Happiness in Dubai

Some say that philosophy is not practical. But they are wrong. About two decades ago a printer in Connecticut named Lionel Kechian stumbled upon ancient philosophy. He read Aristotle's Nichomachian Ethics and the Handbook of Epictetus and was hooked. He started thinking seriously about happiness, and the reasons why so many people were unhappy. From Epictetus he learned that most people were unhappy because they thought about life problems in a wrongheaded way: they had a poor philosophy.

Lionel set out to change that by offering a course on the philosophy of happiness at a local college in Fairfield Connecticut. When the course was over the students wanted to continue the discussion so Lionel started a "happiness club," which continues to meet monthly at the Fairfield Public Library.

His idea has been contagious, and happiness clubs have spread across the U.S. and around the world. In dozens of cities people get together each month to talk about the theory and practice of happiness. A new chapter has just opened in Dubai.


What is so interesting about this phenomenon is that Lionel does not fit your preconceptions of the towering intellectual leader; he is not a learned professor, priest or pontificator. In fact, he revealed to me that when he took "introduction to philosophy" as a college course he found it quite daunting. He is, however, very fond of thinking about the good, and how to live better, and talking about this question with other people. His extraordinary enthusiasm for the philosophy of happiness continues to spread. Here in Fairfield, where I spend about half the year, he is the local Socrates. When I run into him at the library or on the street, he always makes time for an interesting conversation about how we can live better.

There is a lesson here for professional philosophers.

The Delights and Dangers of Cookbook Education

I found a nice simple discussion of cook book teaching today at the Positive Psychogy News Daily blog.

Sherri Fisher writes:

I don’t know about you, but I get bored making, serving and eating the same old-same old. . . .I’d be the first to agree that cookbooks perform a vital function. Especially in an age when it is unlikely that children and grandchildren are in the kitchen soaking up the traditional family recipes, cookbooks allow people the ability to perform in a kitchen with a reasonable amount of self-confidence.

In education there are a number of cookbooks. They may be called “curriculum frameworks” or something similarly sturdy and substantial sounding. Some have actually been around for years despite being touted as the outcomes of education reform. They serve the same purpose as kitchen cookbooks (attempting to guarantee a consistent outcome) and as such are bound by the same limitations. However, in an education system which is under fire from many quarters, cookbook education can sometimes rightly be seen by administrators in charge of “making the numbers” as the most easily defensible program a system can take. A school of educational thought, based on educational theory, develops a highly structured program that is as close to”fool”proof as it can be made. The program is presented to teachers, who are then expected to present it to students. Voilà, education happens. That is supposedly the delight of cookbook education.

Rote cook booking is essential for the novice. One who cooks every day, though, gains the kind of confidence to deviate from the cookbook, to improve the recipe, to adapt the recipe to individual circumstances and ingredients. Ideally, this happens to teachers, too. In fact, the better a teacher is, the more likely it is that the recipe will be improved for the students in her or his classroom, naturally shaping it to the strengths of students by using a teacher’s own strengths.

Good teachers are often acutely aware of the drawbacks and limitations of the educational recipes they are given. When educational systems insist on cookbook education, they may alienate their most creative teachers, their most experienced teachers, their most effective teachers.

One area of promise from positive psychology research in the field of education that addresses this is collective efficacy, the belief of a faculty that as a group they can execute the positive courses of action required to successfully educate students (Goddard, et al., 2004).

Collective efficacy represents a level of confidence in the ability of a group to reach a shared goal. It influences common expectations for action, supports creative problem-solving, and results in resilient goal attainment by influencing the effort and persistence necessary for academic achievement. No cookbook needed!! Perceived collective efficacy facilitates collaboration and the willingness to accept challenges to teaching in the face of difficulty (Goddard, et al., 2004).

Goddard, R.D., LoGerfo, L. & Hoy, W.K. (2004). High school accountability: The role of perceived collective efficacy. Educational Policy, 18(3) 403-425.