Skip to main contentSkip to solution

Economists have spent most of the 20th century ignoring psychology, positive or otherwise. But today there is a great deal of emphasis on how happiness can shape global economies, or on a smaller scale successful business practice. This is driven, in part, by a trend in "measuring" positive emotions, mostly so they can be optimized. Neuroscientists, for example, claim to be able to locate specific emotions, such as happiness or disappointment, in particular areas of the brain. Wearable technologies, such as Spire, offer data-driven advice on how to reduce stress.

We are no longer just dealing with "happiness" in a philosophical or romantic sense - it has become something that can be monitored and measured, including by our behavior, use of social media and bodily indicators such as pulse rate and facial expressions.

There is nothing automatically sinister about this trend. But it is disquieting that the businesses and experts driving the quantification of happiness claim to have our best interests at heart, often concealing their own agendas in the process. In the workplace, happy workers are viewed as a "win-win." Work becomes more pleasant, and employees, more productive. But this is now being pursued through the use of performance evaluating wearable technology, such as Humanize or Virgin Pulse, both of which monitor physical signs of stress and activity toward the goal of increasing productivity.

Cities such as Dubai, which has pledged to become the "happiest city in the world," dream up ever more elaborate and intrusive ways of collecting data on well-being to the point where there is now talk of using CCTV cameras to monitor facial expressions in public spaces. New ways of detecting emotions are hitting the market all the time: One company, Beyond Verbal, aims to calculate moods conveyed in a phone conversation, potentially without the knowledge of at least one of the participants. And Facebook has demonstrated that it could influence our emotions through tweaking our news feeds opening the door to ever-more targeted manipulation in advertising and influence.

As the science grows more sophisticated and technologies become more intimate with our thoughts and bodies, a clear trend is emerging. Where happiness indicators were once used as a basis to reform society, challenging the obsession with money that G.D.P. measurement entrenches, they are increasingly used as a basis to transform or discipline individuals.

Happiness becomes a personal project, that each of us must now work on, like going to the gym. Since the 1970s, depression has come to be viewed as a cognitive or neurological defect in the individual, and never a consequence of circumstances. All of this simply escalates the sense of responsibility each of us feels for our own feelings, and with it, the sense of failure when things go badly. A society that deliberately removed certain sources of misery, such as precarious and exploitative employment, may well be a happier one. But we won't get there by making this single, often fleeting emotion, the over-arching goal.

According to the author, wearable technologies and social media are contributing most to:

Solution

āœ… Correct Option: 4

We need to find what wearable tech and social media are contributing most to according to the author.

Step 1: Find where the passage talks about these technologies and their main impact.

Step 2: Look for the author's overall conclusion about what trend these technologies are creating.

The key insight is in the second-to-last paragraph where the author explains the big picture trend.

From passage: "As the science grows more sophisticated and technologies become more intimate with our thoughts and bodies, a clear trend is emerging. Where happiness indicators were once used as a basis to reform society... they are increasingly used as a basis to transform or discipline individuals."

Author's main point -> These technologies shifted from helping society -> to controlling individuals


Let's walk through confusing options:

Student thinking: "Options 3 and 4 both seem right - isn't happiness becoming a personal project the same as disciplining people to be happy?"

Key difference: Option 3 describes what happens after the technologies do their work. Option 4 describes what the technologies are actually doing.

Elimination process:

šŸ”“ Option 1 -> too narrow -> only mentions stress awareness, misses the bigger control/discipline aspect

šŸ”“ Option 2 -> completely wrong -> passage says depression is now seen as individual failure, not eliminated

🟠 Option 3 -> partial truth -> describes the result but not what technologies are actively contributing to

🟢 Option 4 -> captures the core action -> technologies are actively used to "transform or discipline individuals" as the passage states

The word "discipline" appears directly in the passage, making Option 4 the precise match for what these technologies contribute to.

Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Left arrow: Previous question
  • Right arrow: Next question
  • S key: Jump to solution
  • Q key: Jump to question