Analysis of “On the Habits of Happiness”

The lecture “On the Habits of Happiness” by Matthieu Ricard was recorded in 2004 at a TED conference. These conferences are attended by scientists, CEO’s, designers and other intellectuals selected by an application process; who attend to hear some of the world’s most renown experts in various fields talk about their specialties. The lecture is appealing to the audience because like Ricard says, “no one wakes up in the morning thinking, ‘May I suffer the whole day?’” (Matthieu).

Mattheiu Ricard earned his PhD in molecular genetics before he decided to become a Buddhist monk and live in the Himalayas. He is a renown photographer, humanitarian and author and is considered by many the “happiest man in the world” (About 1).

Ricard starts his lecture by showing pictures of the Himalayas to establish trust with the audience and to also help them get to know him better. It is strange for a French scientist to be an expert of happiness and a monk. He starts the lecture off with a joke and a little insight into his life open up to the audience.

The humor of the speaker is crucial to establishing trust with his audience and makes him seem like an expert of happiness. The audience could be very skeptical that Ricard is an expert in something as subjective as happiness, and he makes light of this by poking fun at the French who “like the ups and downs of life ” and how it is unusual to be so concerned with unhappiness. (Matthieu).

Ricard very carefully structures his argument with a logical succession by starting with society views and common beliefs of happiness and moving into scientific evidence and practices of happiness. This is effective because it is a natural progression and the audience is not caught off guard with any abrupt evidence.

The speaker begins by saying that although we seek happiness, we do not have a very clear idea of what it is and that is why we often end up running from it. Ricard also talks about how even when we find happiness, we often become accustomed to it quickly and eventually lose the feeling of satisfaction. This works in establishing relatability with the audience since most people have felt this way at some point in time (Matthieu).

The author begins his position on happiness by explaining that he prefers the term well-being. His view, based on Buddhist belief, is that happiness is “not just a mere pleasurable sensation. It is a deep sense of serenity and fulfillment, a state that actually pervades and underlies all emotional states.” He helps the audience understand this by using a metaphor of the ocean. He explains that happiness versus sadness is a wave that crashes to shore without depth, yet well-being is a state like the calm sea. There may be an occasional storm, but the depth of the ocean remains (Matthieu). I found this image to be very helpful in distinguishing what is different about Ricard’s argument. His view is clearly illustrated and easy to understand with this metaphor.

Ricard focuses on looking within oneself to find well-being. He acknowledges that traveling, money, and education are all desirable but “are just auxiliary, help conditions. The experience that translates everything is within the mind,” (Matthieu).

He then uses a very effective simile comparing consciousness to a mirror. He illustrates that just like a reflective surface, good and bad can be seen in consciousness but it does not remain forever. “We know were not always angry, always jealous, always generous,” (Mattheiu). This simile showed the fleeting nature of feelings and how complex well-being is.

This principle of fleeting emotions is the basis of the speaker’s argument and what inspires his remedy of mind training. He explains mind training as a practice of confronting your feeling such as anger or jealousy and says, “if you look at the thought of anger, it will vanish like the frost under the morning sun.” (Matthieu). According to Ricard, if this is practiced enough, eventually when these feelings arise they will just pass over.

Now at this point in the lecture, he brings in science. He mentions that it has been found that the brain remembers activities such as playing the violin and that it should be able to remember feelings like compassion and happiness. Ricard uses the example of monks who have done up to 40,000 hours of mind training and then had their brain activity analyzed.

The findings of these experiments were critical logic in his argument and deterred counterarguments. The studies showed that the avid meditators were a full standard deviation away from the bell curve on activity on the left (happy) side of the brain (Matthieu). I think this critical evidence is what was most convincing to the speaker’s argument. The individuals he is speaking to are hard-wired to only believe what is scientifically proven to them.

Ricard ties together all of his evidence and points by saying that we should not look at happiness as a “supplementary vitamin”, but instead as something that is the beginning of determining the quality of every moment of our lives. He concludes with the very powerful example that we spend large amounts of time on outer appearance and very little in comparison on keeping our mind healthy.

Overall, I found Matthieu Ricard’s lecture both entertaining and informative. I thought his argument was clearly stated and well explained. I especially enjoyed the humor he used and that he incorporated both Buddhist faith and science experiments seamlessly. The faith and science never felt forced together and also never seemed to contradict each other, something crucial to the effectiveness of his rhetoric.

Works Cited

"About Matthieu Ricard." Matthieu Ricard. Web. 28 Feb. 2012. <http://www.matthieuricard.org/en/index.php/about/>.

"Matthieu Ricard on the Habits of Happiness." TED: Ideas worth Spreading. Web. 28 Feb. 2012. <http://www.ted.com/talks/matthieu_ricard_on_the_habits_of_happiness.html>.