Consider the question, does money really bring you happiness? Most will say: “Obviously, I will give you money and we will be best friends”. In this essay, I want to argue my point of view that money cannot buy true happiness.
Happiness is difficult to define. Everyone has a different view of happiness based on past behaviors. Rich people can buy your happiness, because with money you can buy the shoes you want, and you are eager to do all this. Some people say that money gives you strength, power and influence, but on the other hand, they disagree. From my personal point of view, I don’t think money can bring you external pleasures in life. Money is the basic necessity to buy daily necessities in our lives. In addition, money cannot give you the emotion of love and joy.
It is quite obvious that money can improve the quality of life and make anyone happy. Today, people think that happiness is bought in stores. But I personally think that they overestimate how much fun they will have buying luxury items. We really don’t need all these extravagant luxuries. Are they necessities of life? Are there two things that can show a person’s vanity? Or they just wanted to follow what Jones said. They are people of different social, labor, middle and upper classes. It all has nothing to do with money, but with the little important things in life. Money cannot buy time, so we should use our time wisely and do spend time with our loved ones. Dependence on money causes serious mental stress, and material life can become an unhealthy problem. From a money perspective, you can fix any problem. Everything can be bought and sold. The only problem is the place: money gives people the opportunity to extend our lives through the use of advanced medical technology. You can afford the best doctors, medical surgeries and nursing treatments abroad. People die without money for treatment. Besides the rich, there are more opportunities to prevent this disease.
Obviously, when we look at the best things and money in life, it is because they are in fact elements that we sometimes take for granted. We may not realize the importance of loving family and friends, but when we think about it, it is true that the best things in life are free. Can you imagine life now without money? It is even possible to survive in a world driven by money and the material world. Some people say that money makes the world go round. Therefore, there is no doubt that money has become the central axis of many people’s lives. Everyone seems to be working tirelessly to earn money. Even students who study hard can find a high-paying job and earn a lot of money in the future. Although money cannot buy happiness, we cannot live without ourselves.
Obviously, money cannot buy happiness, because many people work hard and fight for money every day, and they are often unhappy. Due to heavy workload and long working hours, most people do not have time to spend money, they are very rich. They have no time or energy for leisure activities, and it goes without saying that their family and friends can barely see them. This can make them feel lonely and depressed. Excessive sweating will not bring happiness, but it will be painful in this case. To make matters worse, money is often the main source of harm to happiness. People often compete for money among friends or family, which can become a very serious problem. For example, long-term partners of family members are often heard arguing about inheritance, and these family members arguing about money-related issues. In some cases, the resulting unpleasant demands and relationships will be destroyed forever. So, what’s the use of owning it when no one shares it?
However, different views on money can sometimes make a person happy. For some people, earning enough money to pay their monthly bills and putting food on the table will make them happy. For others, karma can save enough money to buy things that interest them or take a vacation. With some savings, instead of relying on wages for a living, wages also give people a way of thinking. After all, if a person has to worry about facing a financial crisis, they will not be happy. Therefore, money can buy happiness for one’s own survival or for the immediate realization of one’s wishes. Mark Twain once said: “Lack of money is the root of all evil”. I agree with him, because no one can live on money today. But no amount of money can buy true happiness.
Research shows that students view themselves as unworthy, unlovable, and incompetent due to low self-esteem which has a great impact on the behavioral and emotional aspects of life. According to Silverstone and Salsali (2003), having low self-esteem has been shown to be correlated with a number of negative outcomes, such as depression. More likely, people with low self-esteem are more troubled by failure and tend to exaggerate events as being negative. For example, they often interpret uncritical comments as critical. They are more likely to experience social anxiety and low levels of interpersonal confidence. This in turn makes social interaction with others difficult as they feel awkward, shy, conspicuous, and unable to adequately express themselves when interacting with others. In line with this, it is possible to deduce from this that low self-esteem levels tend to decrease the individual’s level of happiness and life satisfaction (Smith, 2000).
Abdelkhalek(2005) stated that happiness is a human being’s ultimate goal and that every person seeks happiness and wants to be happy. The meaning of happiness is different for individuals with different ways and means to achieve it. In this manner, human happiness cannot be guaranteed since people make their own choices and it varies from person to person.
Happiness is the average level of satisfaction over a specific period in which an individual experiences positive emotional states, and the relative absence of negative effects (Golden Burg 2000, quoted from Aksian 2005). Happiness is an attitude that strengthens individuals in facing difficult issues against flattening, despair, and depression whir/pool which a person easily overcomes some of the circumstances in life that every individual has to undergo. It’s a good attitude it can help the person’s well-being to be more potent in his personal life problems, and to be able to focus more on the positive aspects in life than on the negative ones.
Lelkes (2006) that religion and happiness enjoyed a positive relationship. Happiness is linked to people’s evaluation of life.
According to Snyder and Lopez (2003), happiness is one of the variables affecting human life and is considered the most important component in the quality of life, and as far as it can be claimed all human efforts to achieve happiness. Zeinali and Setoudeh Navroudi (2012) also in their research showed that happiness could predict the quality of life and it was one of the factors affecting improving the quality of life. On the other hand, this is one of the variables predictors of happiness of spirituality (Diener et al., 2011).
Happiness has many other benefits for the life of an individual besides giving happiness, positive emotions, welfare, and peace. Research results indicate that happiness strengthens the immune system of individuals along with their energy and creativity while ensuring that they are preferred more in their social relations, increase efficiency at the workplace, and provide a longer life (Lyubomirsky, King, & Diener, 2005). As said in the previous paragraph, happiness has an impact on the emotional, social, and cognitive aspects of life but that doesn’t end there because in this research it is said that in the physical aspect, happiness has also an impact in which it strengthens the immune system of a person wherein they can give more energy and creativity and also increase their efficiency in the field of work where they belong and provide longer life. Accordingly, those who experience positive emotions more frequently in comparison with negative emotions are considered to be individuals who have a high level of life satisfaction (Myers & Diener 1995).
When a person has high spiritual intelligence, he experiences life satisfaction in abundance and rarely experiences negative emotions such as anger and anxiety (Diener, 2000). Life satisfaction is the way a person evaluates his or her life and how he or she feels about where it is going in the future. It is a measure of well-being and may be assessed in terms of mood, satisfaction with relations with others and with achieved goals, self-concepts, and self-perceived ability to cope with daily life. (Myers & Diener 1995).
As explained by (Hosseini et al., 2010) adolescence and its relation to spiritual intelligence found that spiritual intelligence has a significant influence on the quality of life and it goes without saying that adolescence is a sensitive period that requires specific training to make a brighter future and be exposed to the difficulties.
Students in numerous levels of social and economic things are confronted with certain issues after they experience life challenges. Everyone seeks to realize happiness and satisfaction in his or her life so as to achieve great success. Therefore, satisfaction is the core of the success (Abdollahzadeh et al., 2009). Moreover, Life satisfaction is conceptualized as a psychological feature analysis of one’s life and represents how well a person’s current self aligns with his or her ideal self. One in every good issue touching the Happiness and Satisfaction of an individual is their level of self-esteem. Consistent with Silverstone and Salsali (2003), having low self-esteem has been shown to be related to a variety of negative outcomes, like depression. A lot of probably, individuals with low self-esteem are troubled by failure and have a tendency to exaggerate events as being negative. For instance, they typically interpret uncritical comments as vital. They’re a lot of probably to expertise social anxiety and low levels of social confidence. This successively makes social interaction with others tough as they feel awkward, shy, conspicuous, and unable to adequately specify themselves once interacting with others.
In life, people do things for different reasons; however, all these reasons boil down to two broad issues viz. happiness and obligation. A person will either do something to achieve happiness or as a duty. Nevertheless, regardless of the motives behind one’s actions, the actions will be a means to an end or the end itself. Therefore, in this context, happiness and obligation might be the means to a desired end or the end itself.
Logically, the basic element in any pursuit is the end itself; consequently, the task here is to determine the element that stands out as the end as opposed to means to something else. The means to an end is necessary for the end is unrealizable in absence of the means. The debate on the basic elements in ethics still rages. Proponents and critics alike have their side of story, with critics claiming that obligation is the basic element in ethics while proponents hold that obligations are a means to an end and not the end itself.
The superiority of one element over the other determines its viability as the basic element in ethics; consequently, the element that surpasses the other becomes the basic element. At this point, one might confuse the means for the end and vice versa; however, as aforementioned, there can only be one end. Happiness is the basic element in ethics; not honor.
As aforementioned, the end is superior to the means to the end; consequently, happiness is superior to honor. One would wonder why he/she would seek happiness and not honor. Well, happiness is the end because “…we always desire happiness for its own sake and never as a means to something else…” (Mulvaney, 2008, p. 128). Therefore, if people desire and pursue happiness as the end, then happiness surpasses honor.
However, happiness is not autonomous; consequently, there has to be other elements that work in concert towards the realization of the same. Honor lie in the category of the ‘other elements’ because people do not pursue honor basically for what would come out of it but “…as being means to happiness, because…they will prove the instruments of happiness” (Mulvaney, 2008, p. 128). In the light of these observations, happiness outscores honor validating the reason why people should pursue happiness and not honor.
In its entirety, happiness does not seek to accomplish honor because in happiness, honor exists. However, this argument is relative depending on what is important to humans. There cannot be a one-fit-all answer to this question; however, the initial argument that people pursue the end and not the means answers this question. Happiness being the end stands out as the most important element amongst humans.
If honor were the most important element, then it would surpass happiness and having achieved honor, people would not pursue anything else. Unfortunately, this is not the case as even those in honorable positions seek happiness. Aristotle argues that, goodness of a man comes from executing good deeds carried out in proper excellence. For excellence to exist, virtue must be present, and in the presence of the two, one’s goodness becomes an activity of the soul as Aristotle insinuates.
To understand the superiority of happiness to honor, it is worth considering Aristotle’s argument that, the “good of a man is an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue” (Mulvaney, 2008, p. 128). In other words, the motive behind any one’s activity determines the good of that person.
Virtue in this context surfaces with practice and knowledge; that is, one has to practice virtuous deeds and be aware of their implications. If one executes a virtue without knowing it is a virtue, then the activity is not good anymore and one’s goodness becomes obsolete. Virtue minus knowledge turns out to be mere duty and duty cannot define one’s goodness.
Moreover, for virtues to function optimally, they should relate to some morals and this leads to moral virtues. According to Aristotle, moral virtue is the consequence of a habit. Habit sprouts from actions that one continually do. The role of habit in achievement of moral habit is paramount here.
Just the same, way artists have to practice art after learning it; people have to practice virtues to qualify as having characteristics that associate with the virtue. For instance, by practicing kindness towards others one can be termed as kind. Likewise, by showing love to others one passes for a loving person. Without action that leads to habit, then a virtue does not qualify as a virtue. Aristotle likens habit of exercising virtues to that of exercising any other learned aspect of life.
For instance, he observes that not until someone plays a harpist, he/she does not qualify as a harpist. Similarly, virtue that is not exercised is no virtue. However, as aforementioned, Aristotle cautions against use of virtues void of knowledge, and he puts across some conditions that a virtue has to undergo to qualify its excellence.
One should “…know what he is doing…deliberately choose to do it and to do it for its own sake… do it as an instance of a settled and immutable moral state” (Mulvaney, 2008, p. 129). If these conditions are unmet, then the virtue holds no moral support thus negating its worth.
Critics would fault this argument and question the modality of distinguishing what is moral from what is not. At this point, Aristotle introduces the ‘mean’ as a way of balancing the extremes of any moral issue.
Aristotle seeks to explore mean value not from mathematical perspective where one obtains absolute mean, but from a philosophical point of view where mean is relative depending on an individual. Taken in this context therefore, ‘mean’ means that which is not excess and not deficient, depending on an individual. Critics would again raise the question of how to balance the relativity of this mean given the fact that no one is a replica of the other.
As aforementioned, virtue void of knowledge is no virtue and knowledge comes with emotions. Emotions coupled with actions executed at the right time underscores the mean state of any virtue. “To experience these emotions at the right times and on the right occasions and towards the right persons and for the right causes and in the right manner is the mean or the supreme good, which is characteristic of virtue” (Mulvaney, 2008, p. 130-31).
Therefore, time, occasion, subject, cause and manner are functions of ‘mean’ state in any virtue. Given the relativity of determining ‘mean’ state of a virtue, prudence and reason are the key factors that weigh one’s mean state.
There are different forms of mean states as even in some cases; mean is either an extreme or a deficiency. Nevertheless, these inherent differences do not nullify the superiority of happiness to honor or obligations. As previously mentioned, some mean states represent extremes where there are no excesses or deficiencies. For instance, there is no excess or deficiency of wickedness; therefore, the mean state here is an extreme; wickedness.
Murder, rape, adultery and theft among others are inherently wicked states. There cannot be a good or bad murderer. Nevertheless, some cases have clear-cut extremes and deficiencies thus mean stands out conspicuously. For instance, in giving and receiving of material things, the extreme is profligacy while the deficiency is illiberality; liberality is the mean. Whichever, way one perceives and determines his/her mean, the best way to hit the mean is by pushing one’s position towards the mean.
That is, to “choose the lesser of two evils…by steering clear of the evil which is further from the mean…drag ourselves in the direction opposite to them; for it is by removing ourselves as far as possible from what is wrong that we shall arrive at the mean…(Mulvaney, 2008, p. 134). In other words, doing things for the common good of all people underlines the principle behind the best way of hitting the mean.
In conclusion, people do things for different reasons; some do what they do for fame, honor, money, or leisure among other things while others do what they do to get happiness. To determine the basic principle in ethics calls for extensive exploration to distinguish the end and the means to the end. The end is superior to the means to the end and as analyzed above, happiness is the end while honor is means to the end. Therefore, happiness is the basic principle in ethics.
That which brings happiness to all people underscores what is ‘good’ for humans. The goodness of a person lies in the virtue surrounding any action performed. Virtues become virtues only when a person exercises them with full knowledge of their implication and chooses to exercise them deliberately. However, virtue has to be practiced continually giving birth to habit, which works towards realization of moral habits.
Regrettably, virtues exist in extremes and if not balanced in a state of mean, they become vices. Mean is that state in which there are no excesses or deficiencies, a state of balance. There exist different types of mean given the diversity of those who practice is it. Overall, the best way of hitting the mean is to choose not the excess or the deficiency of a virtue. By doing so, everyone will achieve happiness with honor being one of the means to this felicity.
Reference
Mulvaney, R. (2008). Classical Philosophical Questions (13th Ed.). New York: Prentice Hall
It is always pleasant to experience positive emotions. Everyone strives to attain a positive mental state. There are various perspectives that define happiness.
Many religious approaches and perceptions on happiness define happiness as a spiritual fulfillment that is transcended with inner peace and contentment. Such religious perspectives towards achieving happiness are advocated by religion factions such as Christianity and Buddhist. Psychologists also have a strong view on happiness. In this perspective, psychologists view happiness as a scientific concept.
Nonetheless, the sociological approach in defining happiness is more satisfying. For example, the approach acknowledges that happiness has two dimensions; psychological and economical (Hirata 5). As a matter of fact, many people are accustomed to the above dimensions whenever happiness and well-being is discussed. Personally, I always feel happy when I am able to meet my basic needs and afford a luxurious life.
For example, if I don’t get sick within a year, I tend to think that as a sign of positive well-being. Moreover, if I can buy a luxurious car, a house and afford a balanced diet, education and entertainment, I will consider to be living in happiness. The following discussion below highlights how happiness and well-being is viewed from both a psychological and economical perspective.
Michael Marmot in his book The Status Syndrome: How Social Standing Affects Our Health and Longevity tries to justify happiness from a social perspective. In his article, Marmot alleges that social standings can only be viewed from an economic perspective.
In his article, Marmot justifies that one must have a certain economic stability to have good health. According to Marmot, an individual’s happiness can only be derived, if the individual is employed, healthy and well educated (Marmot 2). The writer exemplifies how a well educated person is in a higher social hierarchy than an average educated person.
An educated individual understands the importance of family planning, and controls his earnings and lives in a good house. To the author, these are the basics towards achieving happiness and living healthy. Marmot highlights how the poor in America die early. This is a social trend that Marmot describes as very common in the underdeveloped communities. He alleges that people who live below the poverty line are more prone to depravity of basic needs.
Nevertheless, Marmot is very categorical in his theory of the status syndrome. According to Marmot, the status syndrome does not necessarily affect the poor, but also the rich (6). The status syndrome determines an individual place in the society status hierarchy. From the status syndrome, the author demystifies the assertion that lifestyle diseases are only associated with the rich. Marmot uses a sociological, scientific and political approach to analyze the status syndrome concept (18).
From a personal point of view, happiness can only be achieved, if one has control over certain aspects of life. For example, control over economic, social and political independence is critical in achieving happiness. A happy life should be void of diseases, poverty and lack other essential commodities.
A happy life should consist of political freedom and respect to personal rights. An economy that allows people to develop and grow financially is an ideal environment for happiness. In such environments, families afford luxuries and enjoy holidays, when the society’s economy allows affordable health care for all. I believe that with a good education, I will be able to get a well-paying job or at least create an economic project that creates profit and eventually benefits the society.
Works Cited
Hirata, Johannes. Happiness, ethics and economics. New York, Taylor & Francis, 2011. Print.
Marmot, Michael. The status syndrome: How social standings affects our health and longevity. New York, Henry Holt and Company, 2004. Print.
Happiness is a complex of feelings that people possess due to a number of factors. Sociologists have established that many social factors contribute to happiness of an individual. The study sought to establish if gender, education level, and the number of children influence happiness among Americans.
The findings did show that gender, education level, and the number of children are significant predictors of happiness. Essentially, women are happier than men, people with higher education level are happier than people with lower education level, and the number of children in a family correlates negatively with happiness of parents.
Introduction
One of the most important inner feelings in a person is happiness, mainly because happiness makes a person feel good and satisfied. Indeed, happiness is one of the emotions that people can derive from many things, for example, in relationship with their families. Again, it is always obvious that when people do something good, they automatically become happy.
People prefer to be happy because happiness provides them with many good results. Usually, happiness varies from one person to another depending on social conditions. According to Easterlin (2008), trend of happiness among Americans relatively increases from the ages of 18 to midlife, but gradually decreases as they approach old age.
Happiness forms an integral part of life as when one is happy, his or her health will improve, and this positive effect on health will probably lead to prolonged life. Happiness also provides protection against some serious diseases, for example, those who are always happy are less likely to suffer from diseases like heart attack or depression (Helliwell, 2008). Lastly, when someone is happy, it is always easy for him/her to make new friends, since happiness makes people look very attractive.
Besides, it is always true that those who are happy can easily help others, mainly because happiness brings satisfaction to people. Various factors make one to become happy. In most cases, people always consider money as one of the things that provide happiness; however, this is not always the case.
In the subsequent sections, this paper will provide discussion on how gender, education level and the number of children influence happiness. Therefore, the paper will try to establish whether happiness is directly related to gender or education level, and whether the number of children an individual has can influence the degree of his or her happiness.
Literature Review
Gender
Most of the recent studies have shown that there is a great influence of gender on happiness (Simon, 2008). Happiness is a state of mind that many researchers always argue about – that anybody can be happy. Contrary to this statement, researchers have found that females nowadays are less happy than males (Helliwell, 2008).
In addition, studies have shown that married men tend to be happier than married women are (Easterlin, 2008). This is attributed to the fact that nowadays, the expectations put on women have increased, mainly due to the extensive and numerous empowerment programs accorded to women.
In the past, women were happy compared to men, but this has changed currently especially due to various marital conflicts facing women and men. Another factor that makes women less happy than men is the responsibility of taking care of children, which has always been reserved for women. The role of taking care of children increases stress in women, especially those whose jobs or careers are very demanding.
One of the arguments is that women have more intensive workload due to their empowerment; as a result, today’s women tend to work extra hard and extra hours, leading to no or limited time for others and their families, and consequently bringing less happiness to them.
According to Helliwell (2008), suicides, depressions, and self-destructive behaviors have risen among females recently, mainly due to the stressful life they tend to live. The argument is that as they play double roles of professional engagement and caring for family, they become very stressed and unhappy; indeed, those living in single parenthood are even unhappy, as they do not have anyone to help them with family responsibilities.
Education level
Most researchers have found that there is a direct link between education and happiness. According to Roberts (2013), high level of education results to a good living environment in terms of income, status, and even wealth, which brings happiness. High level of education allows one to attain significant status in the society, leading to respect and happiness, which in turn leads to enjoyment of societal goods and resources.
In addition, those who have a high level of education have more knowledge and they are more aware of their surroundings, thereby tending to enjoy most of the available resources. Besides, Verducci (2013) argues that higher education leads to possibilities of good employment and income, thereby making those who can afford education to be happier than those who are less educated
Overall, high level of education leads to higher income, which allows an individual to access most of things, he or she desires, thus increasing happiness. Education level again has a direct impact on the degree of happiness, mainly because high education is highly valued in the society, leading to self-confidence, and consequently raising the status of those who have a high learning status (Verducci, 2013).
The Number of Children
Different scholars have done research on the relationship between happiness and the number of children in different families. According to Easterlin (2008), the number of children in a family is inversely proportional to the level of happiness the family enjoys. This shows that the higher the number of children, the less happy the family will be.
However, the birth of the first child always has a strong and positive effect on females’ happiness (Luis, 2010). On the male counterparts, the degree of happiness does not vary so much with the number of children unless they are helping the females to take care of the children.
Again, according to Gobbo and Raccanello (2007), the degree of happiness always reduces during the development stages of a child up to the time the child reaches around 10 years. After teenage age, the degree of happiness increases steadily again in the family when the children have grown up.
It is also found out that the increase in the number of children leads to lack of love in the family and later leads to decline in the degree of happiness (Luis, 2010). In some cases, having many children gives the parents, especially the female ones, emotional benefits, leading to increased happiness. Nevertheless, it is clear that an increase in the number of children lowers the degree of happiness, especially on the side of females (Gobbo & Raccanello, 2007).
Overall, it is important to note that the first child normally brings joy to the family, but subsequent children increase the level of stress in parents, leading to reduced happiness. According to Gobbo & Raccanello (2007), there is always a direct link between happiness and the physical health of an individual.
Hypotheses
The first hypothesis is that women are less happy than their men counterparts. Hence, it means that gender determines happiness among the population.
Since happiness is an emotional feeling, women are more likely to be emotional most of the times compared to men. According to the study by Helliwell (2008), women are less happy than men are because they are emotional and increased responsibilities in life, both family and professional duties. The emotional nature of women coupled with marital conflicts and childcare issues make women to experience more problems and challenges than men.
The second hypothesis is that the level of education has a direct effect on the degree of happiness. Those who have higher levels of education are more likely to be happier than those who have lower levels of education.
In the study, Roberts (2013) found out that education is a significant predictor of happiness because it empowers individuals to achieve knowledge, good jobs, and amass wealth, which are essential in creating happiness. In the society, people with high levels of education get decent jobs, which consequently enhance their social and economic status, and thus happiness.
The third hypothesis is that an increase in the number of children is more likely to reduce happiness among people. The happiness decreases with an increase in the number of children because children increase the burden to parents in terms of parenting, school fees, clothes, and foodstuff.
Easterlin (2008) established that families with many children are less happy than families with no children. In essence, families with many children have reduced happiness as they spend most of the time figuring out how to provide for their children.
Method
Participants
The General Social Survey offered the data that the study used in examining how gender, education level, and the number of children in a family influence happiness among individuals. The General Social Survey provides data that depict demographic characteristics of Americans and their attitudes towards various issues that affect their lives. In the selection of participants, the General Social Survey applies proportional sampling method.
The selected participants normally undergo through face-to-face interviews. Davis and Smith (2011) state that the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) is a body that performs an annual survey among Americans who are above 18 years by using computer-aided personal interviews and face-to-face interviews. The General Social Survey is important because it provides an updated data regarding trends of social issues that affects Americans.
Thus, given that the study aims at examining how gender, education level, and the number of children in a family influence happiness among people, it collected appropriate data from the General Social Survey. Hence, the study selected 2500 participants from the General Social Survey and analyzed their data to establish if gender, education level, and the number of children have any significant influence on happiness.
Instrumentation
The study used a three-Likert scaled questionnaire as an instrument for determining factors that influence happiness among Americans. The demographic features such as gender, education level, and the number of children comprise the independent variable of the study. In contrast, happiness is the dependent variable, which the study measures using a three-Likert scaled items, namely, very happy, happy, and not so very happy.
Essentially, gender, education level, and the number of children are the three independent variables, whereas happiness is a dependent variable. To establish variation in the dependent variable, the study used a research question and obtained the answers in a Likert scale manner. Thus, the research question was how happy are you?
Procedures
The nominal scale applied in measuring the independent variables comprised of gender, education level, and the number of children. On the other hand, the scale used in the measurement of the dependent variable is an ordinal scale, which ranges from 1 to 3 in a Likert scale manner.
In the data analysis, the study used the statistical software for social science (SPSS). As the study aimed at establishing the effect of gender, education level, and the number of children in a family, it used frequency tables and crosstabs in the presentation of findings.
Furthermore, the study used Chi-square test in testing if the independent variables are significant predictors of happiness among Americans. The study did set the significance level at 0.05 of rejecting the null hypotheses of gender, education level, and the number of children.
Results
Analysis of data using SPSS did present results in frequency tables. Examination of the frequency tables depicts trends of happiness among 2500 participants based on their gender, education level, and the number of children.
The frequency table presenting the independent variable of gender shows that 145 women and 50 men were very happy. Moreover, the frequency table also shows that 158 women and 75 men were happy, while 35 women and 45 men were not happy. Overall, the frequency table indicates that most participants were happy in their lives.
Moreover, frequency table of the level of education shows that 725 participants with higher education level were very happy while 175 participants with lower education levels were very happy. Comparatively, 1425 participants with higher education were happy while 850 participants with lower education levels were happy. Among participants who were not happy, 350 participants had a higher education level whereas 1475 participants had lower education level.
Regarding the independent variable, among the participants with no children, 545, 1555, 440, and 400 participants were very, happy, and not happy respectively. Among participants with one child, 7675, 1265, and 468 participants were very happy, happy, and not happy accordingly. Regarding participants with more than two children, 8875, 990, and 6225 participants were very happy, happy, and not happy respectively.
Further analysis using crosstabs shows that 5.8% of women and 2% of men were very happy. Moreover, the crosstab shows that 3% of men and 6.3% of women were happy, whereas 1.4% of women and 1.8% of men are not happy.
In the crosstab that shows the distribution of participants regarding their education level, 29% of participants with higher education level were very happy while 7% lower education level were very happy. Among individuals who were happy, 57% had a higher education level while 34% had lower education level. Moreover, 14% and 59% of participants who were not happy had higher education levels and lower education level respectively.
The crosstab of the number of children depicts that 21.8%, 62.2%, and 16% of participants with no children were very happy, happy, and not happy respectively. Comparatively, 30.7%, 50.6%, and 18.7% of participants with a child were very happy, happy, and not happy accordingly. Among the participants who had more than two children, 35.5%, 39.6%, and 24.9% were very happy, happy, and not happy respectively.
The studyused the chi-square test in testing the significance influence of gender, education level, and the number of children. The first hypothesis is that women are less happy than their men counterparts. The null hypothesis holds that men and women are equally happy, and thus it is expected that the distribution of participants in crosstab is equal.
However, the crosstab shows women are happier than men. The distribution of percentages shows that 2%, 3%, and 1.8% of men were very happy, happy, and not happy respectively, while 5.8%, 6.3%, and 1.4% of women were very happy, happy, and not happy respectively. The chi-square test depicted that the p-value is greater than the significant level. Hence, the test reject the null hypothesis and affirms that women are happier than men (χ2 = 88.365, df = 2, p<.005).
The third hypothesis is that an increase in the number of children is more likely to reduce happiness among people. The hypothesis means that families with many children are unhappy when compared with families with no children. Crosstab shows that 21.8%, 62.2%, and 16% of participants without children were very happy, happy, and not happy respectively.
Likewise, 30.7%, 50.6%, and 18.7% of participants with one child were very happy, happy, and not happy accordingly. Regarding families with more than two kids, the crosstab shows that 35.5%, 39.6%, and 24.9% of participants were very happy, happy, and not happy respectively. The chi-square test proved that the observed distribution of participants is significant because it shows that Americans with many children are less happy than those with one or no children ((χ2 = 128.568, df = 2, p<.005).
Discussion
The variation in happiness among the population occurs due to a number of factors. Gender, education level, and the number of children are factors that the study sought to find out if they influence happiness among Americans. The first hypothesis states that men are happier than women.
The study done by Helliwell (2008) found out that women are less happy when compared to their men counterparts because they are emotional and have huge responsibilities both in the family and workplaces. In contrast with these findings, the study found out that women are happier than men. In this view, the study shows that gender is a predictive factor of happiness among Americans.
The second hypothesis states that the level of education influence happiness among Americans. Roberts (2013) conducted a study a found out that the level of education influences happiness in that people with higher levels of education are happier than people with lower levels of education. The analysis of the General Social Survey reveals that Americans with higher levels of education are happier than Americans with lower education level. Thus, the study proves the education level is a significant predictor of happiness among Americans.
The third hypothesis states that the number of children is inversely proportional to happiness among people. In a study, Easterlin (2008) established that families with many children are less happy than families without children because of the increased responsibilities of providing school fees, food, clothing, and parenting.
Similarly, the analysis of the data obtained from General Social shows that people with many children are less happy than those without children. This confirms that the number of children in a family significantly predicts the state of happiness among Americans.
Although gender, education level, and the number of children contribute to some degree of happiness, it is important to realize that thoughts and other feelings enhance peace of mind, leading to happiness (Luis, 2010).
Again, it is important to understand that wealth and money do not guarantee happiness, as one may have a lot of wealth, but live a stressful life due to social and emotional factors. Moreover, although gender, education level, and the number of children tend to influence the level of happiness, it is apparent that happiness is a choice that provides good health and well-being (Easterlin, 2008).
Happiness requires making the right choices; for women, it is important that they lower their degree of expectations, as well as change their thinking and attitudes in order to be happy. Males on the other hand should try to change their attitudes and thoughts on the values and ideas that bring about happiness, as this will enable them to become happy.
Since the study used one question in establishing the extent to which Americans are happy, the question does not accommodate all factors that determine happiness in a person. In this view, the question used by the study is not reliable in measuring happiness among individuals.
Moreover, the study used three-Likert scale items as dependent variables that measure the extent of happiness. The three-Likert scale items do not measure the degree of happiness, and thus prone to erroneous outcome. Therefore, to improve the validity and the accuracy of the outcome, the study should use a number of questions that target factors that influence happiness and increase the Likert scale from 3 items to five items.
Given that the study used 2500 participants, the number is relatively small compared to the general target population. The small number of participants decreases the external validity of the findings, and thus their application across all the population. Thus, the study should increase the number of participants and analyze their data appropriately to enhance external validity of the findings.
References
Easterlin, R. A. (2008). Life cycle happiness and its sources: Capabilities and happiness. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gobbo, C., & Raccanello, D. (2007). How children narrate happy and sad events: does affective state count? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21(9), 1173-1190.
Helliwell, J. F. (2008). Combining individual and national variables to explain subjective well-being. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Luis, A. (2010). Children and Life Satisfaction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 11(4), 523-538
Roberts, P. (2013). Happiness, Despair, and Education. Studies in Philosophy & Education, 32(5), 53-475.
Simon, R. (2008). Who are Happier: Men or Women? Gender Issues, 25 (2), 141-143
Verducci, S. (2013). Happiness and Education: Tilting at windmills? Educational Philosophy & Theory, 45(5), 498-501.
In addition to considering the role that people play in enhancing a nation’s Gross National Product (GNP), the government of Bhutan identifies its citizens’ happiness as a vital measure of the country’s annual progress. In particular, in 1972, the government, under the reign of King Jigme Singye Wangchuck, the 4th king of Bhutan, saw the importance of considering the non-financial element of people’s welfare as an indicator of national prosperity (Givel 107). For this reason, the country adopted the Gross National Happiness (GNH) concept as a crucial mechanism for assessing the status of the population’s social interests. The plan of gauging national progress has attracted the attention of bodies such as the United Nations (UN) because of its positive impact on the society’s productivity. Consequently, the idea of GNH underlines the need for measuring growth and development at the national level by considering the impact that people’s healthy and fulfilling lives can have on a particular country’s overall productivity. Therefore, it is crucial to examine the implication of the concept of GNH for the government of Bhutan. It is also imperative to find out how it is calculated. As argued in this paper, although happiness is a personal issue, Bhutan has taken the responsibility of creating an atmosphere that enables its citizens to carry out their daily businesses without interruptions that may interfere with their satisfaction levels.
The GNH Concept in Bhutan
According to Schroeder and Schroeder, the ever-changing competition has led to the introduction of diverse strategies that aim at boosting development among global economies (3521). Countries have been relying on conventional approaches that emphasize the financial growth paradigm at the expense of other factors, which determine the extent and quality of development in a country. Such conservative methods ignore the input of multi-faceted economic growth mechanisms, which acknowledge a nation’s citizens as key elements that trigger or hinder financial progress based on their level of contentment with the prevailing environment (Schroeder 3). The concept of GNH in Bhutan emphasizes the need for gauging the progress of this country from the perspective of its population’s degree of happiness.
The country regards GNH as more valuable compared to its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) because the former is founded on the awareness that sustainable economic progress needs to adopt a comprehensive approach that captures the link between a nation’s productivity and its population’s extent of contentment. As such, Bhutan’s administration prioritized the establishment of social and financial guiding principles that sought to bring about contentment among its people. According to Sithey et al., the government of Bhutan has laid down vital development-based incentives that enhance its citizens’ contentment and, consequently, their dedication to taking part in nation building (514). The country’s establishment of the GNH framework was based on the need for having a measurement plan that could be helpful during policymaking processes.
As Paul asserts, although the exploration of the tool is a work-in-progress, Bhutan has so far created a culture whereby investigations are carried out after every 48 months involving almost 10000 participants with the goal of gauging the country’s level of advancement with respect to some specified constraints. In particular, the tool was meant to influence the implementation of enticements for not only the state but also other non-governmental agencies and businesses, all of which play a key role in influencing people’s happiness levels. The framework has been crucial towards fostering the realization of national prosperity. For the GNH system to work in Bhutan, it focuses on four main pillars that guide policy-making processes in the country. In particular, according to Gupta and Agrawal, the framework is founded on the need for good governance, environmental conservation, preservation and promotion of culture, and sustainable socio-economic development (1919).
Therefore, social and economic policies established in Bhutan seek to facilitate the realization of the above four major areas of GNH. For instance, the element of good governance ensures that the Bhutanese constitutional monarchy establishes structures that facilitate the actualization of joy among people in the country. Additionally, according to Gupta and Agrawal, policies on environmental conservation boost the sustainability of the people’s surroundings for generations to enjoy amid the onset of global warming (1920). Furthermore, Bhutan boasts of rich culture and identity. As a result, the country’s GNH tool has influenced the establishment of policies that promote culture heritage to create a sense of happiness among its people (Metz 220). Moreover, the GNH concept identifies policies that foster socio-economic development as essential towards enhancing people’s prosperity.
The Calculation of GNH in Bhutan
The measurement of GNH in the Bhutanese society follows a unique process that rejects traditionally established economic elements of progress. Conversely, in the process of estimating GNH, the selected country considers nine important domains, including high-quality governance, psychological health, cultural diversity and flexibility, ecological multiplicity and pliability, education, wellbeing, community liveliness, time utilization, and living standards (Givel 105). Bhutan takes into account qualitative features of social development in its assessment of the Gross National Happiness tool. Therefore, it is imperative to describe the approaches that it has adopted to calculate GNH.
According to Gupta and Agrawal, Bhutan applies the GNH index in calculating the development or progress of the society (1920). In particular, the GNH indicator is comprised of the nine domains mentioned earlier. In calculating GNH, the appropriate officials administer roughly 100-minute long interviews that seek to gauge respondents contentment levels based on each domain of the index (Sithey et al. 514). In this process, every sphere of influence is treated equally since it complements the rest towards bolstering the realization of prosperity. In evaluating the degree of happiness attained in each field, the GNH indicator integrates at least 33 variables (Schroeder 3). Distinctive domains in the GNH are assigned to at least four variables.
For instance, assessing the extent of happened gained from the education realm requires the interviewer to ask questions about schooling approaches, literacy levels, knowledge in particular topics, and values acquired in the educational environment (Beaglehole and Bonita 848). Additionally, assessing the population’s living standards covers variables, including housing, assets, and household income. Furthermore, gauging the psychological wellbeing of citizens in the country requires them to respond to questions that cover areas such as spirituality, negative and positive emotions, and satisfaction. In this respect, the variables capturing these diverse domains play a fundamental role in facilitating the measurement of GNH that, in turn, reveals areas that the country can transform to meet its population’s happiness demands and expectations (Schroeder 3). Nonetheless, the 33 variables used in the assessment of the various domains in the GNH index are disproportionate, meaning that the level of citizens’ contentment and, consequently, productivity in the country is based on the combined findings.
The specified domains have varying weights because of the degree of validity and reliability that each of them offers to the results attained after measurement. In this regard, the computation of GNH upholds the essence of observing objectivity over subjectivity to facilitate the realization of convincing and consistent results (Givel 105). This observation demonstrates that factual indicators have a greater weight compared to personal indices when applying variables that capture the nine domains of the GNH framework. In particular, the calculation of GNH incorporates sufficiency targets because the averages obtained in the process cannot quantify happiness. For example, considerably low literacy levels cannot be countered by a significantly high household income level. In this concern, sufficiency targets ensure that each question covering a particular indicator prompts relevant answers from interviewees. According to Givel, the sufficiency level for monthly earnings in the household revenue indicator in the living standards domain is 23.127 Ngultrum, which is equivalent to around €325 (105). In this respect, such targets facilitate the realization of pertinent answers, which enhance the correct assessment of the level of happiness among the people of Bhutan.
Sufficiency targets help in determining thresholds that enhance the gauging of happiness at various levels. Notably, such sufficiency thresholds evaluate happiness in terms of excess, deep, and narrow extents in relation to the 33 indicators. From the computed GNH results, it becomes possible to determine whether a country is contented or is struggling to implement development agendas that do not contribute towards enhancing its people’s happiness. In this respect, the Bhutanese population is considered to be deeply happy when GNH results indicate a range of 77%-100% sufficiency level after weighing the 33 indicators. A finding of 66%-76% denotes an extensively happy Bhutanese society. A narrowly contented population is considered to score a sufficiency level of (50-65)% whereas a 0-49 percent GNH outcome represents an unhappy society (Beaglehole and Bonita 849). Therefore, such sufficiency thresholds facilitate the creation of an actual picture of Bhutan’s level of prosperity. Consequently, according to Schroeder, the government stands a better chance of using the results to influence policy changes in all sectors of the economy, especially those that seem to be recording low citizens’ contentment levels (3). Moreover, it is important to note that the sufficiency figures rely considerably on the objectiveness of the administered interviews (Sithey et al. 514). Therefore, it is crucial to avoid instances of subjectivity when collecting data used for measuring GNH in Bhutan.
Conclusion
People in a particular country significantly determine its level of development. Similar to the findings in many organizations, satisfaction and productivity go hand in hand. Hence, a nation whose population is not happy with the prevailing economic, education, religious, political, or psychological environment may be less productive when it comes to implementing development agendas. The GNH concept applied in Bhutan considers happiness as an important indicator of development or progress. The social pointer of prosperity is highly valued in this country compared to other economic indicators such as the GDP. The measurement of GNH takes into account nine domains that are evaluated using 33 variables. It is important to observe objectivity in the collection of data through interviews to facilitate the realization of reliable and valid results when measuring GNH. The accurate measure of GNH ensures that the government and concerned parties acquire a clear picture of the population’s satisfaction, happiness, well-being, and the quality of life. As a result, this tool acts as a dependable and a suitable depicter of national growth and prosperity. Results obtained using this tool influence policy improvements geared towards attaining a happy and, consequently, a productive population.
Works Cited
Beaglehole, Robert, and Ruth Bonita. “Development with Values: Lessons from Bhutan.” The Lancet, vol. 385, no. 9971, 2015, pp. 848-849.
Givel, Michael. “Gross National Happiness in Bhutan: Political Institutions and Implementation.” Asian Affairs, vol. 46, no. 1, 2015, pp. 102-117.
Gupta, Kanupriya, and Rajat Agrawal. “Sustainable Development and Spirituality: A Critical Analysis of GNH Index.” International Journal of Social Economics, vol. 44, no. 12, 2017, pp.1919-1939.
Metz, Thaddeus. “Gross National Happiness: A Philosophical Appraisal.” Ethics and Social Welfare, vol. 8, no. 3, 2014, pp. 218-232.
Schroeder, Kent. Politics of Gross National Happiness: Governance and Development in Bhutan. Palgrave Macmillan, 2018.
Schroeder, Randy, and Kent Schroeder. “Happy Environments: Bhutan, Interdependence and the West.” Sustainability, vol. 6, no. 6, 2014, pp. 3521-3533.
Sithey, Gyambo, et al. “Gross National Happiness and Health: Lessons from Bhutan.” Bulletin of the World Health Organization, vol. 93, no. 8, 2015, p. 514.
There are many people who suppose that humans and animals have a lot of things in common when it comes to communication with ones of their kind. Despite the fact that there are some extraordinary cases related to animal behavior, there is no doubt that people usually demonstrate much more developed skills in empathy. Unlike representatives of a wide range of nonhuman species, many people realize that mutual supportiveness remains extremely important even in case when the resources are limited. Speaking about this assumption, it is necessary to mention such activity as volunteering. The latter involves acts of good will that really help the society to keep developing and to provide vulnerable populations with support that they need. Although the majority of researchers seem to express an undivided opinion when it comes to moral appraisal of this phenomenon, the effects that it produces on volunteers themselves have not been thoroughly studied yet. For instance, there is still a discussion concerning the influence that participation in volunteering activities has on happiness levels. At the same time, this problem can be regarded as quite significant because many people all over the world are interested in volunteering, and it may be necessary to conduct an additional research in order to find out whether the effects of volunteering on happiness levels are primarily positive or not.
Main Claim
Speaking about volunteering, we usually mean a range of activities when a person or a group of people provides other ones with help and assistance, and this collaboration does not involve material remuneration. The particular activities related to such line of work are different as they can be aimed at helping people or the entire organizations. Besides, volunteers often take part in different events organized in order to provide people who are in difficult situation with psychological support and, therefore, improve their mental health and help them to cope with difficulties. One of the most important fields of activity attracting a lot of volunteers is connected with managing the consequences of extraordinary situations and helping those who have become their victims. Therefore, it can be seen that volunteering involves many activities but all of them can be supposed to encourage further development of the human society. The thing that I would like to focus on in this research essay is the assumption that volunteering and all the practices that it involves have a positive influence on the society and volunteers increasing their happiness levels. Making a positive contribution to the society and its well-being is beneficial for both volunteers and those who receive help. In particular, it is able to make the majority of people more satisfied with themselves and help them to improve their self-esteem and even physical health.
Reason Statements
There is no doubt that happiness of the entire nation involves positive experience reported by representatives of all the parts of community. Taking that into consideration, it is necessary to pay an increased attention to the effect that volunteering and all the people connected to it produce on representatives of one of the social groups whose opportunities are limited due to natural processes – elderly people. It is common knowledge that mental health depends upon physical health. Therefore, the overall level of happiness may increase only if the majority of people have no serious problems related to these spheres. Volunteering and different practices related to the field help elderly people to improve their physical condition, volunteers’ assistance allows older population to stay active and, therefore, such collaboration may significantly improve their health and well-being that remain the important components of happiness. Speaking about the academic community, it is necessary to say that there are a lot of sources that confirm the given point of view. For instance, Dulin et al. state that the link between well-being and happiness has been proven and participation in voluntary activities may give older people “a chance to improve their health” (618). Apart from that, there is an opinion that “volunteering among older adults is related to better psychosocial, physical, and cognitive health, as well as better functional performance” (Anderson et al. 1506). Besides, there are other researchers who support an opinion that volunteering may have a positive impact on people’s health; for instance, Stephens et al. claim that ones who are involved in it tend to show “overall greater health condition” (23).
This point of view seems to be even more substantial considering that the results of longitudinal studies show that there is a strong link between time spent in order to help other people and living “happier and healthier life” (Konrath 393). Also, the results of such studies seem to demonstrate this correlation when it comes to subjective data reported by the participants. Furthermore, there is a wide range of projects aimed at studying the difference between ones who are somehow connected to volunteering activities and ones who have never been volunteers. For example, as it is stated by Pilkington et al. who conducted such a study, the majority of those people whose self-assessed health condition was relatively high were volunteers whereas non-volunteers reported great physical condition rather seldom (258). Also, it is important to mention that those authors whose works were mentioned do not just express their personal opinion concerning the connection between physical health, level of physical activity, and volunteering; instead, their statements are supported by evidence found with the help of different scientific methods. Having taken this into consideration, it is quite difficult to deny the fact that health has a strong connection to happiness and volunteering helps older population to stay active and feel better.
Another argument that I would like to mention in order to support the given point of view is related to the assumption that giving back to a community promotes attachment and self-esteem and these two qualities are closely interconnected with the notion of happiness. There is no doubt that volunteering activities allow people who are connected to this sphere to demonstrate their strong suits; to some extent, it can even help those people who feel that they need to improve their character or change certain habits. Speaking about the nature of such activity, it is necessary to mention that being a volunteer involves having greater sense of importance. Those related to volunteering usually realize that their effort, skills, and knowledge that they possess may help other people to fulfil their purposes and change their lives for the better. Furthermore, there are a lot of cases when people who have always been unsure of themselves or had no life purpose become volunteers, start helping in organizations fulfilling important missions, and it really helps them to realize that the point of life is strongly interconnected with providing other people with support. Therefore, such individuals realize that there is an important task that they can fulfil; their self-esteem tends to increase due to the fact that their work can help other people to live better lives. There are researchers whose statements support this opinion; for example, in their work, Townsend et al. claim that “increased sense of belonging, self-worth, and enjoyment” are the benefits that volunteers get due to their work (225). Apart from that, there is the evidence that school students tend to demonstrate higher self-assurance “after participating in voluntary activities” (Konrath 400). The data reported by these researchers and many of their colleagues shows that participation in different volunteering activities is associated with higher self-esteem and that it really helps to promote attachment. Considering that these qualities remain essential parts of happiness, it needs to be said that volunteering increases happiness levels in the community in one more way.
To continue, there is another argument that allows us to consider volunteering as an activity which helps people to become happier – its connection with personal development. It is indubitable that happiness is a very complex notion and it involves a lot of components. Being a happy person does not mean only having a roof over the head and something to eat; apart from physiological needs, there are ones related to person’s emotions and mission, and they involve quite a strong desire to realize the potential and achieve success. Therefore, personal development remains one of the most important values for many people and participation in volunteer activities allows many people to bring their talents to light and become happier. Thus, discussing this point of view, it is necessary to mention the research that was conducted by Donahue et al.; as it is clear from the opinion supported by these authors, those who are “motivated by personal development to participation in voluntary engagements tend to exhibit positive emotions” (2). These emotions mentioned by the authors of the article remain an important part of mental condition that we usually refer to as happiness and volunteering is supposed to be one of the good ways to get more positive emotions. It can be stated that there is a lot of ways to get them but in fact, certain things such as amusement can help to improve person’s mood just for a short period of time whereas volunteering involves seeing the fruits of your labor represented by happier people or cleaner streets. It is obvious that such results can make any person happier and this is the effect that participation in volunteer activities produces on common people.
Apart from the factors that have already been mentioned in previous paragraphs, there is one more component of happiness that needs to be discussed with regard to volunteering. Speaking about happiness, it is necessary to understand that there is a wide range of factors that may increase or decrease its level, and these factors are related not only to the thoughts and motives of individuals but also to the relationships between the particular members of the community. Thus, social ties present one more factor helping to assess the level of happiness of the individual or of the entire society. Therefore, the point that needs to be introduced is that volunteering strengthens social ties and this process positively influences happiness. Pilkington et al. found that volunteers who became participants of their research were demonstrating increased social involvement whereas this feature was not as prominent in those people whose activity was not connected to volunteering (249). Discussing the connection between social interaction and volunteering, it is also important to remember that a lack of communication is often associated with such a problem as depression. Nevertheless, volunteering is likely to have a positive influence on people suffering from this disease as well. In their article, Stephens et al. mention the results of many long-term studies proving that “volunteering over time resulted in lower rates of depression among older adults” (23). Considering that depression can be regarded as the condition that is opposite to happiness, the discussed statement allows us to conclude that volunteering has quite a strong influence on happiness levels of individuals and the entire community. In fact, participation in volunteer activities helps people to find new friends and improve communication skills; therefore, volunteers may become more effective members of the society and it also decreases their liability to depression. Thus, volunteer activities help to strengthen social ties and this is another reason why it has a positive influence on happiness levels.
Counterarguments
Even though there are a lot of people who would regard arguments that have been previously mentioned as important and consistent, a willingness to uncover the truth concerning the matter should involve certain respect to opposite opinions. Therefore, it is extremely important to analyze the statements that may weaken these arguments and discuss which point of view is more likely to be true.
The first counterargument that needs to be discussed is related to negative experience in volunteering. Thus, there is an opinion that negative experience in the engagement with voluntary activities may adversely affect happiness. As for this very counterargument, it needs to be said that it is related to interpretation of people’s experience and such process usually involves certain preconceptions. In general, the article by Pilkington et al. that was mentioned previously helps the readers to realize the importance of volunteering as the authors list a lot of its positive effects on people. Nevertheless, the authors of this article wanted to conduct an impartial analysis. Therefore, speaking about the present state of the art, they mention certain results reported by previous researchers in the field. According to them, positive experience of those people connected with volunteer activities “was often negated by unfortunate social exchanges” (Pilkington et al. 250). Social exchange may involve a lot of things but it usually refers to relationships based on appropriate correlation between everything that people give and everything that they get in return. As it is clear from the statement made by the authors, sometimes participation in volunteering could not provide people with the experience that they needed.
Discussing this point of view, I would like to focus on the fact that volunteering as a process is not likely to disappoint those who help other people. Instead, volunteers can have negative emotions due to inappropriate or unexpected reaction of those people who received their help but it still remains a weakness of those who exploit volunteers’ kindness. Another thought that aligns with the given counterargument was expressed by Bekkers who believes that people with low-trust expectations are likely to be dissatisfied with their experience in high-trust communities as volunteering organizations (226-227). Although this information can be regarded as true, it is necessary to understand that expectations depend upon the person. As for people with such expectations, they have to understand that the activities they would like to participate in involve high trust by definition. Therefore, these arguments do not seem to be strong enough to refute the main claim.
Those researchers who suppose that positive effect of volunteering on happiness levels is exaggerated seem to focus on such concept as lack of trust; thus, it is also believed that lack of trust between volunteers can inspire low levels of satisfaction. Speaking about those people who support this opinion, it is necessary to pay attention to Bekkers who supposes that a lack of trust between people related to volunteer activities “can dissipate the movement resulting in adverse impact on satisfaction” (227). It is obvious that trust is an essential part of the specific relationships that volunteering involves; there is the real help but there are no contracts for the provision of services, and this is why the only powers that encourage representatives of volunteer organizations to continue their teamwork are sense of responsibility, sense of purpose, and mutual trust. Furthermore, I suppose that it is quite difficult to deny the fact that a lack of trust always decreases the chances of success. Also, there is no doubt that low levels of satisfaction associated with such situation cannot increase happiness levels within volunteer organizations and the entire community. Nevertheless, it can be also stated that levels of trust depend upon volunteers themselves and their attitudes to work. Consequently, there is a wide range of measures that they can take in order to ameliorate the situation; thus, they may start collaborating with another organization or improve team morale with the help of conversations.
According to another opinion that is supposed to contradict the main claim, an obvious weakness of volunteering with regard to happiness is the fact that some people are deprived of an opportunity to take part in such activities due to the lack of physical strength or resources. As it follows from this opinion, such situation is extremely unfavorable if we speak about happiness level. This point of view is supported by some of the authors whose works have been mentioned before; thus, Stephens et al. suppose that certain categories of people (such as senior citizens and ones from needy families) have to try harder in order to be seen as “involved in community activities” (25). As the authors state, such situation makes these people more likely to become isolated and unhappy. Therefore, I would like to focus on two points. First, the situation described by the authors exists due to unfair treatment of leaders of volunteer organizations who do not take into account different opportunities of volunteers. Besides, those people involved in this activity should focus more on their own feelings than on the opinions of other members. In other words, they should understand that they are already doing what they can and their contribution adds to effort of other people. In such case, their happiness levels will be likely to increase.
Conclusion
In the end, the arguments discussed throughout the paper touch upon different aspects of volunteer activities and their positive influence on happiness levels and self-esteem of contributors is difficult to overestimate. Even though there are statements that seem to weaken this point of view, it is obvious that these difficulties may be avoided and overall influence of volunteering on happiness levels is positive.
Works Cited
Anderson, Nichole D., et al. “The Benefits Associated with Volunteering Among Seniors: A Critical Review and Recommendations for Future Research.” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 140, no. 6, 2014, pp.1505-1533.
Bekkers, René. “Trust and Volunteering: Selection or Causation? Evidence from a 4 Year Panel Study.” Political Behavior, vol. 34, no. 2, 2012, pp. 225-247.
Donahue, Haley, et al. “Community Involvement, Culture and Happiness.” Hope College, Web.
Dulin, Patrick L., et al. “Volunteering Predicts Happiness among Older Māori and Non-Māori in the New Zealand Health, Work, and Retirement Longitudinal Study.” Aging & Mental Health, vol. 16, no. 5, 2012, pp. 617-624.
Konrath, Sara. “The Power of Philanthropy and Volunteering.” Social Psychology, vol. 24, no. 1, 2012, pp. 91-101.
Pilkington, Pamela, et al. “Volunteering and Subjective Well-Being in Midlife and Older Adults: The Role of Supportive Social Networks.” The Journals of Gerontology Series B, vol. 67, no. 2, 2012, pp. 249–260.
Stephens, Christine, et al. “Volunteering as Reciprocity: Beneficial and Harmful Effects of Social Policies to Encourage Contribution in Older Age.” Journal of Aging Studies, vol. 33, 2015, pp. 22-27.
Townsend, Mardie, et al. “Volunteering in a School Kitchen Garden Program: Cooking up Confidence, Capabilities, and Connections.” VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, vol. 25, no. 1, 2014, pp. 225–247.
It is most likely that upon being exposed to the question “If money cannot buy happiness can you ever be truly happy without money?”, one would be willing to assume that the positive answer to this question will necessarily have some moralistic/religious undertones to it. Moreover, many people would also argue that by asserting such a possibility, an individual will be triggering a psychological “defence mechanism” while trying to cope with the realisation that he or she does not have enough money to be considered truly happy – especially as compared to some Arab emirs and sheikhs, who can afford buying dozens of luxurious yachts and building palaces out of pure marble. However, it is also possible to confirm the sheer soundness of the concerned hypothetical presupposition from the scientific point of view – specifically, while evaluating it from the neurological/psychological and sociological perspectives. The following Analysis will explore the validity of this suggestion at length.
Analysis
Neurological/Psychological Perspective
Before proceeding to answer the question, we must first outline what accounts for the main discursive implication of the fact that the representatives of the Homo Sapiens species are, in fact, nothing but hairless primates. In its turn, this means that, just as it is the case with the rest of mammals, it is specifically the limbic part of one’s brain that formulates the innermost essence of his or her existential agenda. This agenda is utterly “biological”, in the sense of presupposing that there are only three truly worthy objectives to anyone’s life – food (ensuring that there is plenty of nutrients), sex (for the purpose of “spreading the genome”), and domination (attaining a dominant status within a society). The considerations of morality/ethics have no place, whatsoever, within the context of how people go about trying to achieve the mentioned objectives – even when they make a point in indulging in the moral/religious rhetoric during the process. This explains why most people think of money as the pathway to happiness – such their tendency is predetermined by the Darwinian laws of evolution, which apply to the “hairless apes” as much as they do to other animals and plants (Dawkins 2014).
The tendency’s mechanics are simple – being in the possession of any substantial sum of money increases a person’s chance to secure a dominant status within the society, which in turn will result in strengthening his/her appeal to the representatives of the opposite gender, and consequentially in making it likelier for the concerned individual to succeed in replicating its genome – the ultimate purpose of just about any form of organic life. Therefore, there is nothing odd about the fact that while claiming a considerable amount of money people naturally experience happiness – this sensation is induced by the limbic system’s release of endorphins into their brains (Rickard & Vella-Brodrick 2014). And, the “easier” is the monetary gain, the “sweeter” it is (more endorphins are released into the brain). By coming into the possession of some “easy money” (without having to apply much mental effort), one is able to preserve the limited operational resources of his or her brain – while accounting for only one-fiftieth of the person’s bodily mass, the brain consumes up to 30% of all the bodily energy. (Magistretti & Allaman 2015). This explains why most people are obsessed with the idea of winning the lottery and why the prospect of stealing something and being able to get away with it represents such an irresistible appeal to them.
Nevertheless, during the course of history a new “sub-species” of people has emerged, consisting of the individuals with the significantly enlarged neocortex and the associative regions in it. Initially, the purpose of such a development was strictly “biological” – people with an enlarged neocortex are better “equipped” for addressing the societally complex cognitive tasks, which leads to domination and ultimately – “baby-making”. At the same time, however, the concerned evolutionary turn resulted in enabling this type of people to cease being affected by their own animalistic (limbic) anxieties 24/7. While not being able to lead any other lifestyle, but the socially integrated one (due to the particulars of their “evolutionary specialisation”), such individuals are naturally predisposed towards seeking a consciously driven (not “chemical”) sensation of happiness, which is triggered by their realization that they were able to contribute to the society’s overall well-being in one way or another – even if at the expense of adopting a self-sacrificial/impoverished stance in life. Due to the specifics of their “brain-wiring”, the “non-biological” persons think of money in solely instrumental terms, which means that the latter cannot be the source of happiness by definition. Hence, the “neurological” reply to the assignment’s question – yes, it is possible for an individual to be happy without money, for as long as the morphological structuring of his or her brain determines a weakened state of the limbic (primeval) impulses within it. In its turn, this can be confirmed/disconfirmed by requiring the person to undergo a tomographic scanning.
Sociological Perspective
The methodological framework of sociology allows us to assess the question from yet another angle. As it was implied earlier, most people tend to react ironically to the suggestion that “money cannot buy happiness”. Hence, the popularity of the saying – “money will never buy you happiness, but they can sure make your misery much more enjoyable”. Can this be deemed as yet another indication that the former suggestion indeed does not make much of a sense and that only the utterly naïve/highly religious people may consider this suggestion thoroughly viable? Most definitely not. The rationale behind this suggestion is as follows.
Even though we are naturally tempted to assume that our opinions about the surrounding social reality and its manifestations are “innately genuine” (in the sense of being reflective our individuality), this is not quite the case. The reason for this is apparent – people’s thoughts are strongly affected by what happens to be the currently dominant sociocultural discourse. And, as of today, the predominant discourse in the West is that of Neoliberalism – the ideology based on the assumption that one’s individual rights and freedoms cannot be restricted, even if such a state of affairs results in undermining the society’s structural/functional integrity from within (Ludwig 2016). In its turn, one’s endowment with these rights and freedoms is presumed serving one purpose only – empowering the person within the context of how he or she goes about satisfying its consumerist instincts. Consequently, this presupposes that the notions of “happiness” and “consumption” are essentially synonymous – hence, causing people to think that the money is indeed the instrument of happiness.
There is, however, another ideological paradigm that used to enjoy much popularity in the past and that is very likely to become just as popular in the future (due to the apparent fiasco of Neoliberalism) – that of Socialism. According to it, one experiences happiness as a result of having realised that he or she is fully capable of applying a conscious and continual effort into becoming a better person (self-perfection) while prioritising the society’s overall interests above those of its own. The validity of the Socialist stance, in this respect, is supported by two considerations: a). One’s existence is spatially limited, which means that it cannot have any objective value as a “thing in itself”; b). Because they are socially integrated beings, it is unnatural for people to consider resorting to the anti-social means of attaining happiness (Rooksby 2012).
Socially minded individuals derive happiness from being able to confirm to themselves that their existence makes a higher systemic sense. Hence, the main happiness-inducing pursuit, on these people’s part – living their lives in such a manner so that the lives of their children and grandchildren would be better than those of their own (Dodd 2012). It is understood, of course, that this implies the irrelevance of money, within the process’s context, and allows us to come up with the positive answer to the assignment’s question – this time from the perspective of popular sociology.
Conclusion
In light of what has been mentioned earlier, the deployed line of argumentation (in defence of the suggestion that it is indeed possible to be truly happy without money) appears fully consistent with the paper’s initial thesis. The paper’s most important discursive implication is that when it comes to answering a question of the presumably moral/ethical significance, one will be much better off doing it in accordance with the principle of analytical (scientific) inquiry. Apparently, many of the surrounding “social facts” (Durkheim’s term) are not quite as phenomenological as they may appear initially.
Reference list
Dawkins, R 2014, Apes with big brains, New Statesman, London.
Dodd, N 2012, ‘Simmel’s perfect money: fiction, socialism and utopia in the philosophy of money’, Theory, Culture & Society, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 146-155.
Ludwig, G 2016, ‘Desiring Neoliberalism’, Sexuality Research & Social Policy, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 417-427.
Magistretti, P & Allaman, I 2015, ‘A cellular perspective on brain energy metabolism and functional imaging’, Neuron, vol. 86, no. 4, pp. 883-901.
Rickard, N & Vella-Brodrick, D 2014, ‘Changes in well-being: complementing a psychosocial approach with neurobiological insights’, Social Indicators Research, vol. 117, no. 2, pp. 437-457.
Rooksby, E 2012, ‘The relationship between Liberalism and Socialism’, Science & Society, vol. 76, no. 4, pp. 495-520.
In actuality, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita does not guarantee a better life for everyone, especially in wealthy countries. It ignores inequalities and factors that are genuinely important to individuals, such as social relationships, health, and how they spend their leisure time. As a result, the Happy Planet Index (HPI) was developed, which can be used in various ways. The Happy Planet Index is a measure of long-term happiness that ranks countries based on how well they use finite environmental resources to provide long, happy lives. It was created in 2006 to contest the notion that countries should prioritize continual economic expansion measured by GDP (Patrick et al., 2019). It seeks to guide a transformation in how national ‘development’ is perceived – as clearly as possible without oversimplifying. The Happy Planet Index contributes to answering the issue, “Is it possible to live happy lives without harming the environment (Patrick et al., 2019)?” The relationship between happiness and ecological footprints can be clearly understood by interpreting the data presented in figure 2.57.
Graph Interpretation
According to the graph’s interpretation (figure 2.57), countries with more giant ecological footprints have higher happiness, health, and well-being levels. Although moderate environmental use produces some of the most increased satisfaction effects, too little or too much can be harmful to health. On the other hand, countries that rank high on the Happy Planet Index demonstrate that it is possible to live long, happy lives while leaving a far smaller ecological imprint than the highest-consuming nations.
Correlation Statistics
Correlation is a statistical term that expresses how closely two variables are related linearly (meaning they change together at a constant rate). Correlations are valuable since they can show a predicted relation used in practice. An electrical company, for example, may generate less power on a warm day based on the association between electricity needs and weather. There is a cause-and-effect relationship in that example since harsh weather causes individuals to consume more electricity for temperature control. In general, the appearance of a correlation does not imply a causal relationship (Patrick et al., 2019). According to the statistics in the graph, maintaining an ecological range of 4-6 can produce a happiness score of up to 8 without causing the damage that an ecological score of 10 can do for the same degree of happiness.
The Affection of Correlation Statistics Size
Regarding the Actual Data Points
It can be predicted that countries that use better resources are likely to be wealthier and have better access to properties and comforts. If an individual can live comfier, they are more likely to be happy, even if the resources are harmful to the environment. Today, most people enjoy longer, happy lives at the price of the environment (Patrick et al., 2019). For example, wealthy, Western countries with higher incomes consistently score highly on life expectancy and happiness but not on the Happy Planet Index due to the environmental consequences of how their economies operate.
Regarding How the Variables Were Measured
Happiness scores were assigned based on countries’ general happiness, health, and well-being, as well as their ecological footprint using resources such as electricity and gas. Costa Rica, for example, has a per capita environmental footprint of only one-third that of the United States, although its health and life expectancy ratings are marginally higher (Patrick et al., 2019). However, all nations can do a better job of converting the ‘inputs’ of natural resources into the eventual ‘outputs’ of long, happy lives – producing sustainable well-being.
Conclusion
Economic data can be measured in diverse countries by measuring those in that particular country’s well-being, health, and happiness. As discussed above, figure 2.57 explains that if ecological footprints, for example, are larger, the happiness levels in that country will be high too. In addition, the correlational statistics in the data provided a clear understanding of the relation between happiness and ecological footprints in different countries such as Costa Rica and the United States.
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that opposes actions that cause harm and advocates for deeds that foster contentment. It aims to make a society a better place for people regarding their economic, social, and political decisions. In the article, John Stuart Mill describes happiness as a criterion for establishing what is moral and what is not (9). He further states that happiness is the only source of well-being (Mill 9). Additionally, Mill defined it as the absence of agony and the presence of pleasure from riches (9). Accordingly, avoidance of negative thoughts and focusing on positive things contribute to self-contentment.
There are distinct varieties of pleasures, as described by Mill; a person experiences gladness through different activities. As argued in the text, utilitarianism coincides with natural sentiments that originate from the social nature of humans (Mill 8). People will internalize ethical standards as morally binding if they embrace keeping others happy. Pleasure is everyone’s desire and is provided by the basis of morality. He states, “happiness has made out its title as one of the ends of conduct, and consequently one of the criteria of morality” (Mill 8). Mill further supports his claim by explaining that the justice sentiment is based on utility and that the existence of rights is due to human happiness (8). Thus, a person who lacks morals cannot promote good actions in society.
The utilitarian doctrine maintains that happiness is the only virtue to be desired disinterestedly. The ingredients of gladness include various desirable virtues that are not merely considered aggregate swelling. The freedom from pain involving health issues and other related things is regarded as a source of one’s gladness. An ideal ethical community is supposed to keep everyone free from discomfort. There would be morals, and people would be happy and contented since there would be less evilness.
Work Cited
Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism (1863). Utilitarianism, Liberty, Representative Government, 1859, pp. 7-9.