Which states are the happiest? New study.

[Dave]

So then, what metric should we be using? How can we know when we have the right one?

I find it interesting that people took this happiness survey and attacked it with two separate groups of statistics (divorce and suicide) and (in essence) claimed that the two new studies are exceptionally relevant to the OP's study and thus can be used as evidence against the OP's study.

Because I don't see how you can just say "Oh, since more people are getting a divorce, the population (as a whole) must be more unhappy overall."

It seems more straightforward with suicide -- but wouldn't there other factors that influence suicide rates that wouldn't show up in the "Happiness" study? Hell, not all suicide attempts are successful -- what if you had a higher-than-average suicide attempt rate, but a lower-than-average suicide success rate? I don't think you can just pull out the suicide rate study and use it to just flat out say "Thus the OP's study is wrong."

[ArmorPierce]

Agreed, higher divorce rate may merely mean that people are more willing to get divorced resulting in increased happyness.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I fully believe that stupid, religious people will always be happier than intelligent people without any religious faith. To me that seems straightforward. The former can raise their hands skyward and praise god that little Sally is in heaven after they couldn't afford any private medical treatment for her. They can fire up their gloriously powerful V-8 pickup truck every morning with no thought to the future, because Jesus will take care of the oil supply and CO2 release then. They can dismiss any advantages to having money and not being so poor, or being educated, because all they need is God and a job good enough to afford cable that lets them watch the NFL. And that really is all they need, because they're stupid enough that they don't worry about anything else.

They are happy and content in their own self-contained world in which things do not go wrong because they don't see them. Even if they have a smidgen of potential intelligence and capability, why would they use it when it just will cause them to learn about all the negative realities of the world? Nobody wants to find out that Loa loa filariasis exists, to use an example in speaking metaphorically. Jimbo the truck driver in Louisiana doesn't want to know that the water will rise above the dikes again and stay there. He doesn't want to know his grandaddy's home will be submerged under the ocean someday. He doesn't want to know that little Sally isn't actually in heaven but has simply ceased to exist. These things would ruin his happiness.

Psychologically, ignorance is bliss. Stupid/desperately in denial/oblivious people can and do form groups in society that actively reject factual reality--just look at Glenn Beck listeners, for instance--and it makes them happier. Because now they're involved in a giant mutual fantasy in which the world is better than it actually is and all outcomes among those they care about are positive. White, God-fearing Christians are going to heaven and the future is as optimistic as Reagan said it would be, if only we worship God and work hard. Nothing more need be done, nothing more to concern anyone about it. And outside of the US there are to varying degrees endless repetitions of the same theme in other countries, to varying degrees of sincerity and intensity. But they all have the same effect: They are groups of mutually supporting people who blind themselves to the rest of the world by ignorance and superstition and thereby create a shared reality which is better than the real thing.

[DarkAscendant]

I fully believe that stupid, religious people will always be happier than intelligent people without any religious faith. To me that seems straightforward. The former can raise their hands skyward and praise god that little Sally is in heaven after they couldn't afford any private medical treatment for her. They can fire up their gloriously powerful V-8 pickup truck every morning with no thought to the future, because Jesus will take care of the oil supply and CO2 release then. They can dismiss any advantages to having money and not being so poor, or being educated, because all they need is God and a job good enough to afford cable that lets them watch the NFL. And that really is all they need, because they're stupid enough that they don't worry about anything else.

They are happy and content in their own self-contained world in which things do not go wrong because they don't see them. Even if they have a smidgen of potential intelligence and capability, why would they use it when it just will cause them to learn about all the negative realities of the world? Nobody wants to find out that Loa loa filariasis exists, to use an example in speaking metaphorically. Jimbo the truck driver in Louisiana doesn't want to know that the water will rise above the dikes again and stay there. He doesn't want to know his grandaddy's home will be submerged under the ocean someday. He doesn't want to know that little Sally isn't actually in heaven but has simply ceased to exist. These things would ruin his happiness.

Psychologically, ignorance is bliss. Stupid/desperately in denial/oblivious people can and do form groups in society that actively reject factual reality--just look at Glenn Beck listeners, for instance--and it makes them happier. Because now they're involved in a giant mutual fantasy in which the world is better than it actually is and all outcomes among those they care about are positive. White, God-fearing Christians are going to heaven and the future is as optimistic as Reagan said it would be, if only we worship God and work hard. Nothing more need be done, nothing more to concern anyone about it. And outside of the US there are to varying degrees endless repetitions of the same theme in other countries, to varying degrees of sincerity and intensity. But they all have the same effect: They are groups of mutually supporting people who blind themselves to the rest of the world by ignorance and superstition and thereby create a shared reality which is better than the real thing.

You don't sound particularly happy to me.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

You don't sound particularly happy to me.

People are getting machine-gunned in Iran, Uganda is about to pogrom Homosexuals, the third world is being a usual festering shithole of misery, the TSA has implemented the most retarded security restrictions ever (which would have the grand result of making everyone on the plane die an hour earlier than they otherwise would, wow, you fucking geniuses), nobody can provide my roommate a ride home from the airport on the 30th, and my girlfriend's train is 4 hours later due to a snowstorm in Montana.

But I'm sure if I just gave myself a lobotomy and went to church more often I wouldn't care and would be happier, so, sure.

[DarkAscendant]

You don't sound particularly happy to me.

People are getting machine-gunned in Iran, Uganda is about to pogrom Homosexuals, the third world is being a usual festering shithole of misery, the TSA has implemented the most retarded security restrictions ever (which would have the grand result of making everyone on the plane die an hour earlier than they otherwise would, wow, you fucking geniuses), nobody can provide my roommate a ride home from the airport on the 30th, and my girlfriend's train is 4 hours later due to a snowstorm in Montana.

But I'm sure if I just gave myself a lobotomy and went to church more often I wouldn't care and would be happier, so, sure.

Well, I'm sorry you have such a heavy burden to bear, knowing that the world is an ugly place while religious people are ignorant retards who know nothing and are obviously inferior to yourself since they cannot comprehend the world as you can.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Well, I'm sorry you have such a heavy burden to bear, knowing that the world is an ugly place while religious people are ignorant retards who know nothing and are obviously inferior to yourself since they cannot comprehend the world as you can.

Don't try that sarcasm with me, little boy. You're not answering a single point, just being snide, and that isn't going to get you far at all. Would you care to propose an actual criticism to my claim that religious people are happier due to psychological self-deception? Or are you incapable of doing so?

[The Yosemite Bear]

Well you know how the thin skinned types are Marina Collette, some people just feel that they are being unfairly persecuted because they can't bash those that they don't like you know that whole tribalism, jingoism, xenophobia (in this case literially fearing anything that is different) helps.

Basically for those Rednecks that are too smart to be part of the pack, it's a painful situation, that sometimes gets summed up in Lennon's "Working Class Hero" song. In that sense though one already has to be an outsider, to know that the tribe doesn't work. I went to those brainwashing systems (big churches, scouts etc) but I had already been physically abused for the circumstances of my birth, thus I had developed the tnedancies to be apart from the pack. (though also having Rennisancemen for male roll models helped greatly.)

[DarkAscendant]

Well, I'm sorry you have such a heavy burden to bear, knowing that the world is an ugly place while religious people are ignorant retards who know nothing and are obviously inferior to yourself since they cannot comprehend the world as you can.

Don't try that sarcasm with me, little boy. You're not answering a single point, just being snide, and that isn't going to get you far at all. Would you care to propose an actual criticism to my claim that religious people are happier due to psychological self-deception? Or are you incapable of doing so?

On religion, I am apathetic. But I find your attitude offensive and distasteful.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Well, I'm sorry you have such a heavy burden to bear, knowing that the world is an ugly place while religious people are ignorant retards who know nothing and are obviously inferior to yourself since they cannot comprehend the world as you can.

Don't try that sarcasm with me, little boy. You're not answering a single point, just being snide, and that isn't going to get you far at all. Would you care to propose an actual criticism to my claim that religious people are happier due to psychological self-deception? Or are you incapable of doing so?

On religion, I am apathetic. But I find your attitude offensive and distasteful.

But is it wrong? You refuse to address that.

[Aeolus]

Well, I'm sorry you have such a heavy burden to bear, knowing that the world is an ugly place while religious people are ignorant retards who know nothing and are obviously inferior to yourself since they cannot comprehend the world as you can.

Don't try that sarcasm with me, little boy. You're not answering a single point, just being snide, and that isn't going to get you far at all. Would you care to propose an actual criticism to my claim that religious people are happier due to psychological self-deception? Or are you incapable of doing so?

On religion, I am apathetic. But I find your attitude offensive and distasteful.

Don't forget pretentious as well as counter productive. You can't put all the worlds troubles on your shoulders. You will never be a happy or even sane person for long if you do.

[Aeolus]

But is it wrong? You refuse to address that.

Of course the world has troubles. It always will. There is very little you can do to change that. Sure you should try and not increase those troubles and when possible try and help alleviate them. You cannot however end all the worlds problems nor are you to blame for them. Feeling guilty because people are rioting in Iran or oppressing gays in Uganda does no one any good. Not the Iranians, not the Ugandans and not you. People who are happy are happy because they understand this simple fact. Making fun of them because you falsely believe you are superior to them will not encourage them to seem your point of view.

[Lusankya]

When did the Duchess say she felt guilty? Feeling guilty isn't a prerequisite for feeling unhappy about something. Are you always so selfish that you can't feel compassion and sympathy for others' pain (and the resulting sense of unhappiness caused by said compassion and sympathy) without relating it to yourself first?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

But is it wrong? You refuse to address that.

Of course the world has troubles. It always will. There is very little you can do to change that. Sure you should try and not increase those troubles and when possible try and help alleviate them. You cannot however end all the worlds problems nor are you to blame for them. Feeling guilty because people are rioting in Iran or oppressing gays in Uganda does no one any good. Not the Iranians, not the Ugandans and not you. People who are happy are happy because they understand this simple fact. Making fun of them because you falsely believe you are superior to them will not encourage them to seem your point of view.

What the fuck? Why don't you go back to the original argument I made, which is that religious people live in a cloud of psychological obliviousness, and answer THAT? This entire useless tangent was started by the other shit for brains and his snide comments and has no bearing on the actual subject, or the point that I made.

[Serafina]

What Marina said

While i agree with you that religious, stupid people worry less about anything that does not affect them directly, i thinki it is the stupid part that causes this, less the religious part.

A smart, empathic person won't worry less about the world because he/she is religious. They will perhaps worry about other things, but they will worry no less. Especially since many of them think that happiness has to be earned from god, so they do not understand why their life is so good while other suffer so much. They mad dismiss it as gods plan, but unless they are stupid, it will still bother them.

Religion can be used to lessen certain worries, but for most things, you can do that as an atheist, too (such as death of a relative).
But it can also add more distress.
Ignorance is bliss, and religion can cause ignorance, but not every religious person is totally ignorant.

[Bakustra]

But is it wrong? You refuse to address that.

Of course the world has troubles. It always will. There is very little you can do to change that. Sure you should try and not increase those troubles and when possible try and help alleviate them. You cannot however end all the worlds problems nor are you to blame for them. Feeling guilty because people are rioting in Iran or oppressing gays in Uganda does no one any good. Not the Iranians, not the Ugandans and not you. People who are happy are happy because they understand this simple fact. Making fun of them because you falsely believe you are superior to them will not encourage them to seem your point of view.

What the fuck? Why don't you go back to the original argument I made, which is that religious people live in a cloud of psychological obliviousness, and answer THAT? This entire useless tangent was started by the other shit for brains and his snide comments and has no bearing on the actual subject, or the point that I made.

No, your original argument was that they were happier, and inevitably so, than the non-religious. Of course, I cannot confront your personal anecdote without tossing out anecdotes of my own. Could you support this argument? You then made a secondary, implied point that the lower and working classes are more likely to be stupid and religious. I would also like some statistical support for this argument as well, rather than a vague argument based on religion's psychological support mechanisms. In my personal experience, mind, people may say, "It's all in God's hands", but they'll generally do whatever they can when matters are within their control to any extent. Of course, your experience may well differ.

Aeolus: You seem to be conflating guilt and sympathy. Sympathy (or empathy) is the quality of, if I may, "being able to walk a mile in another's shoes". It is an important part of social interaction, and essential to being able to offer comfort to other people when they're sad or otherwise in times of trouble. It necessarily involves taking on some of the emotions the other person is feeling. Guilt, meanwhile, is the feeling of regret or sorrow associated with one's responsibility for an ill action. I don't see where Duchess is taking responsibility for institutionalized persecution of homosexuals in Uganda or riots in Iran. Perhaps you can illuminate this for the rest of us?

As for the subject of the thread, I'm not surprised to see my home state of Michigan so low. We have one of the highest unemployment rates and were already in a lengthy economic slump when the recession hit. The Rust Belt in general is probably pretty low because of that, along with California, which is also suffering greatly from the recession.

[Ryan Thunder]

Well, I'm sorry you have such a heavy burden to bear, knowing that the world is an ugly place while religious people are ignorant retards who know nothing and are obviously inferior to yourself since they cannot comprehend the world as you can.

Don't try that sarcasm with me, little boy. You're not answering a single point, just being snide, and that isn't going to get you far at all. Would you care to propose an actual criticism to my claim that religious people are happier due to psychological self-deception? Or are you incapable of doing so?

Easy. How many times have you gone to a funeral where people are happy and don't need to be reminded that the deceased is in heaven or whatever?

Really, religious people can get as miserable as anybody else, delusional or not.

[Lusankya]

You then made a secondary, implied point that the lower and working classes are more likely to be stupid and religious. I would also like some statistical support for this argument as well, rather than a vague argument based on religion's psychological support mechanisms. In my personal experience, mind, people may say, "It's all in God's hands", but they'll generally do whatever they can when matters are within their control to any extent. Of course, your experience may well differ.

Income vs IQ. (PDF)

Various wealth by religion charts.

So yes, Duchess is quite correct in saying that the poor are more likely to be stupid and religious. They're also more likely to be poorly educated (with poor education being its own special kind of stupid - or, if you prefer, education being a way of gaining intelligence).

Easy. How many times have you gone to a funeral where people are happy and don't need to be reminded that the deceased is in heaven or whatever?

How many atheists have you met who found the reminder that "they've gone to heaven" to be a comfort that was available to them?

I don't doubt that Marina's "always" comment was hyperbole, and I also don't doubt that she'll admit to it being hyperbole. Though I would imagine that people who were both religious and stupid would almost always be happier than people who were neither religious nor stupid, as well as people who were only religious and only stupid. Someone both religious and stupid has "all" the answers provided to them, and lacks the intellectual capacity to think outside their own little world. This means that many things that make intelligent people unhappy - such as the state of Iran, Uganda's new policy on homosexuality, etc. aren't even known by stupid people.

Remember, true stupidity isn't just about someone's native ability to learn. It's also affected by the effort they put into learning - in much the same way that someone's skill at basketball is influenced not only by their height and reflexes, but also by the number of times they show up to training.

[Bakustra]

You then made a secondary, implied point that the lower and working classes are more likely to be stupid and religious. I would also like some statistical support for this argument as well, rather than a vague argument based on religion's psychological support mechanisms. In my personal experience, mind, people may say, "It's all in God's hands", but they'll generally do whatever they can when matters are within their control to any extent. Of course, your experience may well differ.

Income vs IQ. (PDF)

Various wealth by religion charts.

So yes, Duchess is quite correct in saying that the poor are more likely to be stupid and religious. They're also more likely to be poorly educated (with poor education being its own special kind of stupid - or, if you prefer, education being a way of gaining intelligence).

Easy. How many times have you gone to a funeral where people are happy and don't need to be reminded that the deceased is in heaven or whatever?

How many atheists have you met who found the reminder that "they've gone to heaven" to be a comfort that was available to them?

I don't doubt that Marina's "always" comment was hyperbole, and I also don't doubt that she'll admit to it being hyperbole. Though I would imagine that people who were both religious and stupid would almost always be happier than people who were neither religious nor stupid, as well as people who were only religious and only stupid. Someone both religious and stupid has "all" the answers provided to them, and lacks the intellectual capacity to think outside their own little world. This means that many things that make intelligent people unhappy - such as the state of Iran, Uganda's new policy on homosexuality, etc. aren't even known by stupid people.

Remember, true stupidity isn't just about someone's native ability to learn. It's also affected by the effort they put into learning - in much the same way that someone's skill at basketball is influenced not only by their height and reflexes, but also by the number of times they show up to training.

Thank you for providing supporting data, but: the intelligence data relies on IQ tests, which are of dubious validity, potentially culturally biased when it comes to intelligence, almost definitely socioeconomically biased, and may not measure intelligence at all, rather the ability of children to succeed within the educational system. With that in mind, it's no surprise that the rich score higher than the poor, when the test is biased in favor of the upper classes in the first place! In addition, IQ tends to be a measurement of how well a child will do in the educational system, which means that a child with higher IQ will tend to achieve the higher levels of education that pay more. Of course, the definition of intelligence varies from person to person, and while there are tests like the TONI that measure problem-solving abilities regardless of linguistics and culture, they are not as generally administered, nor, I suspect, studied as often as IQ tests. I provisionally accept the data, mind, and agree that I was too literal when it came to Duchess' hyperbole. My apologies.

Sourcing: Potential biases
Reliability
The TONI-3
A study on the TONI-3 as applied to the learning-disabled and compared to other intelligence tests.

As for religiosity and wealth, I will note that region has a significant influence as well. There are poorer states that still are less overtly religious, mainly in the American West, such as New Mexico, which is almost as impoverished as Arkansas and West Virginia. Western and Northeastern states are less religious regardless of wealth in general, with Great Plains and Southeastern States more religious, again regardless of wealth. However, I accept the data, and thank you again for providing it.

[wolveraptor]

@Duchess: I feel like you're oversimplifying. Religious people have certain comforts we don't, but they have certain fears we don't as well. The particularly zealous ones have to worry about other peoples' private sexual behavior. As children, they may have had nightmares about themselves or loved ones literally going to hell (you've probably read what The God Delusion said about religion being potentially abusive to children). If they're gay or bicurious, they are forced to remain in the closet. They're aren't allowed to can't admit that they masturbate or engage in premarital sex. Evangelicals, in particular, are more likely to divorce.

Point being, religious people can't necessarily be as carefree as you think.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

How carefree do you think that I think they are? I was raised in a religious background and know it intimately. I was only intending to assert that the study this thread is about can be accounted for by the fact that these poor, religious states are just that--poor and religious--and thus happier than the other states in the US. That is a purely subjective criteria, it's one that shifts based internal perception. All that needs to be shown, however, is that religious stupid people are sufficiently more likely to be happy (without grounds) than educated people, as that will account for the differences in the survey. This is an easily obtained standard of evidence. And Lusankya is right; I will readily admit to some dramatic hyperbole. It's usually what I do when emphasizing something in a post. Anyway, she's already provided the evidence I would have posted if someone had called my argument to account before rather than launching in vague personal attacks, so we can mostly leave it at that, I think.

[Bakustra]

How carefree do you think that I think they are? I was raised in a religious background and know it intimately. I was only intending to assert that the study this thread is about can be accounted for by the fact that these poor, religious states are just that--poor and religious--and thus happier than the other states in the US. That is a purely subjective criteria, it's one that shifts based internal perception. All that needs to be shown, however, is that religious stupid people are sufficiently more likely to be happy (without grounds) than educated people, as that will account for the differences in the survey. This is an easily obtained standard of evidence. And Lusankya is right; I will readily admit to some dramatic hyperbole. It's usually what I do when emphasizing something in a post. Anyway, she's already provided the evidence I would have posted if someone had called my argument to account before rather than launching in vague personal attacks, so we can mostly leave it at that, I think.

Of course. I actually went and correlated the survey with the preliminary unemployment statistics for November, and very little lined up. The only consistency was California and the Rust Belt were at the bottom of both lists, and a few odd correlations. The states with the lowest unemployment were in the lower-middle of the list, though many of them were Great Plains states and Montana. Looking at that, I'm certainly willing to accept your idea, as economics doesn't seem to define much beyond who's at the bottom. Of course, more rural states, which are more likely to be poor and religious, don't show the signs of the recession as much as more urbanized states like New York, the Rust Belt, California, the Northwest, and the Northeast do, but that still ties in with your idea.