CAN SECULAR BUDDHISM, MODERN STOICISM, APPLIED RATIONALITY OR POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY ACTUALLY IMPROVE YOUR MINDSET & YOUR LIFE?
INTRODUCTION:
From the "human potential movement" of 1970s and the "self-esteem movement" of the 1980s to the self-help hucksters of the early 21st century like NLP guru Tony Robbins and "The Secret" author Rhonda Byrne, the scientific skeptic movement has done a fairly good job exposing and debunking some of the more dubious self-help systems, especially those that are based on supernatural claims or some form of pseudoscience. However, even as some self-help gurus are publicly discredited and once popular books are forgotten, there are many more that arise to fill the gap, suggesting that behind the self-help industry in the U.S. (raking in $9-11 billion annually) there is a perennial human desire for real methods of self-improvement.
One of the major realizations that many skeptics & atheists have made in recent years is that, even as most organized religions are based on dubious claims about the supernatural, there's a lot of evidence that suggests participation in a religious organization can make people happier. This has prompted a search for secular replacements for religion that incorporate sound principles from psychology & sociology about what promotes happiness & social cohesion. Unfortunately, the search for the ideal secular self-help system is complicated by the fact that many people live in areas where there are no secular self-help groups. In many cases, the closest equivalent may be a secular humanist organization or atheist meetup that provides some opportunities for socializing, but they don't typically focus on self-improvement. Luckily, online communities have arisen to fill this gap, and there's hope that if one or more secular self-help systems prove to be highly effective at fostering self-improvement this may result in the founding of dedicated practice groups across the U.S.
So what's the current state of secular self-help systems, and what looks promising from an evidence-based perspective? That will be the topic of this discussion...
In the first section of this discussion, we'll address "Secular Buddhism", i.e. Buddhist philosophy & practices stripped of any supernatural beliefs or devotional practices. The practice of Secular Buddhism that is most commonly adopted as a self-help method is a specific form of meditation known as "mindfulness meditation"which involves purposely bringing one's attention to experiences occurring in the present moment without judgment. It derives from the Buddhist concept of "sati", and the methods used for the cultivation are typically based on Zen, Vipassanā, and Tibetan meditation techniques. It became popular with some skeptics & atheists after it was discussed in Sam Harris's best-selling book, Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion (2014), and his frequent discussions of meditation on his podcast and the release of his "Waking Up" meditation app in 2018 has further stimulated interest among his fans. Many Western practitioners of Secular Buddhism also practice various forms of yoga for both its alleged physical fitness & mental health benefits, even though in Asia yoga is mostly practiced by Hindus. Since the 1970s, scientists have have investigated both meditation & yoga and found some possible benefits in terms of stress reduction. However, as we'll see, critics within psychology have questioned both the commercialization and the over-marketing of mindfulness & yoga for health benefits - as well as emphasizing the need for more randomized controlled studies, for more methodological details in reported studies, and for the use of larger sample-sizes. Critics within the Secular Buddhism movement have also criticized the "mindfulness fad", noting that even the meditation is done correctly, it neglects the other elements in the "Eightfold Path" (e.g. abstaining from lying, divisive or abusive speech, or gossip; abstinence from alcohol & meat-eating; abstinence from pornography, etc.) and falsely equates spiritual progress with gaining proficiency in a set of meditative techniques. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_Buddhism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness
In the second section, we'll look at "Modern Stoicism", a recent intellectual and popular movement aimed at reviving the practice of Stoic philosophy and adapting its practices to provide peace of mind and cultivate self-discipline mind the challenges of life in the early 21st century. Many people in the skeptic movement were introduced to Modern Stoicism by Massimo Pigliucci, the former co-host of the Rationally Speaking podcast, who wrote an article entitled "How to Be a Stoic" in the NY Times back in 2015 and has since authored several books on the subject. Stoic philosophy seems promising to many skeptics searching for a science-based form of self-help, since it was the part of the inspiration for some of the methods used in Albert Ellis' "Rational-Emotive Behavior Therapy" (REBT) when it was originally developed in the 1950s, and REBT was the major precursor of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), widely considered to be the most evidence-based form of psychotherapy available today. While Modern Stoics often draw upon CBT, many tend reject the Deism and "appeal to nature" that was central to ancient Stoic philosophy. However, many of them do embrace other elements from traditional Stoic philosophy, such as ascetic practices like cold showers and intermittent fasting, as well as the four classical virtues (temperance, fortitude, justice, wisdom) and a belief in universalism & cosmopolitanism. Modern Stoicism has spawned numerous blogs, podcasts, and online forums such as the Stoicism Today blog and the New Stoa forum. Yet the movement has attracted some criticism from pundits & journalists who often take exception to how Silicon Valley tech entrepreneurs have embraced certain aspects of Stoicism, even while maintaining a wealthy lifestyle and profiting off internet technologies that cause widespread problems with distraction, anxiety and social strife. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Stoicism
In the third section, we'll look at "applied rationality" which is a methodology that has emerged over the last decade from the online "rationalist community", in particular the online "LessWrong forum", founded by Eliezer Yudkowsky in 2009, and the "Center for the Applied Rationality" founded in Berkeley, California by Julia Galef, Anna Salamon, Michael Smith and Andrew Critch in 2012. The "applied rationality" movement promotes lifestyle changes believed to lead to more accurate evaluation of evidence and better decision-making. It often focuses on learning to spot and avoid cognitive biases described in the work of the psychologist Daniel Kahneman. It also teaches practitioners to use "Bayesian inference" (i.e. a looser application of Bayes' Theorem from probability theory) to incrementally update one's beliefs. Criticisms of the rationalist community often center around Eliezer Yudkowsky's central role, despite the fact that he's an autodidact that dropped out of high school, as well as the tendency of discussions on his forum to focus on issues like the possibility of a "technological singularity" and/or the threats posed by "hostile AI" which reminds critics of science fiction. CFAR has attracted criticism from some journalists because it's popular with tech workers in Silicon Valley and the high ticket price for its seminars make it seem "elitist". We'll discuss whether these concerns should be relevant to whether or not the methods of teaching "applied rationality" are beneficial. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/LessWrong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Applied_Rationality
In the fourth section, we'll take a look at the field of "positive psychology", a new domain in academic psychology that began in 1998 when Martin Seligman chose it as the theme for his term as president of the American Psychological Association. Unlike most other domains of psychology which tends to focus on treating various forms of mental illness or social deviance, positive psychology focuses on nurturing talent and improving normal life. Although its formal founding was relatively recent, positive psychology built on the work done in the mid-20th century by Abraham Maslow, Rollo May, James Bugental and Carl Rogers in what was known then as the "humanistic psychology" movement. As we'll discuss, laypeople often mistakenly equate the field of positive psychology with the popular self-help method of "positive thinking" as expounded in the books of non-credentialed authors like Napoleon Hill and Norman Vincent Peele, and many journalists have focused on early concepts from the field of positive psychology or its precursors in humanistic psychology - notably Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" - without being aware they've been long since succeeded by more empirically based concepts. Positive psychology has grown considerably as a field in the last 20 years, and its major theories now include Martin Seligman's PERMA model which posits 5 elements of well-being (Positive emotions, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, Achievement) and the "Values in Action Inventory of Strengths" (VIA-IS) which is a psychological assessment measure designed to identify an individual's profile of 24 "character strengths", organized in relation to 6 underlying "core virtues". However, as we'll see, critics within psychology have faulted the field for a weak evidential basis for some of its claims, as well as for mixing ethical philosophy and empirical science. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_psychology
RELEVANT MATERIAL FROM PAST MEETUPS:
The 1st section of our meetup deals with mindfulness meditation, and we covered some material related to this back in January of 2019 in a meetup entitled "Is Secular Buddhism True?" We looked at the scientific evidence for meditation as a treatment for anxiety & depression as well as a way to encourage more empathy for others & curb violence. We also discussed whether meditation validated the "modular mind" theory, and whether the experience of "ego death" was a a positive experience or likely to lead to disassociation. https://www.meetup.com/Philly-Skeptics/events/ffkqkqyzcbbc/
The 3rd section of our meetup deals with the rationalist community, and we looked at them before back in January of 2019 in a meetup entitled "Can Skeptics Fight Irrationality Without Succumbing To It?" We addressed some critiques of skeptic & rationalist movements for allegedly promoting "scientism" and "techno-utopianism", and we looked at claims that the recent decline in religiosity in the U.S. might lead to a "crisis of meaninglessness" and worsen political tribalism. https://www.meetup.com/Philly-Skeptics/events/lckqkqyzcbrb/
The 4th section of our discussion deals with the emerging field of "positive psychology", and back in January of 2018 we had a meetup entitled "the Science of Happiness" that addressed the results of research on what increases overall happiness for individuals. We reviewed Martin Seligman’s Five Elements of Well-Being from his "PERMA" model (Positive emotions, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, Achievement), and then discussed phenomena like hedonic set points, the hedonic treadmill, and the diminishing utility of wealth for happiness. We also looked at 3 paradoxes that have been discovered by happiness research: the paradox of choice, the friendship paradox, and the parenting paradox. To learn more about these concepts, check out the discussion outline: https://www.meetup.com/Philly-Skeptics/events/246018303/
Although we won't address it in this meetup, it's worth mentioning that many self-help methods are based on Neuo-Linguistic Programming (NLP), a fringe branch of psychology that is related to Ericksonian hypnosis and is often touted by proponents as valuable method for self-help, as well as sales tactics & dating advice. We covered it briefly back in February of 2019 in a meetup entitled "The Science of Hypnosis" -- see the 2nd section. As we discussed, NLP has not found much support for its claims over the past 40 years in the experimental literature, suggesting that it's probably best regarded as a pseudo-science, even though hypnosis has some evidence suggesting can be useful for several types of therapeutic interventions. https://www.meetup.com/Philly-Skeptics/events/ffkqkqyzdbfb/
I had considered looking at Jordan Peterson's bestselling self-help book 12 Rules for Life as well as the mix of Jungian psychoanalysis and evolutionary psychology he promotes. As Stephen Becker noted in an article in Skeptic magazine, Jordan Peterson's advice for men strongly resembles Robert Bly's "Mythopoetic men's movement" that hosted men's retreats in the 1980s & 1990s. We may address similar neo-traditionalist men's groups in a future meetup, along with the alleged "crisis of masculinity" and the debate over "toxic masculinity"... However, it's worth remembering that back in March of 2020, we had a meetup entitled "Is Jordan Peterson (Kinda Sorta) Right About Religion" where we discussed how Peterson's ideas relate to recent research in the fields of "neurotheology" and evolutionary psychology. In general, we concluded that while there's some evidence to suggest that human "spirituality" (for lack of a better term) may have a basis in evolved traits and organized religion certainly played an important role in our cultural evolution from hunter-gatherers to industrial societies, Peterson's attempts to find a genetic basis for Jungian archetypes or his argument that civilization could collapse due to secularization are not very evidence-based. https://www.meetup.com/Philly-Skeptics/events/fllzgrybcfbcb/
CAVEAT: The success of any self-help method depends not only on how effective it is for individuals, but also how likely it is to catch on with the general populace and scale up in a way that it continues to yield noticeable psychological benefits when taught from a standardized curriculum by a wide variety of instructors. I have some doubts about whether or not scaling up self-help methods in this way is possible, based on an earlier meetup we had entitled "A Skeptical Take on Education" where we looked at various reasons that educational interventions that appear to work in small trials typically can't be scaled up to work nationwide. The reasons that educational interventions typically don't yield impressive results may also explain why we might not see big differences in outcomes at the population level if we look at the effects of widely taught self-help methods - i.e. we run up against heavy genetic components in individuals' IQ & Big Five personality traits. Most self-help systems promise improvements in mental prowess, self-discipline, controlling negative emotions, and relationships with other people, but these abilities all depend on relatively fixed traits, namely Intelligence, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Agreeableness respectively. There's also the problems of "learning loss" (for those who discontinue training) and "learning transfer" (for those who can't apply insights learned via one type of training to other areas of life). And when a training system proliferates, the quality of instruction often varies so much that on average it doesn't exceed self-study. That said, there's often a big difference between suboptimal study and no study at all when it comes to proficiency in specific skills, so we shouldn't discount the possibility that simply getting many people to try certain self-help methods might yield big benefits if even a significant fraction of them stuck with it. https://www.meetup.com/Philly-Skeptics/events/238151623/
