almost impossible to remember their poignancy … The man who can center his thoughts and hopes upon something transcending self can find a certain peace in the ordinary troubles of life which is impossible to the pure egoist.” (71). Russell coined the term “hygiene of the nerves” or “mental discipline” for his previous descriptions and makes clear that while physical fatigue can be dealt with via sleep, mental fatigue incites anxiety that makes it all the more difficult to take a break. Russell brilliantly portrays, “The more tired a man becomes, the more impossible he finds it to stop. One of the symptoms of approaching nervous breakdown is the belief that one’s work is terribly important and that to take a holiday would bring all kinds of disaster. If I were a medical man, I should prescribe a holiday to any patient who considered his work important. The nervous breakdown which appears to be produced by the work is, in fact, in every case that I have ever known of personally produced by some emotional trouble from which the patient attempts to escape by means of his work. He is loath to give up his work because, if he does so, he will no longer have anything to distract him from the thoughts of his misfortune, whatever it may be … In every case it is the emotional trouble, not the work, that causes the breakdown.” (73).

Russell acknowledges that although conscious effort can be directed towards dealing with worry, there is still the unconscious to deal with. Unconscious thoughts are usually automatically generated to help people cope with a reality they may have trouble processing, and Russell encourages people to deal with this issue by imagining the very worst thing that can happen if things are to go utterly wrong, and then to tell themselves that even then their lives will still be mostly unchanged. As Russell put it, “When some misfortune threatens, consider seriously and deliberately what is the very worst that could possibly happen. Having looked this possible misfortune in the face, give yourself sound reasons for thinking that after all it would be no such very terrible disaster. Such reasons always exist, since at the worst nothing that happens to oneself has any cosmic importance … It may be necessary to repeat the process a few times, but in the end, if you have shirked nothing in facing the worst possible issue, you will find that your worry disappears altogether and is replaced by a kind of exhilaration.” (74). Russell diagnoses worry as fear. Since all fear is exhausting over long periods, when worry is properly handled, people will have much more energy to utilize. Russell makes it clear that when it comes to dealing with fear, the best way to do so is to face it up front, for when it is denied it grows only in its intensity: “every kind of fear grows worse by not being looked at. The effort of turning away one’s thoughts is a tribute to the horribleness of the specter from which one is averting one’s gaze; the proper course with every kind of fear is to think about it rationally and calmly, but with great concentration, until it has been completely familiar. In the end familiarity will blunt its terrors; the whole subject will become boring, and our thoughts will turn away from it, not, as formerly, by an effort of will, but through mere lack of interest in the topic. When you find yourself inclined to brood on anything, no matter what, the best plan always is to think about it even more than you naturally would until at last its morbid fascination is worn off.” (75). Russell details that at the current moment men are encouraged to be brave in conflicts like war and that women are instructed to hide their inner strength and courageousness if they wish to not intimidate a potential husband. Russell wastes no time in revealing these as very destructive customs, for one party is becoming overly dependent on the other, especially considering how men suffer from their fair share of issues as well. Russell provides a maxim: some of the easiest and most stimulating pleasures are negative in the long-run, for they exhaust the person involved. He details that traditional moralists have made life worse for the vast majority of people, for they decrease human happiness by dogmatically following certain rules and routinely punishing those who think for themselves, as can be seen in people who want to get married without all the hassle due to the sheer expense of courtship. This is in itself self-defeating when applied to people’s professions, for when people are instructed to work long hours in a boring job, they will seek some kind of pleasure to compensate for the tedium they are forced to undergo regularly. Thus, Russell recommends that people practice some self-control and not indulge themselves excessively in escapist activities. Russell speaks damningly of nervous fatigue: “One of the worst features of nervous fatigue is that it acts as a sort of screen between a man and the outside world. Impressions reach him … muffled and muted; he no longer notices people except to be irritated by small tricks or mannerisms; he derives no pleasure from his meals or from the sunshine, but tends to become tensely concentrated upon a few objects and indifferent to all the rest. This state of affairs makes it impossible to rest, so that fatigue continually increases until it reaches a point where medical treatment is required.” (77-8).

Russell then focuses on envy, maintaining that it, along with most of the other factors discussed, is a leading cause of sadness. Envy is a universal trait in humans, as can be observed in children. Russell asserts that envy, or all its negative connotations, is the basis of democracy, for if people who believe their superior traits make them worthy of dominating others had their way, the social order will be both unstable and exploitative. Envy can be noted in how many (perhaps most) enjoy gossip, especially if it is negative, as they can act on their envious instincts in a socially acceptable way. Russell then claims that “women regard all other women as their competitors, whereas men as a rule only have this feeling towards other men in the same profession.” (81). While this may sound quite sexist, Russell’s perspective can be easily understood: when he wrote this in 1930, many women of industrialized nations didn't work due to being informed by a patriarchal society that their sole role in life was to be an obedient wife. Thus, stripped of all their attributes save their looks, they become fierce in matters regarding their appearances. Males, on the other hand, were expected back then (and now) to ferociously work, leading them to unfailingly compete with their colleagues, be their employment a white-collar or blue-collar job. Russell notes that “Of all the characteristics of ordinary human nature envy is the most unfortunate; not only does the envious person wish to inflict misfortune and do so whenever he can with impunity, but he is also himself rendered unhappy by envy. Instead of deriving pleasure from what he has, he derives pain from what others have … Fortunately, however, there is in human nature a compensating passion, namely, that of admiration. Whoever wishes to increase human happiness must wish to increase admiration and to diminish envy.” (81-2). Russell offers happiness as a solution to envy, but recognizes that envious people may find it difficult to be happy, seeing how it is in itself an impediment. Furthermore, envy is frequently generated in large amounts due to early experiences, such as watching others being given better treatment or being neglected oneself. Russell encourages people dealing with envy to pay attention to their thoughts and to avoid comparing themselves to others, for there is a multitude of variables to take into account when making the comparison, making it extremely difficult to rationally and accurately judge who is “superior” over whom. Another way envy ruins happiness is by making a person feel like their happiness is nothing compared to those of others. To this Russell tells people to enjoy whatever positive feelings they may come across in and of themselves and to attempt to think little of what others are going through, for merely enjoying something pleasant is already a gift. Thus, “Envy … is one form of vice, partly moral, partly intellectual, which consists in seeing things never in themselves but only in their relations.” (84). Russell states that trying to get rid of envy by accomplishment alone is meaningless, for there is virtually an infinite number of milestones to reach: when one reaches the height of one mountain, they will see yet another taller hill. For instance, if you work a decent job that pays a comfortable salary, you should be grateful for that. However, those carried away by envy may feel enraged that someone whom they perceive as being no better than them is making twice as much. While this complaint is understandable, it makes little sense: even if the envious individual received the salary they are currently desiring, their frustration will continue, for there will always be someone making more money than them—even if they become the richest individual in the world, they’ll try to safeguard that title, which condemns them to continuous dissatisfaction. Russell writes, “You can get away from envy by enjoying the pleasures that come your way, by doing the work that you have to do, and by avoiding comparisons with those whom you imagine, perhaps quite falsely, to be more fortunate than yourself.” (84). Russell condemns modesty as not being a virtue, for it is a show trait that is supposed to signify some kind of moral superiority while “modest” people are frequently insecure and envious. In today’s and Russell’s age envy is prominent, for beings aren’t envious of things they know they can’t obtain. However, in democratic systems, people may feel like they would have been as successful as someone else if given the same opportunity, leading to anger. Adding to this discussion is the relation information has with envy: people aren’t envious of those whom they don’t know and aren’t acquainted with. However, we are living in the Age of Information in which there are various media networks which will inevitably increase the amount of envy in the world, for people will always find something they lack, and deceive themselves into believing that they’ll be happy if they enjoy that which they envy. Russell describes that when justice is acted upon with a large degree of envy, it is destructive, for envious individuals focus on tearing others down, not lifting themselves up: “It is not to be supposed that out of something as evil as envy good results will flow.” (87). Russell states that a fantastic way to decrease the effects of envy is for people to feel at peace with themselves and to feel self-confident, as an issue with civilization that is still largely undealt with is the distribution of wisdom, kindness, and understanding as well as factoids. Russell elucidates, “Why is propaganda so much more successful when it stirs up hatred than when it tries to stir up friendly feeling? The reason is clearly that the human heart as modern civilization has made it is more prone to hatred … because it is dissatisfied, because it feels deeply, perhaps even unconsciously, that it has somehow missed the meaning of life, that perhaps others, but not we ourselves, have secured the good things which nature offers for man’s enjoyment. The positive sum of pleasures in a modern man’s life is undoubtedly greater than was to be found in more primitive communities, but the consciousness of what might be has increased even more.” (88). Russell makes it clear that humanity has not stopped evolving, and that the current stage of its evolution is very dangerous, for it has a large amount of power and knowledge with little foresight and intelligence. Thus, “We [humanity] must pass through it [the current stage of our evolution] quickly, for if we do not, most of us will perish by the way and the others will be lost in a forest of doubt and fear.” (89). Russell ends his section on envy with the following words: “Envy therefore … is not wholly of the devil. It is in part the expression of a heroic pain, the pain of those who walk through the night … To find the right road out of this despair, civilized man must enlarge his heart as he has enlarged his mind. He must learn to transcend self, and in so doing to acquire the freedom of the Universe.” (89).

Russell comes to explain the danger of the sense of sin. The self-incriminating mindset known to those who believe they are unworthy of love and support due to doing something bad is mostly a result of severe indoctrination in youth. The sense of sin is usually present when one knows that there is a likely chance their misdemeanor will be detected and punished, for the conception of sin, at the end of the day, reflects the morality of the majority of the community. Thus, those who “sin” become outcasts, while those who refrain from indulging in behaviors deemed sinful will still find a home in other people in their vicinity. The sense of sin is especially destructive when children are taught that regular sexual behavior is somehow wicked, for this directly leads to severe repression, which can in later life lead to neuroses and undesirable behavior: even if lust is to be pushed out of sight, it still festers in some form until it becomes an actual problem. This is also related to the concept of the Oedipus complex, as those who have been sexually repressed in the company of maternal figures will require an outlet for their instincts. For those struggling with a sense of sin, Russell recommends the undergoing of intensive self-examination that reveals to them in no-uncertain terms the ridiculousness of their current attitudes. In his own words, “Whenever you begin to feel remorse for an act which your reason tells you is not wicked, examine the causes of your feeling of remorse, and convince yourself in detail of their absurdity. Let your conscious beliefs be so vivid and emphatic that they make an impression upon your unconscious strong enough to cope with the impressions made by your nurse or your mother when you were an infant. Do not be content with an alternation between moments of rationality and moments of irrationality. Look into the irrationality closely with a determination not to respect it and not to let it dominate you. Whenever it thrusts foolish thoughts or feelings into your consciousness, pull them up by the roots, examine them, and reject them. Do not allow yourself to remain a vacillating creature, swayed half by reason and half by infantile folly.” (96-7). Russell critiques society for focusing heavily on the wrong things when it comes to morals: harmless activities that harm no one (ex. spending one’s earned money on leisure and engaging in a consensual romantic relationship) are criticized by many. Russell’s following words still hold true today, for in the modern era much negative behavior which should be spoken and acted against still goes unrestrained: “What are the really harmful acts to which the average man is tempted? Sharp practice in business of the sort not punished by law, harshness towards employees, cruelty towards wife and children, malevolence towards competitors, ferocity in political conflicts—these are the really harmful sins that are common among respectable and respected citizens. By means of these sins a man spreads misery … and does his bit towards destroying civilization. Yet these are not the things that make him … regard himself as an outcast … the ethic believed in by those who had charge of his infancy was silly; because it was not derived from any study of the individual’s duty to the community; because it was made up of old scraps of irrational taboos; and because it contained within itself elements of morbidness derived from the spiritual sickness that troubled the dying Roman Empire. Our nominal morality has been formulated by priests and mentally enslaved women. It is time that men … learned to rebel against this sickly nonsense.” (97-8). Russell demonstrates that those who are passionate about freeing themselves from the sense of sin should practice self-awareness and rationality. When they do make actual mistakes regarding their conduct, they shouldn’t merely feel guilty, as guilt increases misery while not leading to any potential solution. Russell encourages all individuals to ensure their beliefs and their actions coincide, for not doing so is schizophrenic and inconsistent. Furthermore, Russell calls for people to firmly decide what they rationally believe in and to “never allow contrary irrational beliefs to pass unchallenged or obtain a hold over him, however brief,” for allowing them to be so would lead to an emotional disturbance (100). Russell ends the section by affirming that rationality can improve happiness and that traditional morality leads to unhappiness and self-abasement due to its utter self-centeredness, for those that are involved in their community and perform their roles will usually have self-respect. Russell says that people shouldn’t be ashamed of themselves for their weaknesses, bad life situations, and past follies, for those that are able to rise above being dominated by these issues are more developed people than those who never experienced them. “And perhaps the sickness is a necessary stage in mental development … the man who has passed beyond it by the help of reason has reached a higher level than the man who has never experienced either the sickness or the cure.” (101). Russell describes happiness as a state of acute self-awareness: “It is in the moments when the mind is most active and the fewest things are forgotten that the most intense joys are experienced … The happiness that is genuinely satisfying is accompanied by the fullest exercise of our faculties, and the fullest realization of the world in which we live.” (102).

Persecution mania, true to its name, is when people feel like others are working against their interests. Russell communicates that extreme forms of persecution mania may be indicative of some kind of mental illness (like psychosis) and requires psychiatric care for the safety of the afflicted. In its less extreme forms, those suffering from persecution mania should understand why their beliefs are irrational. To begin with, very few people are so unique and talented to warrant others to despise and to attempt to harm them. When one looks at humanity, the vast majority of people are regular folk who usually draw little negative attention from others, for their actions and behaviors do not set them apart from the herd. While it’s true that some special people are targeted, by probability alone it is unlikely that you are one of them. Of course, if a person is actually being persecuted and they have ample evidence supporting their claim, they should seek a redressement of the situation. Another method to deal with persecution mania is to realize that the behavior of others, even when going beyond inconsideration into the territory of callousness, is understandable. Russell details, “Very few people can resist saying malicious things about their acquaintances, and even on occasion about their friends; yet when people hear that anything has been said against themselves, they are filled with indignant amazement. It has apparently never occurred to them that, just as they gossip about every one else, so every one else gossips about them … We expect everybody else to feel towards us that tender love and that profound respect which we feel towards ourselves. It does not occur to us that we cannot expect others to think better of us than we think of them … If we were all given by magic the power to read each other’s thoughts, I suppose the first effect would be that almost all friendships would be dissolved; the second effect, however, might be excellent, for a world without any friends would be felt to be intolerable, and we should learn to like each other without needing a veil of illusion to conceal from ourselves that we did not think each other absolutely perfect.” (105-6). Russell deems persecution mania as an inability to examine the situation for others, for people can be self-interested and narrow in their scope of thought and empathy. Persecution mania can also be a result of excessive self-love and even narcissism, for those thinking themselves as somehow exceptional can become horrified and convinced that the world is out to get them when they are told they are not as talented as they thought themselves to be. Another kind of persecution mania is generated when people go through an actual misfortune in which they then generalize to the entire world. And then there’s the philanthropist who helps people against their will and is rebuffed, causing them to believe that humanity is inherently ungrateful. Russell humorously notes, “Our motives in doing good are seldom as pure as we imagine them to be. Love of power is insidious; it has many disguises, and is often the source of the pleasure we derive from doing what we believe to be good to other people.” (108). This can be clearly seen in how some people who convinced themselves of their goodness try to deprive others of harmless joys. When others react negatively to them, they may even be shocked, though Russell notes that they wouldn’t be happy if their acquaintances genuinely thanked them for being freed of their “vices,” for this goes against their desire to dominate others. Russell provides four maxims to deal with persecution mania, which are to be greatly appreciated: “The first is: remember that your motives are not always as altruistic as they seem to yourself. The second is: don’t overestimate your own merits. The third is: don’t expect others to take as much interest in you as you do yourself. And the fourth is: don’t imagine that most people give enough thought to you to have any desire to persecute you.” (109).

Russell details that self-interest isn’t to be seen negatively when it isn’t excessive, as every individual is selfish to a certain degree: “The immense majority of even the noblest persons’ actions have self-regarding motives, nor is this to be regretted, since if it were otherwise, the human race could not survive. A man who spent his time seeing that others were fed and forgot to feed himself would perish … It is better … that a man should eat because he enjoys his food than that the time he spends at his meals should be solely inspired by a desire for public good … Whatever is to be done, can only be done adequately by the help of a certain zest, and zest is difficult without some self-regarding motive.” (110-1). When it comes to the second maxim, Russell acknowledges that while there were indeed cases of geniuses and brilliant individuals who have been ignored by the ignorant masses, the vast majority of those who were ignored were indeed unexceptional, unfortunately. Russell provides the reader with guidelines to test whether they may actually be a talent: “When you have been dead a hundred years, it will be impossible to guess to which category you belonged. In the meantime, there is a test … which you may apply yourself if you suspect that you are a genius while your friends suspect that you are not. The test is this: do you produce because you feel an urgent compulsion to express certain ideas or feelings, or are you actuated by the desire for applause? In the genuine artist the desire for applause, while it usually exists strongly, is secondary, in the sense that the artist wishes to produce a certain kind of work, and hopes that that work may be applauded, but will not alter his style even if no applause is forthcoming. The man, on the other hand, to whom the desire for applause is the primary motive … if he fails to win applause by his art, had better give it up … speaking more generally, whatever your line in life may be, if you find that others do not rate your abilities as highly as you do yourself, do not be too sure that it is they who are mistaken.” (112-3). Russell clarifies his third maxim by stating that expecting too much from others is foolish, as they have their affairs to get to. Furthermore, even if someone else genuinely cares for you, there are limits to their sympathy, just like how you may be very fond of your best friend (assuming you have one) but not devoted to the point of blindness for their sake. Thus, “Very often the conduct that people complain of in others is not more than the healthy reaction of natural egoism against the grasping rapacity of a person whose ego extends beyond its proper limits.” (113). As for the fourth maxim, only certain individuals are actually plotted against by others: historical figures fitting this category include Napoleon, Julius Caesar, and Abraham Lincoln. Russell concludes the section on self-deception with the following maxim: “No satisfaction based upon self-deception is solid, and however unpleasant the truth may be, it is better to face it once for all, to get used to it, and to proceed to build your life in accordance with it.” (115).

Another factor contributing to unhappiness is the fear of public opinion. While humans are social creatures, others frequently have a negative effect on them. For instance, Russell describes that free-thinking, intelligent young people in foolish and ignorant communities may go through much mental anguish and loneliness, for if they were to share their opinions, they could be bullied, mocked, and exiled (which wouldn’t be a bad thing in the long-run though, as they would meet new people in the process). Thus, “to most young men and young women of exceptional merit adolescence is a time of great unhappiness.” (119). Fortunately, if they are capable of leaving their closed communities for the outside world, they may meet individuals who will provide them with company and the motivation to continue pursuing their passions. Russell recommends that people negatively impacted by public opinion should become indifferent to how others view them, for humans will generally leave individuals alone upon learning they are largely unaffected by their actions. Russell tellingly notes of human nature: “Conventional people are roused to fury by departures from convention, largely because they regard such departures as a criticism of themselves.” (121). Russell calls for people to take up jobs in which they can meet a variety of people, including those with similar opinions, for people will flourish in their respective ways. Russell acknowledges that people who are thought to be insane by societies that from the modern viewpoint are stupid, barbaric, and inhumane are in fact perfectly healthy: following this logic, modern society will be viewed by future ones as lacking in many regards, and those who criticize it for lacking those attributes and who may be shunned and criticized now will be considered in a much higher light soon enough. As Russell put it, “To be out of harmony with one’s surroundings is of course a misfortune, but it is not always a misfortune to be avoided at all costs. Where the environment is stupid or prejudiced or cruel, it is a sign of merit to be out of harmony with it. And to some degree these characteristics exist in almost every environment. Galileo and Kepler had ‘dangerous thoughts’ (as they were called in Japan), and so have the most intelligent men of our own day.” (122). Russell remarks that it is extremely unfortunate that geniuses and progressive individuals frequently have to carve their destiny against their environment: even if they succeed in doing so and change the world for the better, the process is exhausting. There are definitely many individuals with great capability and talent who didn't embark on their journeys due to being born in a disadvantageous situation, which is of the utmost misfortune. While respect should certainly be shown towards tradition, people should still be open-minded and experimental. For instance, if a young person is told by their parents that a certain profession (ex. studying science or acting) is bad for them, they should try it out for a considerable portion of time before reaching their conclusion, for experiencing something firsthand can help dispel prejudices and mere conjecturing. Russell declares his opinion that public approval is overrated and that intellectual courage and honesty should be honored more. He describes, “One should respect public opinion in so far as is necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison, but anything that goes beyond this is voluntary submission to an unnecessary tyranny” (124-5). Fortunately, much of modern life encourages people to do what they believe is correct given the necessary evidence, as transportation has been revolutionized with the creation of machines like cars, trains, and planes while the internet can provide people with resources they otherwise would’ve been blind to. Russell then warns of the potential danger of mass communication, for people may be savagely ridiculed by media platforms, specifically newspapers (today said newspapers have largely been replaced with social media platforms like Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and Youtube): “as publicity gets more and more perfect in its methods, there will be an increasing danger in this novel form of social persecution … I think the line will have to be drawn more sharply than it is by the existing libel laws, and anything will have to be forbidden that makes life intolerable for innocent individuals, even if they should happen to have done or said things which, published maliciously, can cause them to become unpopular. The only ultimate cure for this evil is, however, an increase of toleration on the part of the public. The best way to increase toleration is to multiply the number of individuals who enjoy real happiness and do not therefore find their chief pleasure in the infliction of pain upon their fellow men.” (127).

The second section of the book, “Causes of Happiness,” is then introduced. Russell maintains that happiness is very possible in today’s age, though people should be mindful of their behavior to increase the likelihood of their feeling it. He describes that happiness is of two categories: “plain and fancy, or animal and spiritual, or of the heart and of the head.” (131). Russell provides an anecdote for a happy individual of the simple category. That is, he knew a very tall and muscular man who was very happy when it came to his job of digging wells, though he could “neither read nor write, and when in the year 1885 he got a vote for Parliament, he learnt for the first time that such an institution existed.” (132). Russell’s gardener enjoyed his life and was focused on preventing rabbits from eating his vegetables, and he speaks of them like how foreigners speak of Communists, considering “them dark, designing, and ferocious … Like the heroes of Valhalla who spent every day hunting a certain wild boar, which they killed every evening but which miraculously came to life again in the morning, my gardener can slay his enemy one day without any fear that the enemy will have disappeared the next day. Although well over seventy, he works all day and bicycles sixteen hilly miles to and from his work, but the fount of joy is inexhaustible, and it is ‘they rabbits’ that supply it.” (132). For educated people, Russell states that a great method to be happy is to expect a certain amount of achievement in one form or another, though one should not overestimate oneself, as doing so is likely to lead to disappointment. Russell asserts that the happiest professional people of his day are scientists, as many of them are working towards a better future. Furthermore, even if a scientist is too complex and intelligent to be understood by the masses, they will probably live a manageable and even celebrated lifestyle, as scientific concepts that are hard to grasp are mostly accepted by a believing public, seeing all the benefits they can present. On the other hand, those involved in creative works were frequently impoverished due to their art and literature having no immediate and definite benefits for society. Russell details that education can lead to much happiness when combined with action, as when people are presented with an opportunity to act on their learning, they will feel like they have a definite say in the destiny of humanity. Russell excellently details, “Cynicism such as one finds very frequently among the most highly educated young men and women of the West results from the combination of comfort with powerlessness. Powerlessness makes people feel that nothing is worth doing, and comfort makes the painfulness of this feeling just endurable. Throughout the East [Soviet Union] the university student can hope for more influence upon public opinion … but … has much less opportunity than in the West of securing a substantial income. But, neither powerless nor comfortable, he becomes a reformer or a revolutionary, not a cynic. The happiness of the reformer or revolutionary depends upon the course of public affairs, but probably even while he is being executed he enjoys more real happiness than is possible for the comfortable cynic. I remember a young Chinese visitor to my school who was going home to found a similar school in a reactionary part of China. He expected the result to be that his head would be cut off. Nevertheless he enjoyed a quiet happiness that I could only envy.” (136). Russell concedes that most people aren’t comfortable cynics nor energetic revolutionaries. Thus, belonging to the right profession is made all the more important, for having a well-paying job that is also gratifying solves both financial and emotional concerns. Russell speaks of the effect of machines on employment, acknowledging that if things go well, machines can perform repetitive, difficult tasks like farming and factory work, giving humans the freedom to do activities that they’re genuinely interested in. Russell presents the Agricultural Revolution as something that utterly changed humanity by gifting humanity consistency and routine but charging boredom and tedium as its price. Russell remarks that “When men obtained their food by hunting, work was a joy … But with the introduction of agriculture mankind entered upon a long period of meanness, misery, and madness, from which they are only now being freed by the beneficent operation of the machine … Companionship and coöperation are essential elements in the happiness of the average man, and these are to be obtained in industry far more fully than in agriculture.” (139). Russell states that a fantastic way for people to be happy is to adopt a hobby or a cause that they believe in, for they will be filled with increased enthusiasm and zest.

Russell clarifies that “Fads and hobbies … are in many cases, perhaps most, not a source of fundamental happiness, but a means of escape from reality, of forgetting for the moment some pain too difficult to be faced. Fundamental happiness depends more than anything else upon what may be called a friendly interest in persons and things.” (141). Russell describes that having a friendly interest in others is one out of curiosity and affection, not possessiveness and jealousy. Thus, happy people are likely to “observe people and … [find] interest in their individual traits, that wishes to afford scope for the interests and pleasures of those with whom it is brought into contact without desiring to acquire power over them or to secure their enthusiastic admiration. The person whose attitude towards others is genuinely of this kind will be a source of happiness and a recipient of reciprocal kindness … He will achieve without effort results from which another man, after long struggles, will find to be unattainable … But all this must be genuine; it must not spring from an idea of self-sacrifice inspired by a sense of duty. A sense of duty is useful in work, but offensive in personal relations … To like many people spontaneously and without effort is perhaps the greatest of all sources of personal happiness.” (141-2). As for being interested in things, this involves being enamored with certain objects or facts that are positive, not negative, in nature. That is, someone may enjoy learning about trees, but it is unlikely people will feel happiness regarding the accumulation of knowledge regarding how best to avoid certain people. Overall, “The world is vast and our own powers are limited. If all our happiness is bound up entirely in our personal circumstances it is difficult not to demand of life more than it has to give. And to demand too much is the surest way of getting even less than is possible. The man who can forget his worries by means of a genuine interest in, say, the Council of Trent, or the life history of stars, will find that, when he returns from his excursion into the impersonal world, he has acquired a poise and calm which enable him to deal with his worries in the best way, and he will in the meantime have experienced a genuine even if temporary happiness.” (142-3). Russell then gives a fantastic piece of advice regarding how to be happy: if one desires happiness, they should have many interests and should try to make their reactions to the things they’re interested in joyful rather than grim. Russell proceeds to discuss zest. Zestful individuals enjoy life, for they spend little time thinking of themselves and instead focus on the environment around them, and due to the world being interesting in many aspects, it’s very unlikely that they’ll become bored. Hearkening to his previous advice, Russell recommends that people try to enjoy whatever they can, such as eating food, admiring scenery, or going on walks. Following this logic, the same thing can lead to two entirely different responses from two people with different attitudes, as the one with zest will derive much food for thought while the one devoid of it will feel as they always do. Russell concedes that some diseases can destroy zest. He tellingly suggests that “Perhaps when biochemistry has made further advances we shall all be able to take tablets that will ensure our feeling an interest in everything” (149). Russell proceeds to discuss variables with relationships to zest, and that most people can become very interested in a specific topic, which is likely to benefit them, though he later balances, “Very specialized interests are, however, a less satisfactory source of happiness than a general zest for life, since they can hardly fill the whole of a man’s time, and there is always the danger that he may come to know all there is to know about the particular matter that has become his hobby.” (150). Of course, if that is to happen, said person can simply find another specialized interest to learn and pursue. Russell then writes that happy people practice moderation, for almost everything becomes nauseating when taken to extremes. “All our separate tastes and desires have to fit into the general framework of life. If they are to be a source of happiness they must be compatible with health, with the affection of those whom we love, and with the respect of the society in which we live. Some passions can be indulged to almost any extent without passing beyond these limits, others cannot.” (151). Enjoyments that are to be shunned altogether are those that call for the sacrifice of one’s health, sanity, and responsibilities towards others. Russell writes that certain kinds of extremity are socially approved, but even they are heavily dependent on a certain result. For instance, if a scientist is to be completely obsessed with curing a certain disease and in the process neglects his family and thereby forces them to undergo much hardship, it is very unlikely he’ll be criticized for doing so if he finds a treatment or cure, though he is likely to be condemned if he fails to do so. Russell writes that those who are intemperate, including those who drink excessively, do so to forget, albeit for a brief moment, their personal problems. However, sublimation can be practiced as a healthy behavior to deal with personal issues, for it is constructive and good for the individual. A major reason why zest may be uncommon in modern societies is that while it is a good motivator, it is also difficult to predict and manage, for it can run out relatively quickly. Thus, when people perform their jobs, they must rely on discipline, not excitement or happiness. Russell elucidates, “At every moment of life the civilized man is hedged about by restrictions of impulse: if he happens to feel cheerful he must not sing or dance in the street, while if he happens to feel sad he must not sit on the pavement and weep, for fear of obstructing pedestrian traffic. In youth his liberty is restricted at school, in adult life it is restricted throughout his working hours. All this makes zest more difficult to retain, for the continual restraint tends to produce weariness and boredom.” (156). This is also true for women, as for much of humanity’s sedentary history, women have been kept in isolation from the outside world and were instructed to always appear calm, which has in turn made many inclined towards useless idleness and boredom. To conclude, people should try to reawaken their zest in whatever way they can without disrupting their life to the point of dysfunction, as more than discipline and duty is needed for a good life.

Russell writes that the feeling that one is unloved is one of the surest predictors that someone will be unhappy. While some individuals can channel their misfortune into their actions, most fare much less well. Russell describes, “Few men are able to reach such heights; the great majority, both of men and of women, if they feel themselves unloved, sink into a timid despair relieved only by occasional gleams of envy and malice. As a rule, the lives of such people become extremely self-centered and the absence of affection gives them a sense of insecurity from which they instinctively seek to escape by allowing habit to dominate their lives utterly and completely. For those who make themselves the slaves of unvarying routine are generally actuated by fear of a cold outer world, and by the feeling that they will not bump into it if they walk along the same paths that they have walked along on previous days.” (160). Russell states that the reason affection is very helpful is that it makes people feel secure and safe, thereby enabling them to feel confident. The ideal relationship of affection is one in which both parties provide love to each other, as that will facilitate trust and intimacy. Russell writes further of the individuals deprived of affection, detailing that they may think of serious issues from a young age to try to make sense of the seemingly chaotic world around them. The unloved individual “becomes an introvert, melancholy at first, but seeking ultimately the unreal consolations of some system of philosophy or theology … Within the four walls of his library the timid student feels safe. If he can persuade himself that the universe is equally tidy, he can feel almost equally safe when he has to venture forth into the streets. Such a man, if he had received more affection, would have feared the real world less, and would not have had to invent an ideal world to take its place in his beliefs.” (162). Russell states that affection should encourage people to take necessary risks and to thrive, not merely to avoid trouble, for when children are constantly warned of the dangers of the world, they can become docile and cowardly. Russell argues that a form of mature love is sexual romance, and that it is a great joy to be experienced for those fortunate enough to experience it. Russell writes that those who give admiration may do it mostly for goodwill while others do so for safety. Russell then comes up with the following: “The best type of affection is reciprocally life-giving: each receives affection with joy and gives it without effort, and each finds the whole world more interesting in consequence of the existence of this reciprocal happiness.” (165). Russell makes it clear that those with extremely large egos will drain the vitality of those around them. Thus, if they desire to be happy and to feel the joys of being involved with others, they must decrease their own self-absorption, for a mismanaged ego is nothing less than a jail. Russell asserts that merely sexual relationships do not qualify as love, for each party is using the other for the sole sake of physical gratification. However, if the two involved are genuinely interested and caring of each other, then the sexual element will only serve to strengthen their bond—“the only sex relations that have real value are those in which there is no reticence and in which the whole personality of both becomes merged in a new collective personality. Of all forms of caution, caution in love is perhaps most fatal to true happiness.” (167-8).

Russell continues to analyze the family. While children and their parents are capable of helping each other, frequently the opposite occurs, as parents may be over-demanding or neglectful while children may be confused and rendered disobedient by lack of instruction. Russell writes that a reason some parents are very harsh on their children is that they sacrificed opportunities to have them, which leads them to try to give their children all the opportunities they denied themselves. This is quite foolish, as the hyper-competitive attitudes of the parents are likely to negatively impact their children, not-mentioning how the children never asked to be born to begin with, only to live a life full of tremendous work. Russell describes that ideal familial relationships should, like affection, benefit both parties, as mutually positive relationships generally benefit both parties more than a parasitic, exploitative, or domineering one. Russell states that people frequently reproduce due to desiring the feeling of immortality: most people want to leave a mark on the world, and they try to do so by replicating themselves. Of course, this view is quite erroneous, for most people are laughably unimportant, and their legacies are nonexistent, for even past emperors and generals had somewhat limited impacts on civilization, forget regular people. Furthermore, their “immortality” is fallacious, for their descendants will share only a minuscule portion of their DNA, and when the Earth is consumed by the Sun and the universe dies of heat death, all the proof of their existence will be wiped out completely and utterly. Russell details that while parents generally do care for their children to some regard, their affection may be tainted with a desire for power, seeing how some parents overprotect their children and want to keep them underdeveloped and inexperienced so as to keep them dependent on their help. Russell states that when it comes to parenting, parents should try to act with the child’s welfare primarily in mind, and that they are very likely to do a good job so long as their motives are pure. Russell states that women who have children should continue to work professional jobs if they desire to do so, as the alternative is undesirable: although parenthood is a large portion of the lives of many people, if it is the sole activity their lives cannot be expected to be very happy. Russell calls for humane and extensive education to help raise good people, though he notes in the chapter that a world in which differing groups of people can get along with each other is still far away. He also says that fathers should try to spend time with their children, for both parents are vital to the development of a human being. Russell progresses to discuss the relationship work has with happiness and despondency. Russell concedes that while work can introduce a sense of meaning into the lives of many people, it is a shame that many are overworked while a few rich remain idle and therefore bored. Russell describes, “Most of the idle rich suffer unspeakable boredom as the price of their freedom from drudgery … Accordingly the more intelligent rich men work nearly as hard as if they were poor, while rich women for the most part keep themselves busy with innumerable trifles of whose earth-shaking importance they are firmly persuaded.” (189). Russell details that the two main ways work can become desirable, interesting, and exciting for people is when it involves the exercise of skill and construction. Skills vary greatly according to the profession, and constructive tasks are much more satisfying than destructive tasks, for they erect rather than tear down. Furthermore, in history many people having occupations dealing with destruction were motivated not by concern for others, but hatred, for they were solely occupied with tearing something down and could be quite confused as to what will come after. While destroying something “is a fierce joy, perhaps at moments more intense … it is less profoundly satisfying, since the result is one in which little satisfaction is to be found. You kill your enemy, and when he is dead your occupation is gone, and the satisfaction that you derive from victory quickly fades. The work of construction, on the other hand, when completed is delightful to contemplate, and moreover is never so fully completed that there is nothing further to do about it. The most satisfactory purposes are those that lead on indefinitely from one success to another without ever coming to a dead end; and in this respect it will be found that construction is a greater source of happiness than destruction.” (193).

Russell encourages those used to feeling negative emotions to undertake constructive work, for that will call upon their better skills and impulses. Furthermore, even if work doesn’t make a person happy, it will at least significantly decrease their unhappiness when done in the right amount. For instance, a significant number of artistic and literary figures are unhappy, and the only thing keeping them from ending their lives is the existence of their constructive jobs. Russell calls for people to retain their self-respect by refusing to take, if they are financially able, jobs that undermine their passions and talents (ex. writing for a specific organization in a style and opinion unbecoming of yourself). Russell concludes that people may have to do jobs they don’t like due to the ever-looming threat of starvation, “but … where it is possible to do work that is satisfactory to a man’s constructive impulses without entirely starving, he will be well advised … if he chooses it in preference to work much more highly paid but not seeming to him worth doing on its own account. Without self-respect genuine happiness is scarcely possible. And the man who is ashamed of his work can hardly achieve self-respect.” (196). Russell asserts that people who view their lives as a whole rather than a series of detached incidents are likelier to be happier than those who adopt the latter perspective, for they will be gifted a certain calmness and reassurance that will be able to resist the whims of luck. As Russell put it, “The habit of viewing life as a whole is an essential part both of wisdom and of true morality, and is one of the things which ought to be encouraged in education. Consistent purpose is not enough to make life happy, but it is an almost indispensable condition of a happy life. And consistent purpose embodies itself mainly in work.” (197). Russell then examines impersonal interests, stating that people who desire happiness and health will do well to take interest in things that are unrelated with their livelihoods, for that will give them a variety of experience. Furthermore, being able to stop thinking about work and other concerns for a set amount of time is likely to benefit the quality of one’s work, for it is exhausting and demoralizing to be constantly worried over something. Another reason people should take interest in their impersonal interests is that they are not as important as they may think they are, and since humans exist for only a short time, they should take interest in the world around them: “Each of us is in the world for no very long time, and within the few years of his life has to acquire whatever he is to know of this strange planet and its place in the universe. To ignore our opportunities for knowledge, imperfect as they are, is like going to the theater and not listening to the play. The world is full of things … and those who fail to be interested in the spectacle that it offers are forgoing one of the privileges that life has to offer.” (201). Russell informs workaholics that working a little towards a good end is preferable over doing a large amount towards something negative. He again reiterates the utter unimportance of humanity in relation to the cosmos, which makes it all the more pressing for people to be willing to learn new things and to be balanced individuals. He warns, “Those who care much for their work are always in danger of falling into fanaticism, which consists essentially in remembering one or two desirable things while forgetting all the rest, and in supposing that in the pursuit of these one or two any incidental harm of other sorts is of little account. Against this fanatical temper there is no better prophylactic than a large conception of the life of man and his place in the universe … It is one of the defects of modern higher education that it has become too much a training in the acquisition of certain kinds of skill, and too little an enlargement of the mind and heart by an impartial survey of the world.” (202).

Adding to what he previously spoke, Russell describes that individuals with a large view of the universe are unlikely to harm others, for they will know that their existence and desires are brief and temporary and that doing immoral deeds benefits no one. Russell portrays the situation in the following words: “If, on the other hand, you have as part of the habitual furniture of your mind the past ages of man, his slow and partial emergence out of barbarism, and the brevity of his total existence in comparison with astronomical epochs … you will realize that the momentary battle upon which you are engaged cannot be of such importance as to risk a backward step towards the darkness out of which we have been slowly emerging … You will have, beyond your immediate activities, purposes that are distant and slowly unfolding, in which you are not an isolated individual but one of the great army of those who have led mankind towards a civilized existence. If you have attained to this outlook, a certain deep happiness will never leave you, whatever your personal fate may be. Life will become a communion with the great of all ages, and personal death no more than a negligible incident.” (203). Russell fantastically provides his definition of a truly informative and good education: “I should seek to substitute for the old orthodox religions … something which is … merely a focusing of attention upon well-ascertained facts. I should seek to make young people vividly aware of the past, vividly realizing that the future of man will in all likelihood be immeasurably longer than his past, profoundly conscious of the minuteness of the planet upon which we live and of the fact that life on this planet is only a temporary incident; and at the same time … I should present quite another set of facts designed to impress upon the mind of the young the greatness of which the individual is capable, and the knowledge that throughout all the depths of stellar space nothing of equal value is known to us … A man who has once perceived, however temporarily and however briefly, what makes greatness of soul, can no longer be happy if he allows himself to be petty, self-seeking, troubled by trivial misfortunes, dreading what fate may have in store for him. The man capable of greatness of soul will open wide the windows of his mind, letting the winds blow freely upon it from every portion of the universe. He will see himself and life and the world as truly as our human limitations will permit; realizing the brevity and minuteness of human life, he will realize also that in individual minds is concentrated whatever of value the known universe contains. And he will see that the man whose mind mirrors the world becomes in a sense as great as the world. In emancipation from the fears that beset the salve of circumstance he will experience a profound joy, and through all the vicissitudes of his outward life he will remain in the depths of his being a happy man.” (204). Russell maintains that every person goes through some form of hardship, making it all the more important to be flexible and resilient. He states that distractions that aren’t destructive can and should be enjoyed when one is in difficult straits such as grief or stress, for they afford the individual both pleasure and a sense that there is more to the world than their concerns. If one doesn’t wish to pursue distractions, they should instead have a wide variety of interests, for if certain ones become unavailable or are rendered painful by tragedy, they will have others to turn to.

Russell affirms that while people should try to be successful and to perform their tasks, they should also have a certain degree of resignation within themselves. After all, as stated before, sometimes caring too much for something will only increase stress, inefficiency, and anxiety, which only makes the said task more difficult. Thus, when one lets go of excessive and unhealthy worry (or at least tries their best to), their lives will become easier to handle. Furthermore, people’s goals should be for the advancement of not only themselves, but others. If one fails at a purely egoistic goal, emotional devastation may sometimes follow. However, if a person tries to achieve something that will mean happiness for multiple people and fails, they won’t be as disheartened, for they view life in a way devoid of much selfishness. After all, “The man who is working for some much needed reform may find all his efforts sidetracked by a war, and may be forced to realize that what he has worked for will not come about in his lifetime. But he need not on that account sink into complete despair, provided that he is interested in the future of mankind apart from his own participation in it.” (212-3). Russell clearly demonstrates that wise and mature people don’t waste emotional energy on trivial matters. Russell humorously yet accurately notes that many individuals can become utterly enraged when small inconveniences strike, and when they do, they may make the situation even worse, for they are only exacerbating the discomfort associated with the issue. Furthermore, “The energy that such people waste on trivial troubles would be sufficient, if more wisely directed, to make and unmake empires.” (213). Wise people do try to solve problems, though they do so with an air of calmness missing from the minds of many people. Where regular people may be irritated, wise individuals may feel only amusement or even humor. For instance, if a stoic person does poorly in a job interview, they may realize that their failure isn’t significant when compared to the universe, that they have lessons to learn, and that the areas they did poorly in are remediable and somewhat funny, as how they erred may be laughable from a later mindset, for anxiety can cause even experienced people to make basic mistakes. Russell concludes, “There is no limit to what can be done in the way of finding consolation from minor misfortunes by means of bizarre analogies and quaint parallels.” (214). Russell declares that those who work should refrain from self-deception, as those reliant on delusions of the importance of their work will only harm themselves in the long-run, for delusions are expensive to maintain. Russell tells individuals to do the right amount of work, for doing too much may do harm, and doing nothing is infinitely preferable to performing actions that negatively impact sentient beings: “A little time spent in learning to appreciate facts is not time wasted, and the work that will be done afterwards is far less likely to be harmful than the work done by those who need a continual inflation of their ego as a stimulant to their energy.” (215).

Russell elaborates on happiness: it depends both on external factors and the individual. Necessities are generally not hard to acquire in many developed countries, and those who are unhappy while having their needs met should undergo self-examination to find the root of the problem or to enlist the help of a psychiatrist if the problem is sufficiently severe. Russell states that happy people generally adopt cheerful beliefs while dissatisfied individuals choose pessimistic ones: while both may believe that their beliefs are what leads them to feel the way they are, the truth is in fact the opposite way around. Russell reaffirms the importance of being genuinely interested in the outside world, for egocentrism is a prison in and of itself and keeps the individual from much experience, which is an utter shame, for it stunts their personal development. Russell summarizes, “The happy man is the man who lives objectively, who has free affections and wide interests, who secures his happiness through these interests and affections and through the fact that they, in turn, make him an object of interest and affections to many others … The man who receives affection is, speaking broadly, the man who gives it.” (219). Individuals who are unhappy should foremost try, if possible, to break their regular routines and habits and to adopt new ones. For instance, individuals encased in self should try to genuinely care about others and to learn new things about the world instead of wallowing in their tepid thoughts. Russell brilliantly recommends, “If his trouble is self-pity, he can deal with it … after first persuading himself that there is nothing extraordinarily unfortunate in his circumstances. If fear is his trouble, let him practice exercises designed to give courage … moral courage and intellectual courage … have their technique. Admit to yourself every day at least one painful truth; you will find this quite as useful as the Boy Scout’s daily kind action. Teach yourself to feel that life would still be worth living even if you were not … immeasurably superior to all your friends … Exercises of this sort prolonged through several years will at last enable you to admit facts without flinching, and will, in so doing, free you from the empire of fear over a very large field.” (220). Once an individual deals with their personal issues, most likely they will find things they’re interested in relatively easily, which will make them happy. Russell ends his book with the following sentences: “All unhappiness depends upon some kind of disintegration or lack of integration; there is disintegration within the self through lack of coördination between the conscious and the unconscious mind; there is lack of integration between the self and society, where the two are not knit together by the force of objective interests and affections. The happy man is the man who does not suffer from either of these failures of unity, whose personality is neither divided against itself nor pitted against the world. Such a man feels himself a citizen of the universe, enjoying freely the spectacle that it offers and the joys that it affords, untroubled by the thought of death because he feels himself not really separate from those who will come after him. It is in such profound instinctive union with the stream of life that the greatest joy is to be found.” (222-3).

Personal thoughts:

The Conquest of Happiness by Bertrand Russell is an excellent, informative, and encouraging book that should be read by everyone. Russell’s humanistic and descriptive language is a true treat, and his keen observations make the book all the stronger. The organized format of this book makes it easy to analyze and repeatedly go through, which I greatly appreciate. I can personally attest that this book, when properly applied, definitely has the potential to make one’s life much happier. I highly recommend The Conquest of Happiness to anyone interested in self-improvement, psychology, Russell’s writings, and literary triumphs.

Get the book:

Amazon - The Conquest of Happiness

Barnes and Noble - The Conquest of Happiness