
Appearances vs. Experiences: What Makes Us Happy - prostoalex
https://fs.blog/2020/07/appearances-vs-experiences/
======
thaniri
I can at least anecdotally say that I am in a privileged position of being
enormously happier after COVID-19 shut my workplace down and every employee
was told to work from home. I associate this entirely with my commute being
reduced to nothing. I hope working from home in IT becomes the future
standard. Big expensive cities are not worth it.

To expand on the article. One thing I've noticed is that a lot of people in my
age group (18-24 years old) are desperately trying to find happiness in
"experiences" but finding emptiness due to social media. Often for them, it is
not achieving something amazing like a long bicycle trip, or summiting a
mountain that brings them joy, but they are thinking about the resulting
Instagram photos instead.

Communication tools like Snapchat are a little bit healthier. Most people use
Snapchat not to show off, but rather to regularly share their lives with a
small group of friends.

Certain social media platforms like Instagram or TikTok seem entirely designed
to try to get their users to pursue building a following and attach their
happiness to that. Some unfortunate people end up having all the joy of
traveling and meeting new people robbed from them as a result. They know that
"experiences" are better for happiness than possessions, but somehow the
result is a bastardized version the actual experience.

Knowing all of this, I am not taking a holier-than-thou position. I myself
have accounts on several social media platforms, but make a conscious effort
to not get drawn into their dopamine manipulating designs.

~~~
ZephyrBlu
> Some unfortunate people end up having all the joy of traveling and meeting
> new people robbed from them as a result. They know that "experiences" are
> better for happiness than possessions, but somehow the result is a
> bastardized version the actual experience

I'm in the same age group and this is what I don't get. If you're enjoying
your experience so much, why the hell are you trying so hard to create content
for social media? Just sit back and relax.

I think the biggest thing for people our age (And probably a bit older as
well) is that they lack purpose. Social media is so popular because it's
instant gratification, and a great way to attempt to fill that void.

~~~
buran77
> If you're enjoying your experience so much, why the hell are you trying so
> hard to create content for social media?

Because many also enjoy the experience of being admired or envied by others,
perhaps even more than the original experience itself. The original experience
might even be "the necessary evil" __* to get the appearance. Anything that
can turn into an exhilarating "high" given by the appreciation of your
followers. Like any high you have to chase bigger and bigger experiences to
get the satisfaction.

Those moments pay off whether they're pleasure or pain because they all
translate into literally days (/s) of appreciation from your followers plus a
story to throw at the dinner table once in a while for another light dose of
the drug. I think it's not really about lacking a purpose. Just perhaps that
the purpose doesn't give them the same or enough satisfaction. Like any other
"drug", you don't need to lack purpose to take it. After all being admired can
be a purpose in itself.

And this by no means applies only to social media. People buy expensive
watches, or cars, or houses where the maintenance cost itself reminds them
every time of the downsides but other people's admiration more than makes up
for it.

* the popular Everest base camp hikes, marathons, and others. Things most people don't necessarily enjoy yet a disproportionate number of them advertise them on social media.

~~~
ZephyrBlu
> Because many also enjoy the experience of being admired or envied by others,
> perhaps even more than the original experience itself

...

> I have many acquaintances who go to great lengths and expenses for an
> experience they don't particularly enjoy but which pays off on social media

That's my whole point. No wonder people are unhappy when they rely on external
things for happiness and fulfillment. It's peak stupidity.

I don't believe what you're describing is sustainable long term.

I think Jim Carrey said it best: _" I think everybody should get rich and
famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it's not
the answer."_

~~~
buran77
> I don't believe what you're describing is sustainable long term.

I'm describing things that have been happening for millennia: people seeking
the admiration of others even at great cost for themselves. Social media is
the last manifestation, in line with modern times. It's still the same drug
just obtained via different means.

I don't know how sustainable it is, if social media puts us above the
sustainability threshold by making this practice more accessible to the
masses. But as the article states people have put up with a lot of permanent
downsides (e.g. a long uncomfortable daily commute) for the fleeting joy of
the upside (e.g. having a bigger bedroom).

On the other hand social media allows people to get that satisfaction with a
one time investment. One fancy trip = one big dose of admiration from
thousands of people. Your grandparents had to take a mortgage to get this
effect. Entire industries were created purely to satisfy such needs, anything
containing "luxury" is a good point to start. Of course there are many other
implications here but while we can agree it's probably not good that so many
rely on this for their daily life happiness, it's hard to quantify how bad.

Anecdotally the worst outcome I've seen from social media induced
disillusionment was couples falling apart because the more immature one lived
"inside" social media and real life didn't provide any of the same highs. The
disappointment took a sledgehammer to what was probably a shaky foundation but
still.

~~~
ZephyrBlu
I don't disagree that this has been going on for millennia. I think humans are
far less rational than we pretend to be (Myself included).

From the article: _" The problem is, we consistently make decisions that
suggest we are not so good at distinguishing between ephemeral and lasting
pleasures. We keep getting it wrong"_.

I believe social media massively exacerbates this phenomenon rather than
making it sustainable.

> Of course there are many other implications here but while we can agree it's
> probably not good that so many rely on this for their daily life happiness,
> it's hard to quantify how bad

It's a slippery slope to me. If you don't eliminate the need for external
validation it snowballs, just like an addiction.

Note that I'm not saying external validation is inherently bad, but _relying_
on it is. We all like getting praise and compliments, but relying on them to
prop ourselves up is a recipe for disaster.

------
hyko
This article–and the many like it-assume that there is some universal truth
that experiences will make you happier than mere things, when this is not
true.

I derive a great deal of happiness from nice things. I suspect I’m not alone,
and that people like me are the reason that the whole human environment isn’t
just a pile of half-arsed crap designed to facilitate only certain types of
approved experiences. We notice the qualities of the things around us every
single moment of the day, and they can bring us great joy (or the opposite).

Materialism is clearly not in vogue (and I suspect there is a moral dimension
to this), but for some people it will make them far happier than trying to
chase experiences. I suspect there are many natural materialists out there
struggling to conform to the new societal norm that only the ephemeral can
lead to psychological salvation, and that all desire for material riches is a
sin.

~~~
bschne
I had the same thought when I first read this as I don't care much for some
experiences that seem to be very highly regarded as if they were guaranteed to
make your life richer (at least in my generation) and at the same time I
appreciate some material things and the physical configuration of my
surroundings to a degree that some would maybe consider overly materialistic.

For some people, nice _things_ can actually affect their life experience,
while some "experiences" (as in activities) feel rather meaningless. I think
the point is that you should aim to pursue whatever positively affects how you
experience your life and not what looks good on the surface only, regardless
of whether the entity under consideration is a material thing or an immaterial
activity.

What a lot of well-designed "nice things" achieve is not just surface level
beauty, but actually working well and "feeling right".

~~~
graham_paul
> For some people, nice things can actually affect their life experience,
> while some "experiences" (as in activities) feel rather meaningless. I think
> the point is that you should aim to pursue whatever positively affects how
> you experience your life and not what looks good on the surface only,
> regardless of whether the entity under consideration is a material thing or
> an immaterial activity.

I agree. Being a coin collector and engaging with the coin collection
community can be as or more meaningful as a holiday

------
Milank
There is no silver bullet.

I am lucky to have both options at my disposal - I live in the city, commute
to work (~45 minutes by tram, more if I walk, which I do). On the other hand,
my parents live in the suburbs, backyard and stuff.

Both options have advantages.

During the lockdown, apartment was fine, but claustrophobic a little bit. Not
many things to do. In the house, you don't even notice it. Especially now,
during the summer, garden, fruits, vegetables, swimming pool.

On the other hand, living in the city offers more options, like socialising,
finding things to do, people with similar interests, training, learning
classes for whatever, etc.

Both options offer experiences. They talk about an experience of commuting
ruining everything. But what about an experience of enjoying personal swimming
pool? Eating stuff from your own garden? Kids running around happy, having a
tree house versus being limited to the apartment?

As I said at the beginning - there's no silver bullet. It's about finding out
what you like, what works for you, and then act accordingly (if possible).

~~~
autokad
I dont like how they didnt back up their claim with data. they never showed
that people in the suburbs were actually more unhappy than people in the
cities. I only saw anecdotes on commutes. And hey, I feel them. I myself only
choose places that I can walk to work, its what I prefer.

some sources say that people in cities are less happy than those in smaller
cities or rural areas.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/05/17/peopl...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/05/17/people-
who-live-in-small-towns-and-rural-areas-are-happier-than-everyone-else-
researchers-say/)

Others say different: [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-29/u-s-
mille...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-29/u-s-millennials-
find-happiness-in-cities-not-small-towns)

and then further bloomberg articles say the opposite. This is why I was
particularly disappointed with their last point. Or is what it is saying is
that once you take away the commute, cities loose handily in happiness?

------
lsinger
Another anecdote.

Me, my wife, and our two kids recently moved.

Previously we lived in a large house that looked “special” — old but in good
shape. Lots of wood and 4m ceilings. That was a rented place.

By chance we found a house smaller and not special at all — a mass-produced
townhouse, basically — that we were able to afford buying. For a few us-
specific reasons we really wanted to buy a house instead of rent it, so we
went ahead.

I was a bit scared that it would be a let-down. A downgrade. The house would
be less special. I would feel less special. I was certain I would regret it,
but it made sense for the family.

The opposite happened. It’s a much nicer experience. The house feels more cozy
and more modern. The kids have suddenly lost all problems sleeping in their
rooms by themselves. They go play in their rooms. They never did that in the
previous house. And being a townhouse, there’s a bunch of similar families
around — suddenly the kids have friends.

I work remotely so there’s not a huge difference work-wise. But I’m much
happier and more relaxed knowing the kids are happier and more relaxed.

~~~
Insanity
I suppose that's because, even though it's smaller, it's actually yours.
Congratz ;-)

~~~
lsinger
It will probably be in ~20 years. :)

"Owning" it makes a difference in so far as that I can now be absolutely
certain that no issue will be handled by the landlord because there isn't one.
Definitely increases my perceived agency.

The kids are 6 and 9. I think they just feel more comfortable in the more
compact living space.

------
toto444
"Living in the suburbs comes at a price: long commutes. Many people spend
hours a day behind the wheel, getting to and from work."

I wish there is a word to distinguish commute in a car and commute in public
transport. The first one is clearly a waste of time. Depending on the person
you ask, commuting by public transport can mean : reading a book, learning a
new language, watching a series, reading the news, writing a book, ...

~~~
Oreb
In every city I have lived, commuting by public transport means standing so
packed that it’s barely possible to move my arms. Thankfully, I now live in
walking distance from my office.

~~~
TeeWEE
I commuted 1h daily in the netherlands. I was lucky always having a spot in
the train, and I could sit in the train for 1h straight. I basically opened my
laptop, programmed a little bit. Read a book. Or just listen to the radio.

It was a lot of time. However it didnt feel completely wasted. However, now
i'm biking in 25m to work. And its a joy. I'm missing it now we're working
from home.

------
jazzabeanie
I tried to review the things in my life that this article might identify as a
misplaced goal. Almost all of them are tied to experiences. Maintaining,
harvesting, and admiring my garden is a soure of pleasure in my life. I can
say the same thing about my bike, my computer, my phone, my guitar, etc.

The example of sacrificing a short commute for a bigger house in the suburbs
isn't so clear if people that you care about also live in the suburbs, or the
house allows you experiences that you couldn't otherwise have - building
things in a workshop, raising a large family, etc.

~~~
so33
I’ve said this above but I don’t think this is an incompatible view with what
the article says. But the predominant attitude is that everyone just ought to
move to the suburbs eventually because it’s just “obviously” so much better,
with the bigger living space and the lower density. We’re seeing this attitude
pop up with COVID-19 once again.

For me, I so heavily despise the experience of being in a car for even half an
hour. So unless I find a neighborhood where everything is nearby or maybe I
can bike everywhere (not so easy in the US!) none of these supposed quality-
of-life improvements will outweigh the downside for me.

(And yes, I have owned a car and used it for day-to-day stuff. I universally
hated every single moment I sat in that car.)

------
boffinism
Surprised that having a big garden is dismissed as a superficial benefit. My
intuition based on personal experience would be that the freedom to potter
about in a garden every day (well, local climate permitting) would be a
reliable source of regular positive experiences. But maybe that's more the
difference between a garden and no garden, and the size of the garden matters
less than I assume?

~~~
KineticLensman
> My intuition based on personal experience would be that the freedom to
> potter about in a garden every day (well, local climate permitting) would be
> a reliable source of regular positive experiences

This is my exact experience. I've always enjoyed pottering about as a form of
mindfulness. I made it part of my daily routine during Lockdown. The garden is
large which increases the amount of pottering available.

In the words of the Zen masters: "Before enlightenment, fetch water, chop
wood. After enlightenment, fetch water, chop wood". Although for me 'fetch
water' = 'pull weeds'.

------
_jal
"[...] for a single person, exchanging a long commute for a short walk to work
has the same effect on happiness as finding a new love."

I can directly relate to this. I went from spending ~2.5 hours/day on the
train to a 15 minute walk about five years ago.

It is hard to overstate how much it changed my life for the better.

~~~
cruano
So falling in love with someone that lives far away just evens out

------
ookblah
having moved thru a number of diff apartments and diff cities i've found the
balance for me, personally. the example in the article is very true,
shortening commute and location of a home is probably #1 on my list of things
that can increase your quality of life.

not sure if this falls under appearances, but i've also found that spending a
more on the "quality" of your home or items (not size) also makes a noticeable
diff. having amenities that are important to you, say... a gym, doorman or
package delivery stuff, "new" appliances did a lot more for me than i
expected. only when i moved to a cheaper place at the expense of those things
did those annoyances crop up.

i think in general this has led me over the years to buy less stuff, but spend
more on quality or aesthetics or what not, even how it makes you feel. most
likely placebo, but you tend to take better care and pride of things you feel
you've "invested" more in. i don't throw around my clothes or shoes. i dealt
with a no frills corded hoover i had since college and hated vacuuming, then
decided to get a cordless dyson cordless and now it's a "joy" to clean on the
weekends or randomly lol. dumb example, but you get the point.

------
gnicholas
> _A person with a one-hour commute has to earn 40 percent more money to be as
> satisfied with life as someone who walks to the office._

Living in downtown Palo Alto probably costs 100% more than living in
Pleasanton, which is roughly a one hour commute.

> _While a bigger garden and spare bedroom soon cease to be novel, every day’s
> commute is a little bit different, meaning we can never get quite used to
> it._

I wonder if this is one of the reasons big tech companies run buses — to make
the commute less painful and blend into the background of life.

~~~
so33
> Living in downtown Palo Alto probably costs 100% more than living in
> Pleasanton, which is roughly a one hour commute.

As I understand, there’s heavy resistance to building any sort of density in
Palo Alto. That will, of course, skew the cost of living. I believe that
people are constantly priced out of the city as well (i.e. they wanted to stay
but couldn’t).

> I wonder if this is one of the reasons big tech companies run buses — to
> make the commute less painful and blend into the background of life.

The American perception toward public transit is that it is unreliable,
crowded, dirty and/or filled with poor people. Knowing that there will be a
seat on a clean bus to take you home without much worry is a major sell and
can convince people to ditch their cars (whether or not the equivalent public
transit commute actually matches the above perception).

When I was in a situation where I could take the “tech buses” regularly, they
for sure helped make a long commute bearable.

------
lordnacho
Maybe the biggest thing in this psychology-type stuff that's come out recently
is how bad people are at knowing their own wants. It's truly stunning for
someone who's used to economic thinking - the orthodoxy is that agents know
what's good for them - and demands we think about how that affects our
economic thinking.

------
alexmingoia
_”There is a direct linear downwards relationship between commute time and
life satisfaction, but there’s no linear upwards correlation between house
size and life satisfaction.”_

But is it really true that house size is the reason people commute? My family
members commute in order to live in a neighborhood and city they desire, yet
live in a small apartment. There are reasons to desire suburbs other than
house size, like gardens, parks, safety, silence, etc. And people also commute
from a city to the suburbs/office parks, as many tech workers in San Francisco
do.

~~~
danielheath
The USA has a... unique... approach to urban planning law, which ensures that
most city centers are unpleasant places to live.

If you were living in inner-city Melbourne (Australia) - you are close to
gardens and parks, and it's one of the safest parts of town. The well-built
buildings are quiet to be in (unfortunately there's now many more poorly-built
ones which are noisy and too hot/cold).

~~~
chadcmulligan
Same in Brisbane, inner city Brisbane has an abundance of parks, public
transport and places to live, and getting more so. Melbourne's liveability is
really influencing Brisbane imho, we're copying a lot of things that make
Melbourne good. (and of course its even better because - no victorians ;-))

------
neilwilson
"Living in the suburbs comes at a price: long commutes. Many people spend
hours a day behind the wheel, getting to and from work. On top of that, the
dispersed nature of suburbs means that everything from the grocery store to
the gym requires more extended periods of time driving."

Move the work and the services to the suburbs.

For most of human history we worked where we lived. That changed only very
recently, and the artificial bifurcation needs to be reversed - particularly
now we have the technology to do it, without sacrificing any necessary
economies of scale

~~~
PeterisP
"Move the work and the services to the suburbs." \- USA zoning laws generally
prohibit that, and zoning is hard to change as local NIMBY activists can
effectively block such attempts to change.

------
gmaster1440
With the risk of coming across as vapid, I believe that a more profound and
possibly undermining insight here is that "appearance" is itself an implicit
experience of it, meaning that you can't really escape experience or consider
something as truly decoupled from experiencing it.

With that, "Appearances vs. Experiences" becomes more of a false dichotomy, an
argument that privileges certain experiences over others, which is fine, but
possibly less effective.

~~~
arrosenberg
You definitely can decouple it. Go to any major National Park in the US or
Canada and you will see people who get out of a luxury bus or car, snap 3
pictures and get back in to go to the next scene. To some extent experience is
in the eye of the beholder, but I feel pretty good about judging those people
as not really experiencing what they came to see.

~~~
gmaster1440
Fair enough, in your example the tourists who simply take a photo are
definitely not getting the same kind of experience as those who choose to go
on hikes. I do feel that fits nicely into my argument, which is that we can
compare photo opportunity and hiking as two different kinds of experiences,
instead of treating one as an appearance vs another as an actual experience.

In the end, it's at least possible that the tourists that only took a photo
have derived as much personal pleasure and satisfaction as those who invested
more time into activities such as hiking, depending on their personalities,
interests, and intentions.

------
supernova87a
Well, as I've learned in my own life, you can be told that so many different
things have no real impact on your satisfaction after you finally achieve
them. But such is the human condition, that you still need to experience for
yourself before you learn (generally).

If only there were a way to pass the real feeling / understanding to someone
else so that we wouldn't all have to bang our heads against the wall and find
out for ourselves...

------
leon1717
You just gotta be able to differentiate happiness from fun.

------
mrxd
But what if the students assigned to the less desirable building really were
less happy, but they had made other changes to their life to make up for it?
Maybe they spent less time in the building, or improved the aesthetics of
their room, or spent more time on hobbies or socializing.

I suspect confirmation bias leads researchers to find proof of their initial
hypothesis without ruling out other explanations.

------
mathew_samuel
In the book, there is also insights on how our touchpoints with our city
affect our perceptions of it, and how roads play an extreme role in it. For
instance, how major roads go ‘through’ the city in the US vs how roads are
built ‘around’ the city in Europe increases the touchpoints to the cityscape
that makes it more engaging.

------
zalkota
You should create and buy things that serve and enable the experiences you
desire. An example would be a beautiful pool where your family and friends can
gather.

------
noetokyo
I mean this is good but it assumes that all people are treated the same way in
experiences.

------
seosenior
Both

