How To Be Happy Part 2: Avoiding Cognitive Dissonance

Or the taste of Ice cream to someone who had never had sugar?

Wrestling with these conundrums demonstrates the problem facing religion and spirituality.

The life force of the universe, which has been called God, Brahman, The Tao, The Atman, and many others, is impossible to put into words.

Human language fails miserably at comprehending the infinite.

In Awareness, Anthony DeMello discusses two areas where language struggles to capture reality.

Concepts are abstract; reality is concrete.

If all you experience is the concept, you’re not experiencing reality. The concept is a guide to help you categorize and understand what you experience, but if you only experience the concept, you won’t experience reality directly.

Concepts are static; reality is in flow.

Our terms and concepts describe snapshots of reality.

But reality is a river — it can’t be adequately captured using static terms.

Anyone who attempts to articulate God or spirituality faces the chasm between language and reality.

Their efforts inevitably fall short.

This is why many rational, “sciencey” people scoff at spiritual books and texts.

From the perspective of logic and reason, much spiritual writing sounds stupid — not because it is stupid, but because it’s attempting to accomplish something with the wrong tool.

You would look like a jackass if you tried to paint a house with a tuba.

Not because painting a house is dumb, but because you’re using the wrong tool.

Humans realized this issue a long time ago.

The 5th-century Greek author Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite came up with the term “Via-Negativa” - the idea that God is better described through the negative than through affirmations.

When something is difficult to describe — when it transcends the limitations of language — we have a better shot of saying what it is not rather than trying to articulate what it is.

The 12th-century Philosopher Priest Thomas Aquinas is most famous for following the same logic in his “Summae Theologiae”:

So how does this tie into happiness?

Let’s start by understanding something that is the chief cancer of happiness: cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance is the mental conflict that ensues from your beliefs not lining up with your actions.

21st-century humans have an extra challenge when dealing with cognitive dissonance thanks to social media.

Social media has made it easier than ever to fall for the trap of cognitive dissonance.

This is because many of us are living two different lives:

We have our day-to-day reality, but we also have the picture of our lives that we portray on social media. Our personal brands.

Having a personal brand and using social media isn’t bad—I’m convinced that building a personal brand on social media is one of the smartest things one can do.

But it’s dangerous if your personal brand is not in alignment with your reality.

This misalignment creates the pain of inauthenticity (cognitive dissonance).

It causes a terrible feeling that can even lead to suicidal thoughts.

The person experiencing extreme cognitive dissonance becomes shaky about their own existence.

They lose their sense of self in the misalignment.

Mental health requires that your actions need to be aligned with your values.

In the 21st century, this expands to include that the brands we build on the internet must also align with our values in a realistic way.

But you encounter a problem in this journey to authenticity.

Much like defining God, or reality, defining who you are (with our limited language) is deceivingly tricky.

You are a complex, constantly evolving integration between the “me:” your ego with a name, career, status, and bank account- and the “I” - the subconscious part of your psyche connected to the infinite.

The “me” vs. “I” distinction is another golden nugget from “Awareness” by Anthony DeMello.

What does it mean to be able to “observe yourself?” If you observe yourself — if you become “self-conscious,” who is doing the observing?

When you go down this rabbit hole of trying to articulate who the “I” is, you end up with the same problem that Thomas Aquinas and anyone who has tried to write about God came up against.

It’s easier to focus on what “I” is not.

Are you your thoughts?

Your thoughts come and go, but you remain. You’re certainly more than your thoughts.

Are you your body?

All the cells in your body turn over every seven years - speaking literally, you are not the same physical being that you were a decade ago.

Are you your religion?

Your career?

Your name?

All these labels can be changed, but there would still be an “I” underneath them that remained the same.

On a deeper level, you transcend all of these aspects and labels.

I’m in danger of going too far down the rabbit hole here, so let’s bring this back to a point where it can actually be useful.

Seeking authenticity requires a coherent definition of you because authenticity is the actions and values that align with who you are.

But since you, in your totality, are very difficult to describe using the inadequate tool of language, this is fucking hard to pin down.

Approaching authenticity in reverse, however, is an easier task.

Via Negativa authenticity.

Instead of trying to match your actions, content, and personal brand to the elusive definition of you, audit your life for inauthentic moments that create cognitive dissonance.

Inauthenticity is easier to spot than authenticity.

Just as Thomas Aquinas defines God by saying what it is not — capture your authentic nature by not doing the things that don’t align with your values.

In this way, authenticity is invisible.

It’s living with the absence of the pain of inauthenticity.

It’s similar to what the mystics say about happiness: happiness is our default mode.

It’s unconditional and available to us right now.

It’s how children are.

Our unhappiness is brought about when we add self-consciousness, comparison, jealousy, and the infinite other problems that interfere with the natural state of happiness.

How much can you feel your tooth at this moment?

But when you have a toothache, it’s all you can think about.

Happiness is invisible.

Authenticity is invisible.

Inauthenticity and the cognitive dissonance it creates stands out like a sore thumb.

Social media makes it easier than ever to be inauthentic.

Inauthenticity leads to cognitive dissonance and, in turn, unhappiness.

Defining inauthenticity is the best place to start.

Live an authentic life online and offline by auditing for anything that creates the sting of inauthenticity.

Do this, and you’ll avoid cognitive dissonance (and be happy).