Human Attachment

Eons ago, when I was in college, I had a discussion with a post-modern philosophy professor about the possible biological underpinnings of morality. His view, of course, was that there was no such thing, that all we had were more or less persuasive arguments that people believed or didn't. I had decided to study anthropology because I believed I might discover universal human truths through understanding the wide variety of cultural adaptations that were known to science.  My professor was intrigued by my idea, though skeptical. I remember him asking me, "You mean that your view is based on something like health?"  He had understood completely, but neither of us had heard, at the time, about the emerging fields of evolutionary psychology or experimental philosophy or other interdisciplinary studies of all sorts that were just beginning to take off. Since then these disciplines have come into their own, and many current thinkers are confirming what I intuited back then--we are biologically adapted to certain kinds of behaviors, and when we act in accordance with our biology, we are actually happier as human beings.

One of the obvious standouts of human behavior is that we are social creatures. We cannot survive in isolation. We do not lay eggs in a hole in the sand and take off to let our babies fend for themselves. Our post-industrial society has led to a bit of a conundrum in this area. We are simultaneously less able than ever before to forage and fend for ourselves in the most basic ways. Most people I meet wouldn't know an edible wild plant, if it jumped into their salad bowl. On the other hand, people *feel* less dependent in a mechanized world where human beings are treated as "resources" that are used for specific functions and are easily replaceable. How many people notice when their favorite cashier at the local grocery store moves away, gets fired or dies? Even if we notice they're missing, it doesn't change our lives in any significant way. Contrast this with the loss of the best hunter or the "medicine woman" in a band of foragers. These losses would have deep and significant impact on day-to-day realities of survival compounded by the emotional stress of losing a beloved family/community member.

Bands of foragers (hunter-gatherers) tend to be biologically and/or matrimonially related. Groups tend not to get larger than 60 people. Everyone is known intimately, for a lifetime. New members come in through marriage and birth, and members leave through marriage or death. Marriages tend to take place between groups that are well-known to each other and have kinship and language ties. All of this is to say, relationships are extremely close, probably to an extent we cannot really even grasp in a modern context. In our world, it is not at all unusual for a baby to be born, be fed with a bottle of artificial milk and placed in the care of virtual strangers within six weeks. The caregivers will change within the given institution, even if the parents strive to maintain continuity of place. Within a couple of years, the child will be transferred to a "school" type setting, where her peers and teachers will change every year until she graduates and moves into a world that is even less stable. There is a 50% chance that her parents will split up (if they were ever married) during her childhood, and she will lose even that stability. There is also a good chance that she will not live near her extended family, that she will not stay in one neighborhood for the duration, that if she does, she will not really know her neighbors, etc.

I remember watching a PBS reality show called "Frontier House" a few years ago. People were selected to live in conditions that were similar to those of the settlers of the American West, and were filmed doing their daily chores and having interactions with their peers. The challenges, as you can imagine, were formidable. Though people understood that their survival did not depend on their abilities, there was still a lot at stake. No one wanted to be seen as a failure on national TV, plus their actual comfort was very much on the line. One of the things that really struck me about the follow-up interviews was how everyone, when back in their comfortable homes, seemed so much unhappier. They recalled their time on the show as being some of the most satisfying weeks of their lives. When surveys of happiness are conducted, we in the "modern world" are always at the bottom, people in traditional societies are at the top. I have heard people conclude that "stuff does not bring us pleasure", which I believe is only partly true. I have no desire to live without indoor plumbing or electricity. I do not believe for a minute that giving those things up will add to my or my family's happiness. It seems obvious that it is the human connection, the real interdependence, that makes the difference.

In fact these ideas are not even very controversial within the psychological community.  For instance, there is almost no debate about the critical importance of childhood attachment to one's primary caregiver, the data on divorce are clear (it is detrimental to kids in every measurable way, in almost all cases), people who report more close relationships with friends and family members also report being happier (and healthier!).  Yet when these studies are published, we hear a tremendous amount of debate.  Though these ideas are understood by science, our current cultural adaptations are at odds with our more basic needs.  So we hear people rationalizing by citing the "resilience" of children, the importance of economic success, and the primacy of one's own "fulfillment". It seems that we are terribly ill-equipped to manage worthwhile relationships and especially to stay committed (whence our examples?) and since we feel so cheated ourselves, we have a difficult time giving to others (we are so needy) and breaking the cycle of disconnection and selfishness.

So how can we live in a more connected way without giving up the comforts of technology, without overturning our current cultural practices in one fell swoop (which could never work anyway)? I believe that technology, in fact, holds part of the answer. People can now work from home in a way that was simply not possible a generation ago. My husband does. He is in the house most days, but with the aid of a computer, an internet connection and a telephone, he can interview people all over the world, write articles, blogs and tweets, edit and publish without needing to go to his office in New York (we live on the West Coast). There are dozens of other ways to increase our closeness with one another, and improving connection with our fellows, in any way, will benefit us as individuals and as a society. Some examples that will be explored in future posts are: knowing oneself in order to make wiser personal and career decisions; choosing one's life partner carefully in order to stay committed; bonding with one's children and maintaining a safe and loving home; staying connected with one's extended family, especially by living nearby; choosing a neighborhood and community and settling down; actively participating in the local community, through recreational activities, politics, religious affiliation, volunteering, and/or economic activities.

Further Reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attachment_theory
http://www.livescience.com/14402-divorce-plagues-kids-social-academic.html
http://web.med.harvard.edu/sites/RELEASES/html/christakis_happiness.html
http://healthland.time.com/2010/12/12/religions-secret-to-happiness-its-friends-not-faith/
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704243904575630541486290052.html

I Really Don't Hate Christmas

Phineas and Ferb's Dr. Doofenshmirtz gives us his take

Unlike the bad doctor, I in fact love Christmas.  So what?  Millions of people love Christmas.  It is true, but most of them are religious to one degree or another.  I on the other hand, am a committed atheist.  I do not believe in God, or gods, or soul, or spirit, or astrology, or the power of crystals.  Most atheists hate Christmas, and at this time of year, you will find them expounding on various aspects of the holiday that disturb them, from the fact that it is an amalgam of various pagan holidays, to the fact that it's not really the date of Jesus's birth, to the fact that some Christians choose this opportunity to become aggressive about their beliefs, or to the fact that the U.S. is supposed to be a pluralistic and secular culture.  Again, so what?  Just because all of these things are true, is no reason to chuck one of the funnest set of rituals we have.

Full disclosure, I was not raised in a religious household, though both of my parents came from a protestant background, and my mother clearly retained those beliefs.  We did not attend church as a family, but my mom read us Bible stories and told us they were true.  We celebrated all of the major Christian holidays with gusto, and most of my relatives are practicing Christians of the low church, protestant variety.  We were taught that Santa Claus was real, and I believed in Rudolph, Frosty the Snowman, toy-making elves, and practically anything else you can think of.  And I thought it was magical and wonderful!  I was not in any way traumatized when I discovered that these things were imaginary.  In fact, I continued to pretend to believe for a number of years after I stopped actually believing.  I can remember lying in bed at night, getting myself all psyched up for Santa's visit, and being delighted at the full stockings and presents under the tree on Christmas morning, despite my complete understanding that my mom did all of the work.  It was still transformative--a beautiful day of light and plenty at the darkest time of the year.  And that was only the beginning!  Later in the day, the house would fill with family and feasting.  There would be tons of laughter and special treats and game time after dinner, with multiple generations sharing in the fun.

So my particular psychological circumstances lead me to continue to embrace Christmas, but I also have cultural grounds.  I love tradition, and I don't see the need to reject a harmless practice, based on a lack of religious belief.  I'm pretty sure nobody still believes that one's soul flies out the mouth during a sneeze, and yet countless people continue to say "Bless you" as a means of expressing concern for the health of our loved ones.  One of the best ways to look at celebrations is to conduct a thought experiment.  Imagine yourself visiting a foreign culture, and finding yourself in the midst of joyous holiday preparations.  Everything is completely unfamiliar to you, but your hosts graciously invite you to join in the festivities, promising delicious foods, singing, decorations, games, drinks, and a generally raucous good time.  You are welcomed as a guest and treated as an esteemed friend.  I cannot believe that there are many atheists who would turn down such an opportunity to celebrate Diwali, say, in India, yet they resentfully refuse to participate in their own culture's festive time.  If you truly reject religion, then you are free to embrace the secular aspects of Christmas, and the fact that so many pagan traditions are woven into our celebration makes it all the more fun and interesting to me.

So Jesus wasn't even born on December 25?  And?  Maybe he never even existed at all as a historical personage.  The non-literal nature of myth does not lessen its power.  We don't cease to study the powerful stories of the ancients, because we doubt Zeus's supremacy.  Jesus wasn't truly the son of God, but the story of His divine birth is arguably the very best part of Christianity.  It is the story of the mundane miracle of human life.  Every birth is remarkable, even those that take place in the most humble of circumstances.  Every human being, pauper or king, comes into the world in the same way.  We begin our lives as equals, and we are all in possession of a little bit of the eternal, the transcendent, simply by taking part in the beauty and the terror that is conscious existence.

Christmas is the way generations of people have decided to take a stand against the cyclical darkness and chill.  So we blaze up our windows and lawns, we grab a little greenery and bring it inside, we toss in anything with color or shimmer, we celebrate the birth of a baby when confronted with the death of our trees and crops, we feast while our stores are high in preparation for the lean months ahead, we sing into the silence, we announce our presence and we assert our will before the overwhelming power of nature.

N.B.  Even though it should go without saying, I will still say that we need to always respect the stories and traditions of others (including practicing Christians in our own nation) and shouldn't make assumptions about people's beliefs or lack thereof.  Offering a hearty "Season's Greetings!" should cover all the bases without offense, and graciously accepting a "Merry Christmas", "Happy Hanukkah", "Blessed Kwanzaa" or "Happy Diwali" should be the obvious response when wished well by a practitioner of another faith.