Connect with us

News

The 3 ingredients for fun: an expert's formula for experiencing genuine delight

Published

on

The 3 ingredients for fun: an expert's formula for experiencing genuine delight

People take part in the annual International Pillow Fight Day in Rotterdam, Netherlands, in 2018.

Robin Utrecht/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Robin Utrecht/AFP via Getty Images


People take part in the annual International Pillow Fight Day in Rotterdam, Netherlands, in 2018.

Robin Utrecht/AFP via Getty Images

Search “how to have fun” on Google and literally billions of search results come up. People pay hundreds of dollars to hire party coaches and play coaches. There are seminars and workshops on how to have fun in life.

What’s so hard about having fun?

Advertisement

Packed schedules and the pressure to succeed discourage people from taking a step back and unwinding. For some of us, the guilt of not being productive makes fun, well, not fun.

“Everyone is so busy but yet unfulfilled,” Catherine Price, the author of The Power of Fun: How to Feel Alive Again, told NPR.

With a background as a science journalist, Price sought to parse out the ingredients for “true fun,” as she calls it. Her answer is the overlapping states of playfulness, connection and flow.

This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Interview highlights

Andrew Limbong: Can you define some terms here: What is “fun”?

Advertisement

Catherine Price: So what I found is that the dictionary definition doesn’t match the lived experience when people have fun. So I decided to try to come up with a better definition of what fun is. And the definition I came up with is that fun — or “true fun,” as I call it — is the combination of three states: playfulness, connection and flow. And when those three states are together, like the center of the Venn diagram, that is the feeling of fun.

Playfulness does not mean you have to play games. A lot of adults get very nervous when you use the word “playfulness,” so I like to say you don’t have to necessarily be silly or childish. It’s really just more about having a lighthearted attitude towards life and towards yourself.

Connection refers to this feeling of having a special shared experience with other people. And then flow is active and engaged. And really importantly, flow requires you to be present. So if you’re distracted at all, you can’t be in flow and you can’t have fun.

Limbong: People are hiring a party coach or a fun coach. And on the one hand, I can see people like myself rolling their eyes at this, you know? But on the other hand, I don’t know if it’s something akin to a physical trainer, someone to just help you along. I want to get your take on why these jobs exist and how have we commodified the business of fun.

Price: I think that the reason that there’s a market for such things is that there’s a genuine problem, which is that we’re not feeling connection or playfulness or flow that often. Things feel very serious. We are very lonely and isolated. And we’re very distracted. Everyone is so busy but yet unfulfilled. So I think that the market does speak to this genuine longing that we have for something more.

Advertisement

On the flip side, I don’t think it’s necessary to do that. I think that there are steps each of us can take and reflections we can engage in that can fill our lives with more everyday moments of fun without having to spend money. I mean, I literally have thousands of stories from people around the world about fun, and it’s fascinating to notice how few of those involve people spending money or even going anywhere. I think those are two misperceptions we have about fun: that it costs money and that you have to be outside of your everyday life for it to occur.

Children play in the snow in Yarmouth, on the Isle of Wight, off England’s southern coast, in 1940.

George W. Hales/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

George W. Hales/Getty Images


Children play in the snow in Yarmouth, on the Isle of Wight, off England’s southern coast, in 1940.

George W. Hales/Getty Images

Limbong: But I wonder, then, how much social media plays into this, right? Because I know when I play with my nieces and nephew, my sister then always gets out her camera. Then we’ve got to pose in the leaves or whatever, and she has to post on the ‘gram. It’s like, well, we were just having fun. (Shout-out to my sister: I hope you’re listening. I love you!) But what does social media do with our perception and our concept of having fun?

Price: I think it’s really messed us up because one of the requirements for fun is that you be completely present and that your inner critic is silent. And if you’re performing, then you’re not fully present and you probably have your inner critic on in some capacity. That kills fun. Fun is very fragile. It’s like a sensitive flower.

Advertisement

Limbong: So I’m going to come to you hat in hand. If I want to start having more fun today, where do I start?

Price: I would suggest that you think back on moments from your own life that stand out to you as having been fun and notice what themes emerge, because these are things that you should prioritize. I’d also say, though, to really play around with the idea of how could you build more playfulness, connection and flow into your everyday life. You know, how could you be more present? How could you reduce distractions? One suggestion I always give for playfulness in particular that I love is to try to be playfully rebellious — do things that kind of break the rules of adult life a little bit — not in the way of getting you arrested, but just something that delights you. Like, do stuff that delights you, and create delight for other people.

The last suggestion is prioritize it. That’s the most important thing: Take fun seriously. Play around with it, and just notice the difference in your mood. We should be having more fun. The world would be a better place if we had more fun.

News

Utah County declares State of Emergency as wildfires ‘ravage’ the state

Published

on

Utah County declares State of Emergency as wildfires ‘ravage’ the state

UTAH COUNTY, Utah (ABC4) — Utah County has declared a state of emergency.

According to an announcement from the Utah County Commissioner Skyler Beltran, the county is in a dire position due to the extensive wildfires in the area and high fire risk.

The announcement states that declaring the State of Emergency will allow the county to access additional resources, and notes there is no imminent threat to Utah County residents.

“We have utilized a tremendous amount of our resources (very early in the traditional fire season schedule) responding to the Iron Fire and continue to face ongoing recovery concerns,” the statement read. “This was even before the Maple Peak and Cherry fires, which have now merged and are moving toward the Iron Fire.”

The Iron Fire, which started last week, has burned over 40,000 acres. Around 22,830 of those acres were in Utah County. Reportedly, the county has limited resources available to help those who are evacuating from Juab County, including the 600 residents in the Town of Eureka.

Advertisement

Due to the influx in evacuees, the Utah County Commission says that more resources are necessary to help the evacuation shelters in Elberta, Utah. Additionally, due to the Iron Fire and other wildfires, Utah County is facing immense repair needs to avoid future flooding, loss of homes, and disruption to local economies and ecosystems.

There is “imminent threat” to public safety due to the damage.

The commission also asks the public to be vigilant when handling heavy equipment, using campfires or barbecues, and discharging fireworks, to avoid preventing fires.

Their statement added, “Our firefighters are exhausted, our resources are stretched thin and we are in a very vulnerable position.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

A day after Alito’s testy response to Sotomayor’s dissent, court says it was a ‘misunderstanding’

Published

on

A day after Alito’s testy response to Sotomayor’s dissent, court says it was a ‘misunderstanding’

The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor (seated left) and Justice Samuel Alito (seated second from right).

Alex Wong/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Alex Wong/Getty Images

As the Supreme Court heads into the announcement of its final and hugely important opinions next week, there are reverberations from this week’s announcements, and Justice Samuel Alito’s public rebuke of his colleague Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

On Thursday, Justice Alito summarized from the bench three very big opinions he authored for the court’s six justice conservative majority. Alito, unlike most of his colleagues, doesn’t spend much time on these summaries. And it is rare that a justice has three big opinions to announce, but it is almost the end of the term, and there are a lot of big cases still outstanding.

The first case he announced came and went. Alito then moved on to a second case, this one tests whether migrants may apply for asylum in the U.S. by going to one of several ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexican border, and presenting themselves for admission. This entails presenting documents that persuade an asylum officer that applicants’ fear of persecution in their home country is credible enough to allow them to enter the U.S. while their asylum application is processed. Alito’s opinion ruled in favor of the Trump administration’s policy of refusing all such applicants by blocking them at the border. It was a policy also followed at one time by the Obama administration until it was blocked by the lower courts.

Advertisement

After Alito finished his summary of the opinion, he paused, at which point Justice Sotomayor read a summary of her contrary views in dissent. When she finished, however, Justice Alito did not move on to the announcement of his third opinion. Instead, he did something that nobody in the press corps ever remembers happening before. Looking much as if he had just bitten into a lemon, Alito said, “There is much that I would have added to my bench statement had I known there would be a dissent read.” And he then went on to a short extemporaneous rebuttal.

Continue Reading

News

“It’s blood money”: Family of exonerated man in Texas yogurt shop murders speaks out after settlement

Published

on

“It’s blood money”: Family of exonerated man in Texas yogurt shop murders speaks out after settlement

The widow and the daughter of Maurice Pierce, one of the four men wrongfully accused in the 1991 Texas yogurt shop murders, have confirmed they signed a multimillion-dollar settlement with the city of Austin.

Kimberli and Marisa Pierce spoke with correspondent Erin Moriarty in a new episode of the podcast “48 Hours: Case by Case.” Moriarty has reported on the yogurt shop murders for over 30 years. 

Maurice Pierce’s widow Kimberli made clear that their priority has never been financial compensation. “It’s blood money for us. He died for this money,” Kimberli Pierce said. “It’s about the reform and the changes that need to happen, not only in Austin, but apparently across the country.”

They also went into great detail about what they believe happened when Maurice Pierce was shot and killed by police in 2010. 

Advertisement

Maurice Pierce was one of four men, along with Michael Scott, Robert Springsteen and Forrest Welborn, who were wrongfully accused in the murders of four teenage girls in Austin on Dec. 6, 1991. Eliza Thomas, Amy Ayers, and sisters Jennifer and Sarah Harbison were tied up, shot and left inside the yogurt shop as it was set ablaze. 

The four men were exonerated in February after investigators linked another man, Robert Eugene Brashers, to the killings. The city of Austin subsequently offered a $35 million settlement. Because Maurice Pierce died in 2010, his share of $10 million will go to Kimberli and Marisa Pierce.

Eight days after the killings, 16-year-old Maurice Pierce was arrested at a mall, carrying a .22, the same caliber handgun connected to the crime. Kimberli Pierce said police told Maurice Pierce that his gun was the murder weapon. He responded by mentioning his friend Forrest Welborn. Maurice Pierce was then wired up and sent to speak with Welborn, but investigators ultimately determined that Welborn and the others knew nothing about the murders, and no charges were filed at that time.

Marisa Pierce has said there was no evidence when her father was questioned, “only a detective and a narrative, a narrative so completely false. It feels evil.”

From left, Maurice Pierce, Forrest Welborn, Michael Scott and Robert Springsteen were exonerated in February 2026 after investigators linked another man, Robert Eugene Brashers, to the December 1991 killings of four teenage girls in an Austin, Texas, yogurt shop. 

Advertisement

CBS News/AP


Nearly eight years later, in 1999, all four men were arrested after Scott and Springsteen confessed to the murders. They later recanted, saying they had been coerced. Springsteen and Scott were tried and convicted, but later those convictions were overturned on constitutional grounds. A subsequent DNA test excluded all four men. Maurice Pierce was never convicted but spent three years in jail before his release in 2003. 

Kimberli Pierce said her husband came home a hardened man. She believes police continued to harass Maurice and their family after his release. In 2010, Maurice Pierce was stopped for a routine traffic stop, fled on foot, and was shot and killed by an Austin police officer who said Pierce had stabbed him with a knife. 

Marisa and Kimberli Pierce told “48 Hours” that they intend to review the circumstances surrounding the night of Maurice Pierce’s death. Marisa Pierce revealed in new, emotional detail that she was on the phone with her father at the time. She believes he panicked and was only trying to get away, not to hurt anyone. She described her father’s last breaths: “And in those last moments, he had just said I’m sorry, I don’t think you’re gonna see me again, and I love you.” 

Advertisement

“48 Hours” reached out to the Austin Police Department about the Pierces’ allegations of harassment and their questions about Maurice Pierce’s death in 2010. The police department said they had no additional comment.

For the Pierce family, the settlement is a starting point, not an end point. They have put forward seven proposed reforms they hope the city of Austin will approve, including appointing a child advocate whenever a minor is questioned, prohibiting deceptive interrogation tactics, educating juveniles about their rights and establishing accountability measures to address tunnel vision in police investigations.

In a statement shared with “48 Hours,” the Pierces wrote: “Real justice is not only about acknowledging harm after the fact but about creating safeguards that prevent future families from enduring the same pain.”  

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending