Whatever my faults, I rarely struggle to pinpoint how I feel about a piece of work. I’m not an indecisive person. But I found myself struggling to rate this book for several reasons. I want to note that I do not think the author of this book is a bad person. I could feel the authenticity from the page. There was something very genuine and real in the words, and many of the questions and pieces of advice were thoughtful. It was written by a business professor, so I do acknowledge this perception and how it influences the work.
I loved the juxtaposition of mindfulness and empathy within the business world. And to be clear, I think empathy should be cultivated wherever, however and whenever. Always. It is one of the most vital traits we can cultivate EVER. However, there are many reasons why the corporate world (and capitalism as a whole) is not compatible with mindfulness.
Okay. Let’s get into it.
A study that was used as evidence in this work is the Harvard Study of Happiness, which is one of the longest human studies ever conducted. Several studies have since analyzed the correlation between money and happiness and found consistent but unsurprising results. Happiness is strongly correlated with money until basic needs are met, which was most consistently valued at 75k USD. As wealth disparity increases, this number will so to change.
Here’s my problem with this. The book NEVER MENTIONS that after basic needs are met, MONEY HAS NO AFFECT ON HAPPINESS. Note the distinction: overall happiness, not temporary spikes in happiness. This is a great example of how studies, facts and statistics can be skewed if framed in the right way. To leave out the capping point of money’s effect on happiness is to completely undercut the findings. In fact, this omission highlights my core frustration with this book. It asks the wrong questions.
I wish people, not just authors, would be less focused on the questions they ask and more intentionally focused on the FRAMING of their own perceptions that leads them to asking those questions. A core question of the book is: “If you could be the happiest person in the world or the wealthiest, which would you choose?”. According to this book, participants often answer “the happiest” until they reflect on what they can DO with money.
Billionaires such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, etc are regularly mentioned in this work and not in a negative way. In fact, they are seen as benevolent for sharing their wealth. The book creates a very inspiring picture of what you can do when you’re a billionaire. Who you can help. Warren Buffet and his friends are CURRENTLY AS WE SPEAK trying to get nearly 60k railroad workers to not go on strike for being treated unfairly / underpaid. Railroad workers can be docked “points” for A DOCTOR’S VISIT through an arbitrary points system. You cannot ethically become a billionaire. You can’t. You have to exploit the environment and the working class to become a billionaire. So, I ask, even if they shared their wealth, is it really outweighing all the terrible effects that come with such wealth disparity?
Here are the questions the book asks and which ones I believe would have better served the core message.
They ask:
“If I could be the wealthiest person in the world or the happiest, which would I choose?”
I ask:
“What are the cultural, societal and psychological influences that lead me to value money as I do? Do I value it above human life? Animals? Environment? My time? My labor? Relationships? How have these influences further shaped my understanding of inherent value within the world?”
They ask:
“As a billionaire / millionaire, how can I help people with the money I have?”
I ask:
“Is the distribution of money something that will actually help people and communities over time or is this a trivial fix for much larger systemic issues? Can I truly create everlasting change while upholding the very systems that create wealth disparity? Furthermore and most importantly:
Do I actually want to see wealth distribution on a mass scale or is this just something that makes me feel like I’m a good person so I can wash my hands and be done with it? Does this keep me from asking more difficult and important questions?
They ask:
“How can I be mindful in a capitalistic and corporate world?”
I ask:
“What privileges have I been afforded to not be able to think of money as a means to live, but instead as a concept that can bring ME happiness? Instead of prizing mindfulness, would I produce more good if I instead decided to look at wealth disparity as it really is, instead of a means of personal gain?”
Here’s my point. Money exists because we allow it to, because we choose to believe in it. We choose to uphold these systems. we choose to participate. What could we do if instead of upholding the framing / perceptions we are given, we chose to expand our minds and try for something better? Something that could perhaps benefit ALL and not just a few.