While studying for my psychology qualification, I found an interesting article titled A Psychologically Rich Life: Beyond Happiness and Meaning1. In today's post, I want to pull out some of the main things of interest, with the caveat that it’s one article and doesn't necessarily constitute the whole truth. However, in my opinion, the discussion and conclusions are worth reading. Grab a cuppa…
Apparently, everyone wants to have a good life.
Completely understandable. After all, no one wants a bad life, do they?!
However, it's difficult to define what exactly a good life is. Are we talking about money, friends, pleasant feelings, and according to whom? Oishi and Westgate, the researchers and authors of the article we're looking at, suggest that “a good life is a life well lived from the perspective of the person living it.” Okay, good start. But that might sound like it leaves things wide open.
Let's break it down into three areas, two of which have been used for decades as the basis for describing a good life but may, as we'll see, be inadequate to cover all the experiences that people who say they have a good life might have. This is good news because that means you can still have a good life even if you're not filled with happiness, as we'll see.
Happiness
Firstly, decades of psychological research have suggested that a good life is one in which you are happy. This kind of life would include sufficient money, good relationships, a positive mindset, and time to do things you like to do. Generally, someone with these is likely to experience a sense of basic security, comfort, and joy from time to time. In short, this kind of person would find personal satisfaction.
Now, this implies that if you want more happiness in your life, then you could try to earn more (or spend less!), spend time investing in relationships that have gone dry, make some new friends, and perhaps learn some good mental habits like using ACT therapy principles to manage a busy and self-doubting mind.
The idea of happiness as a dimension of the good life seems logical. But does that mean you can't have a good life if you're not necessarily happy overall? And if you are happy, will that necessarily help humanity? Clearly, there's more to the equation.
Meaningful
Secondly, psychological research has shown that the good life includes a meaningful life. It's about having feelings of significance, purpose and a kind of coherence across your life. The identified elements that lead to this experience include having clear moral principles you follow, being consistent, and having good relationships, but based on slightly different experiences than just enjoyment, and spirituality. Those who have this in their lives seem to be involved in contributing to others and society in some way.
Nice. We no doubt need that.
However, as Oishi and Westgate point out, "A significant reason neither a happy life nor a meaningful life captures the full range of human motivation is that both happy and meaningful lives can be monotonous and repetitive."
Good point.
So this implies that there is something more that can constitute a good life and, in fact, can help you avoid growing old, happy and meaningful but bored shitless. And stuck, somehow.
Psychologically Rich
They call it the psychologically rich life. I'll outline it in a moment, but this links nicely with a lot of research done into life satisfaction - researchers have found that those with high life satisfaction say they are continually growing, learning and trying things out.
A psychologically rich life is one where a person experiences variety (so crucial for your mind and body), interest (novelty plays a role in staying fresh), and changing perspectives. Hmmm, sounds suspiciously like growth, doesn't it?
How do you facilitate this kind of life? Through cultivating a fundamental curiosity, choosing where you put your attention and energy, spending time on what matters most, and consciously inviting spontaneity into your life.
The result? Wisdom.
Now, the authors point out that happy, meaningful, and psychologically rich lives are not three types of life but rather three dimensions of living a good life.
It's just that focusing on one at the exclusion of the others will give you only a part of the human experience we're all looking for.
Ideas
You could carve out some time and a place to ponder this. See what comes to mind. Jot down your thoughts, and maybe find something to action.
You could take someone out for a brew and talk about these aspects of life, ask them how they foster each area, and see where the conversation leads.
You might already know what you need to do. Wonderful. Go you.
Caveat
As you may know, this is a woo-woo-free zone. So, we talk about things with peer-reviewed evidence behind them, hence the psych papers quoted. Now, psychology research papers are easy to find with Google Scholar but they can make fairly heavy reading if you're not used to them. They use unfamiliar terminology, strange statistical methods and all sorts of long words and sentences. So, if you're used to them, great. But if not, don't worry. We've covered the key themes here in plain English.
Oishi, S., & Westgate, E. C. (2021, August 12). A Psychologically Rich Life: Beyond Happiness and Meaning. Psychological Review. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/rev0000317
Jacqui, been thinking about your comments over the weekend. Kurt Goldstein's self-actualisation is his concept of an approach to living that focuses on finding ways to become more of oneself in a holistic way. Maslow put it this way: “What a man can be, he must be. This need we may call self-actualization." Psychological richness is probably one aspect of that. Psychologist Scott Barry Kaufman (in https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/in-defense-of-the-psychologically-rich-life/) makes the comment that, "It involves complex mental engagement; a wide range of deep, intense emotions; and diverse, novel and interesting experiences." He suggests that may be fun, or not, but, regardless, "(It is) rarely boring or monotonous." I would suggest that all this means there is value in consciously growing oneself and taking the paths less travelled. One could say this brings true joy although, as you say, at times, it may be not result in feelings of happiness. Does that make sense to you?
I’m interested in how (or if) psychological richness differs from self actualisation? For the most part I agree with the three contributing factors of happiness, purpose and richness. I’d go with joy not happiness though - as the latter can too easily be attached to something rather than a state of being. Great article - thanks