Readers Write In #790: To Go Out or Go In—That Is the Question

By Wiseass Fool

Go out?

Why are we so miserable, unhappy and discontent when we seemingly have everything? Bertrand Russell, the famous Western philosopher, in his book “The Conquest of Happiness”, asked this nearly a century ago–and it’s sadly a question that still haunts us. Obviously, he is not talking about people grappling with a grave personal tragedy, but rather those who are depressed for no apparent, tangible reason.

The usual suspects of unhappiness – competition, boredom, fatigue, envy and guilt have found a spot on Russell’s list as well. He outright rips into tortured artist archetypes who romanticize suffering as something inevitable and intellectual. (Looking at you, Byron)

So, do you want a good life? If yes, Russell says, you ought to spend as little time as possible in your own head, and spend more time and energy outwards into the real physical world. His theory is that one gets pulled down into the depths of sorrow, the more one thinks of oneself. To overcome this, Russell suggests engaging with people around you, picking up a hobby, self expression through art, spending time with nature – basically doing anything that pulls you out of yourself. These things, he argues, will help one find meaning and purpose – and thus, happiness also.

This is not earth shattering advice by any means, but refreshingly sane. Through his dry British wit, Russell achieves the impossible task of writing a self-help book that is not only decently helpful, but also readable.

This old book, I thought, is still painfully relevant today – because more people are suffering from isolation and depression than ever in the history of mankind. Modern humans, despite all the comfort and convenience of the 21st century, still have not figured out a way to end human suffering. Russell’s advice, at the very least, offers a way to help us lead a sane, content and social life.

But, is that all there is to it?

Go in?

While Russell’s advice may guide us to the ever so elusive path to happiness, no doubt, what does our backyard Eastern philosophies have to say on this topic?

The Conquest of Happiness is written from a western, rational and individualist perspective while our Eastern philosophies like Buddhism approach the same from a spiritualist, metaphysical angle. Buddhism professes that the idea of the individual (self) itself is an illusion, and one can transcend into a higher truth to realize that you are not merely a part of the universe, but the universe itself.

The Buddha, as we all know, practiced rigorous asceticism and famously went on a spiritual journey within himself under the Bodhi tree to achieve enlightenment.

While Russell did not ask his readers to give up desire completely, one of Buddhism’s core tenets is precisely that: to root out desire from one’s psyche in order to end suffering – one of the four noble truths to achieve Nirvana. To be fair to Russell, he never promised enlightenment – just a well-lived, satisfied life.

But, how far can one go inward, in this modern age? Buddhism poses practical difficulties, because it can’t simply ask its followers to give up on desires and indulgences altogether. There are not enough Bodhi trees in the world to fit all the suffering souls to sit under.

That is precisely why we see a lot of adaptations and repackaging of the ideas of Buddhism all around us in the globalized western world; making them more accessible and relevant to modern audiences through a variety of ways. Secular Buddhism, for example, interprets the Buddhist philosophies in a rational, agnostic manner. Once niche practices like meditation, mindfulness have become so ubiquitous–and they have been used as tools for stress reduction and mental well-being. “The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck” by Mark Manson which is literally on everyone’s bookshelf, even on the shelves of people who haven’t read a book since college, is essentially a contemporary retelling of Buddhist philosophies about detachment and impermanence.

Even orthodox Buddhism has a built-in solution to modernity through one of its core concepts called The Middle Path, emphasizing a balanced approach to life by steering clear of extremes like self-indulgence or self-denial.

WHERETO?

I want to cover my bases here, and say that I have oversimplified both Eastern and Western philosophies. (Don’t come at me)

Russell’s philosophy has made peace with life while Eastern philosophy is all about transcending life itself altogether.

Russell’s physical world or Buddha’s metaphysical world?

Outward-focused rationalism or inward-facing spiritualism?

Do you want to live well or transcend suffering itself?

Do you want to go out, or go in?