How Self-Control Can Lead to Greater Happiness
Exploring the psychological impacts of self-determination and restraint in a culture driven by individualism and instant gratification
The era when children were primarily taught responsibility and restraint has passed.
Today, it's often believed that a person who devotes much attention to self-control and suppressing desires is a miserable neurotic who doesn't understand themselves, forbids natural expressions, and chastises themselves for the slightest wrongdoing.
However, in reality, weakening self-control hasn't brought us happiness. Numerous studies show that focusing on fulfilling immediate desires only brings short-term satisfaction and, moreover, causes distress to others.
Canadian philosopher Charles Taylor called our times the "age of authenticity" because people are more ready than ever to share their secrets and restrain their emotions less than ever before. Such sincerity, once the privilege of a few celebrities, is now accessible to anyone through reality shows or active social media use.
It might seem that this should benefit us, as suppressing thoughts and desires is considered unhealthy and unnatural. In psychology, this mindset is sometimes referred to as the self-determination theory, which posits that personal well-being depends on satisfying basic needs and following inner impulses.
I agree that self-suppression is not the path to well-being. However, I believe that the "age of authenticity" hasn't made us happier; on the contrary. Some scholars, such as Taylor and historian and theologian Carl Trueman, argue that over the past few decades, American society has become more individualistic, the average happiness level has fallen, and depression and anxiety have risen.
Perhaps our collective mistake has been the reluctance to exercise self-control. Understanding how we arrived here won't change our entire culture, but it might help you personally become happier.
From a psychological standpoint, self-determination involves two brain systems: behavioral activation and behavioral inhibition. The former responds to the system of positive stimuli and rewards, and also awakens interest in task completion. The latter helps you refrain from activity and cool down if you anticipate negative consequences.
Overall, each of these systems can be thought of this way: if the activation system is operating at full capacity while the inhibition system is deactivated, self-control decreases. Conversely, if the inhibition system is activated and the activation system is muted, self-control increases.
So, which combination makes us happier? The strengthening of the behavioral activation system and the deactivation of the behavioral inhibition system, or vice versa? Both combinations are effective in their own way. A team of eight psychologists demonstrated this in a self-control study conducted in 2018 for the Journal of Personality, surveying students. They found that low levels of self-control were associated with low levels of subjective well-being. Conversely, a higher level of self-control was observed in those who better controlled themselves.
Yet, a complete absence of self-control often meant a high level of short-term well-being. This isn't surprising: total relaxation is usually associated with brief bursts of pleasure.
Thus, if you are a relatively restrained person, you can affect your well-being in one of two completely opposite ways: either let yourself go, becoming absolutely sincere and impulsive, or continue to refine your punctuality and modesty.
Given the choice, the first option sounds more fun, but it's unlikely to be the preference of most people.
The problem is that this approach—"going wild"—provides only momentary well-being and impacts others negatively. In 2011, researchers from the University of Arizona studied the connection between low self-control and irresponsible behavior that spoils the lives of those around them. They discovered that low self-control, while potentially providing pleasure to those who abandon restrictions, provokes criminal offenses, academic fraud, binge drinking, drunk dialing, and other types of unrestrained behavior with negative social consequences.
I venture to guess that this partly explains the decline in the national happiness indicator in the US: American culture, in its quest for personal happiness, has taken the wrong path. Encouraging people to weaken self-control to become happier, society is actually making them unhappier. In pursuit of positive emotions, we've turned into irreconcilable, cursing, and scamming individuals who make each other miserable.
It seems that the idea to increase self-control is better not only for ourselves but for society as a whole.
For example, Benjamin Franklin advised training one's children in self-control, the habit of subduing passions, prejudices, and wicked inclinations to an honest and rational will, to spare them suffering and achieve collective happiness.
Try to understand and realize what drives you to decrease self-control, what specifically affects your inhibition system. According to scientists, there are three factors to consider: excessive alcohol consumption, anonymity, and power. Not necessarily that something from this list will definitely lead you to antisocial behavior, but they can easily lead you in the opposite direction from happiness.
Have you ever met someone who is frank when drunk but never engages in heart-to-heart talks when sober? Does anyone expect that in conditions of anonymity, people will show magnanimity? Researchers studying anonymity in social networks have found that, although most users behave benevolently, some may exhibit antisocial, even psychopathic behavior. If you aim to increase your level of self-control, avoid any anonymous online forums and take responsibility for everything you say.
Power, as the ability to influence others, is a more complex topic. Say, if you have the opportunity to publish materials for a wide audience, think about the information you broadcast about yourself. For example, it may pique people's interest and shape their opinion of your taste and manners.
Consider also the influence we place on opinion leaders. When we give power to the vulgar, our own well-being is put into question.
Just as the loss of self-control gives a sense of freedom but leads to negative consequences, following leaders who act without restrictions and violate norms can fuel our personality but inevitably leads us down a dark path.
You might think that, by calling for reflection and sublimation of true feelings and desires through self-control, I am advocating insincerity. But that's not true because I stand for genuine self-improvement. By choosing a certain way to act, I choose the kind of person I will be.
This is what Aristotle meant when he wrote that "virtues are formed in a man by his actions." Ultimately, we face a choice: either to behave with controlled grace or to give in to uncontrolled freedom. But only one of these paths leads to universal well-being, and we can improve ourselves on this path.