: Ms. Brockmann, have the nature and intensity of the pursuit of happiness changed over the course of history?
Hilke Brockmann: The intensity—the search for favorable environments and situations—is a universal drive of humans. The form, however, changes because the environments we respond to change.
: Is the pursuit of happiness of individuals a cause or a solution to crises?
Brockmann: Both. On the one hand, depression is a reaction to external circumstances that are not conducive. On the other hand, the pursuit of happiness is a drive to propel us out of this misery. Happiness or well-being research is often criticized for studying only the positive. We did, of course, also study misfortune. Because war, climate change, and polycrises are often the motivation to change a situation.
: Does there actually exist a universal definition of happiness?
Brockmann: After millennia of research, people today generally assume that happiness is a evaluative mechanism that every sentient being performs. These can be judgments of the environment, but also memories or notions. The environment around us is constantly changing, so we must continually recalibrate the level at which we are happy or satisfied.
: But doesn’t happiness also have an emotional component?
Brockmann: Indeed, in the form of rapid feedback—for example from the intake of sugar or fats. That gives a quick kick and a strong sense of happiness. But there is no fundamental difference between emotional and cognitive evaluation. Rather, it is a brain process that affects other areas. We actively control certain emotions, such as the urge for chocolate. Other cultural techniques likewise aim to resist impulses to achieve long-term goals.
: Is it really the same whether I react to chocolate or to a peace agreement?
Brockmann: Yes. Yet I draw on different information in each case. In a war that does not affect me personally, I first have to imagine how others suffer. For this cognitive process I use different brain areas than when I think about the frustration of not eating chocolate. Still, both areas in the brain are connected. Because my empathy for war victims also triggers—on a different level—sorrow and misfortune. Although I can only speak as a sociologist.
: What do the neurologists say?
Brockmann: They have not yet fully explored the processes in the brain. In MRI they can observe metabolic processes. But it remains unclear why certain regions are engaged while others are not. Parts of the cerebral cortex are older than the prefrontal cortex. With the latter we have gained memory capacity, which allows us to think abstractly. Other, evolutionarily older areas of the brain we share with beings that existed long before us. There, emotions occur reflexively—like pulling a hand away from a hot stove. Yet in both brain regions there is a positive–negative decision made. This mechanism is used by happiness research to see: do people like it or not?
: So happiness is defined more as well-being?
In the interview: Hilke Brockmann
60, sociologist, has been a professor at Constructor University, Bremen, since 2006, editor of the “Encyclopedia of Happiness, Quality of Life and Subjective Wellbeing” in the series “Elgar Encyclopedias in the Social Sciences”.
Brockmann: By now, yes. In ancient Greece there was still a search for a substantial definition of happiness: What is the highest thing that is worth striving for? Today we have moved away from that because it is hard to define. What one sees, however, is that people perceive some things as more positive than others. That makes happiness more earthly and the judging subject the real expert. Consequently, empirical research is conducted and people are asked whether they are happy. This shift in perspective from the “objectively attainable” to the subjectively perceived happiness is substantial.
: And how does one realize an “ethics of well-being” that your “Encyclopedia of Happiness” proposes?
Brockmann: Aristotle already asked: Can bad behavior be ethically right, or must we differentiate? Happiness research shows that people do not strive for individual happiness alone, but in many happiness endeavors are social and want to share the good feeling with others. Therefore many devote themselves to volunteering, to shared religious practice, to making music together.
: But doesn’t our society drift apart? Club memberships, volunteering, even blood donation are on the decline.
Brockmann: Hard to say. In any case, it is documented that people who work as volunteers are very satisfied. We see that giving makes people happy—and activities in non-hierarchical communities among friends: where they do not have to compete for status, recognition, or attention.
: But overall altruism seems to be waning in society.
Brockmann: Yes, egoism and ambition are already strong. Neoliberal ideology long propagated in Western culture that “people are driven by selfish interests.” Western cultures emphasized competition to the extreme and devalued the collective. Because otherwise, supposedly everyone would evade responsibility and curl up in the social hammock. That is a very one‑sided view. For we are deeply social and can only exist well if there are people who take care of us at the beginning and end of our lives. This mutual generosity is part of humanity. We are very aware of our own finitude—a great frustration for the ego. The search for meaning appears to be the recipe in all cultures.
: A chapter of your book is titled “Physical Pain and Happiness.” How does that fit together?
Brockmann: Many people suffer chronic pain. The cause is often harmless, and they have to learn to cope with it. A reframing—looking at the pain from a different angle—often works. Importantly, ending the pain should not be a prerequisite for happiness. One method is the Cold Comfort mentioned in the book.
: That means?
Brockmann: A Finnish researcher describes in her country the popular ice bathing. It is a method to overcome one’s resistance. When one overcomes the impulse to avoid the cold water, one gains a sense of control and self-efficacy. And then one can also overcome the circling around the pain. That means: I can accomplish something I thought I could not. I learn that I can survive under adverse conditions and that the crisis strengthens the physical and mental defenses.
