Science Literature

Human beings are much better talking about Darwinism than being explained by it. One of the major anomalies concerns altruism. Despite the many proposals to explain, on biological grounds, why humans help others before looking after their own interests, the central questions are still unresolved. Consequently, Darwinists continue to search for ways of interpreting altruistic behaviour in a way consistent with selfish genes.

We need a philosophy of life that allows us to make sense of all our experiences

New research emanating from social psychology brings challenges to economists as well as Darwinists. The starting point was the question: "Can money buy happiness?" Several studies have found that, once basic needs are met, happiness levels are not correlated with income.

"Indeed, although real incomes have surged dramatically in recent decades, happiness levels have remained largely flat within developed countries across time. One of the most intriguing explanations for this counterintuitive finding is that people often pour their increased wealth into pursuits that provide little in the way of lasting happiness, such as purchasing costly consumer goods."

The finding is counterintuitive because the received wisdom in economics is that "spending money on yourself gives the greatest happiness bang for the buck". Against this is growing evidence that "prosocial behaviour" brings significant experiences of happiness to benefactors. The researchers devised three methods of testing their hypothesis that altruism promotes happiness. These involved a survey of the spending behaviour of 632 Americans, an analysis of the actual spending patterns of bonuses given to employees by a Boston-based company, and a spending behaviour experiment utilising psychology undergraduates. In all cases, emphasis was not on disposable income, but on patterns of expenditure (whether on self or on others). In all three avenues of enquiry, "happiness correlated with the amount of money people spent on others rather than the absolute amount of the bonus or income".

"Dunn says the results "confirmed our hypothesis more strongly than we dared to dream." The effects of altruistic spending are probably akin to those of exercise, she notes, which can have immediate and long-term effects. Giving once might make a person happy for a day, but "if it becomes a way of living, then it could make a lasting difference," she says."

According to the ScienceNOW report, these results will surprise most economists. A UK academic is reported as saying: "It's an intriguing result you won't find in Economy 101 textbooks". It is worth adding that the observed behaviours do not fit well into Darwinian thinking either, because no genetic advantage ensues from these forms of altruism.

In situations like this, it is reasonable to ask fundamental questions about the validity of the conceptual framework of the theorists. In particular, have economists and evolutionary biologists got the right tools for understanding human behaviour? Answering this question takes us far beyond the scope of this blog, but here are a few thoughts to suggest a way ahead.
There are millions of people around the world who are not at all surprised by the research findings. They have learned that it is better to give than to receive - from a Teacher whom they regard as the supreme example of self-sacrifice. They have proved by practical experience that it is worth excelling in generosity. This message is particularly relevant today - Easter Day 2008. For these people, the human race cannot be understood solely in terms of material entities. When economists and evolutionary biologists come to recognise that design permeates all aspects of human nature, this will be a big step forward towards the development of a holistic worldview.

Spending Money on Others Promotes Happiness
Elizabeth W. Dunn, Lara B. Aknin, and Michael I. Norton
Science, 319, 21 March 2008: 1687-1688.

Although much research has examined the effect of income on happiness, we suggest that how people spend their money may be at least as important as how much money they earn. Specifically, we hypothesized that spending money on other people may have a more positive impact on happiness than spending money on oneself. Providing converging evidence for this hypothesis, we found that spending more of one's income on others predicted greater happiness both cross-sectionally (in a nationally representative survey study) and longitudinally (in a field study of windfall spending). Finally, participants who were randomly assigned to spend money on others experienced greater happiness than those assigned to spend money on themselves.

Youngsteadt, E., The Secret to Happiness? Giving, ScienceNOW Daily News, 20 March 2008