Advertisement

In Praise of Ordinariness: The Wisdom of Living

  • Kevin MooreEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

In this final chapter, Moore reprises the overall argument of the book including the evolution of personhood and its dependence on the entire set of structures and institutions that form a culture. He reiterates the need to understand how persons emerge at the boundary of biology and culture and how the uncertainty and dynamically shifting nature of today’s aspirational culture creates great difficulties for generating and sustaining personhood. He ends with the optimistic suggestion that, as a culture, we need only aspire to creating the conditions for persons to live ordinary lives. All that is necessary for the wellbeing of persons and the maintenance of personhood can be gained from a non-aspirational daily life.

References

  1. Chater, N. (2018). The mind is flat: The illusion of mental depth and the improvised mind. London, UK: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  2. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  3. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  4. Curran, T., & Hill, A. P. (2017). Perfectionism is increasing over time: A meta-analysis of birth cohort differences from 1989 to 2016. Psychological Bulletin.  https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Danziger, K. (1997). The historical formation of selves. In R. D. Ashmore & L. Jussim (Eds.), Self and identity: Fundamental issues (pp. 137–159). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dennett, D. C. (1995). Darwin’s dangerous idea: Evolution and the meanings of life. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  7. Diener, E., Ng, W., Harter, J., & Arora, R. (2010). Wealth and happiness across the world: Material prosperity predicts life evaluation, whereas psychosocial prosperity predicts positive feeling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(1), 52–61.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018066.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Elias, N. (2000). The civilizing process: Sociogenetic and psychogenetic investigations (2nd ed.). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  9. Harré, R. (1983). Personal being: A theory for individual psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  10. Harré, R. (1998). The singular self: An introduction to the psychology of personhood. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Haybron, D. M. (2008). The pursuit of unhappiness: The elusive psychology of well-being. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Helliwell, J. F., Layard, R., & Sachs, J. D. (2018). World happiness report 2018. New York: Sustainable Development Solutions Network.Google Scholar
  13. Heyes, C. (2018). Cultural gadgets: The cultural evolution of thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Ishizuka, P. (2018). Social class, gender, and contemporary parenting standards in the United States: Evidence from a national survey experiment. Social Forces, soy107.  https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soy107.
  15. King, L. A. (2008). Interventions for enhancing subjective well-being: Can we make people happier, and should we? In M. Eid & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), The science of subjective well-being (pp. 431–448). New York: The Guildford Press.Google Scholar
  16. King, P. E., Barrett, J. L., Greenway, T. S., Schnitker, S. A., & Furrow, J. L. (2018). Mind the gap: Evolutionary psychological perspectives on human thriving. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 13(4), 336–345.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2017.1291855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Oishi, S. (2010). The psychology of residential mobility: Implications for the self, social relationships, and well-being. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(1), 5–21.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691609356781.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Price, C., Dalman, C., Zammit, S., & Kirkbride, J. B. (2018). Association of residential mobility over the life course with nonaffective psychosis in 1.4 million young people in Sweden. JAMA Psychiatry, E1–E9.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.2233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sachs, J. D. (2018). America’s health crisis and the Easterlin paradox. In J. F. Helliwell, R. Layard, & J. D. Sachs (Eds.), World happiness report (pp. 146–159). New York: United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network.Google Scholar
  20. Sennett, R. (Ed.). (2006). The culture of the new capitalism. New Haven: Yale University Press. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com.
  21. Stokes, P. (2017). Temporal asymmetry and the self/person split. Journal of Value Inquiry, 51, 203–219.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10790-016-9563-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Strawson, P. F. (1959). Individuals: An essay in descriptive metaphysics. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  23. Twenge, J. M. (2000). The age of anxiety? Birth cohort change in anxiety and neuroticism, 1952–1993. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 1007–1021.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.1007. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Twenge, J. M., Zhang, L., & Im, C. (2004). It’s beyond my control: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of increasing externality in Locus of Control, 1960–2002. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(3), 308–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Twenge, J. M., Gentile, B., DeWall, C. N., Ma, D., Lacefield, K., & Schurtz, D. R. (2010). Birth cohort increases in psychopathology among young Americans, 1938–2007: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of the MMPI. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 145–154.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2009.10.005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Twenge, J. M., Joiner, T. E., Rogers, M. L., & Martin, G. N. (2018). Increases in depressive symptoms, suicide-related outcomes, and suicide rates among U.S. adolescents after 2010 and links to increased new media screen time. Clinical Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.117/2167702617723376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Veenhoven, R. (2010). Life is getting better: Societal evolution and fit with human nature. Social Indicators Research, 97(1), 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Environment, Society and DesignLincoln UniversityLincolnNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations