Whoever Said that Money Cannot Buy Happiness Simply Did Not Know Where to go Shopping by Derek Bok - Book Report/Review Example

The Politics of Happiness ‘’Whoever said that money cannot buy happiness simply did not know where to go shopping’’ –Derek Bok. Perhaps Bok meant that happiness could be within us that money indeed can buy happiness, that money itself is achievable and likely so is happiness. Whichever way one interprets that one thing still remains certain about the author; his obsession with happiness and wellbeing of the humankind. In all his books, Bok dedicates his pen to commitment to social improvement, with a realistic ability to deduce the possible from the impossible. There is no denying that he therefore, suffices as one of the very few wise people in our celebrity-driven public life. The politics of happiness’ main proposition is that measuring people wellbeing to provide meaningful results. It is based on this that Bok argues that governments should adopt the results of wellbeing research and in consideration of existing economic measures to guide policy-making in a country. He further avails plenty of examples of how existing policies in the U.S could be changed to increase its citizens’ wellbeing. In this book, Bok simply provides a challenge to the deeply ingrained political and economic orthodoxy on how to calculate or rather measure progress. The book sets of with a review of the present research on wellbeing. It is so impressive that expert and frequent researchers on wellbeing could learn some new techniques from this chapter. However the suggestion that the term ‘happiness’ would be used synonymously with phrases such as ‘wellbeing’ and ‘satisfaction with life’ is a downside as philosophers would argue that the entomology of the meanings the nature of happiness-what happiness really is and wellbeing- what ultimately is good for a person are very different. This therefore, when conducting research, the distinct philosophical origins of these terms and the various research questions that use them emerge to be imperative when comparing the results of wellbeing survey. Take an example of many surveys using different questions to test for wellbeing. This would inevitably result in conflicting conclusions about important matters such as who is happy and who is not, and what makes one be happy. Bok succeeds in the research techniques but has a shortcoming in persuading the reader that the use of various words synonymously with happiness would bring forth relatively reliable statistics upon which policies can be aligned with. But such skepticism is especially called for when it is a matter of policy being addressed here, so it is one thing for a social scientist to be wrong in their studies, for other studies will most likely eventually discover what is right and remedy appropriately. That is perhaps why Bok urges caution as he is aware of the ultimate difficulty of absorbing unreliable statistics to form the basis of a policy change exercise. Bok now goes ahead to analyze the reliability of research on wellbeing. He dispels an array of the weaknesses to the reliability of research, for instance he discusses why we cannot rely on traditional economic indicators such as the level of employment. He supports survey on happiness thus, ‘’the results of happiness studies seem, if anything more reliable than many familiar statistics and other types of evidence that legislators and administration officials routinely use in making policy’’ (pg40) Bok again fails to adequately back up this as his defense on the reliability of research on wellbeing rests heavily on the correlations between different measures of happiness, these are self-assessments of life satisfaction, consensus opinions about how happy a neighbor is, tendency to smile and brain scans. Focusing on the correlations’ significance Bok disregarded their sizes and this could have had a much positive inclination to his argument. A highly significant but minute correlation for example, could be an indicator that the two measures are likely to be related in some small way but are most definitely not the same thing. This, Bok could have realized is the difference and that it is indeed what is the case with the measures he discusses. However, he notes that it takes more than the government to implement these. Citizens are noted to be too skeptical of their governments fo their own good, this is evidenced by the harsh judgments the citizens have towards the political figures. Bok suggests that the government should improve the citizens’ trust in it and also urges the mainstream media to balance what it feeds the public and thus show both achievements and flaws instead of focusing on negative pictures of the system that further damages the image. The politics of happiness further presents a powerful case with regard to the notion of inequality and economy growth. It reveals how these two actually have less impact on wellbeing than is the commonplace belief. With well-detailed discussions from various academic fields, Bok explains why these surprising results could possibly happen. He then challenges governments to employ the use of research on wellbeing because it is the most vital aim of public policy. Recommendations were the high points to this book. The politics of happiness suggests numerous amendments with less technically applied common sense, and convincingly at that because Bok’s policies sometime times improve people wellbeing. However degrees of wellbeing in the western nations have proven to be relatively ignorant to policy adjustments over the recent years. He shows how his policy recommendations would pay for themselves, say for example, lowering burdens on state services elsewhere. If a policy will improve wellbeing and still pay for itself, should be a convincing factor even to the most conservative policy-makers any day. The policy recommendations in this book, promoting greater, helping to stabilize marriage and the family, improving public health all require no science to back them up. They have been with us ever since, and even one of Bok’s most radical comments-that we should abandon our obsession with economic growth-has its roots, as he himself acknowledges from the 19th century thinkers like Stuart Mill. The writer finally summarizes his thesis with regard to the importance of wellbeing research for governments. The politics of happiness is a worthy read to students it provides weighty discussions that provoke the student’s critical thinking and subsequent analyzing of recommendations. It has with it flaws just like any other book providing a hypothesis would have but these flaws in the book it is positive to note mainly emanate from the author’s straight-forwardness, honesty and well intentions. He does not shy to back up his arguments to the very end even when it emerges that they could be having flaws. Derek Bok is an example of the large number of American dreamers but only one of the very few to pursue it if not set out ways of pursuing it. With his book, he successfully joins in the ranks of famous academics who have been calling on the policy makers to take wellbeing research seriously. I therefore, recommend that students read this book. Policy makers and those interested in politics and wellbeing will also find it a worthy encounter to read this book. Ignoring it could reduce one to the backseat during future discussions about what progressive governments should do to their citizens. The politics of happiness is indeed for the good of mankind (Bok). Works Cited Bok, Derek Curtis. The politics of happiness: what government can learn from the new research on well-being. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2010. Print. Read More