Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, and Schkade explore what they refer to as the architecture of sustainable happiness (114). The model of happiness they propose combines personal and circumstantial determinants of happiness. According to the model, the three factors determining the level of an individual’s happiness at a given period are the circumstances (10%), intentional activity (40%), and setpoint (50%) (Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, and Schkade 116). As a result, a person may influence the level of their happiness by changing their intentional activity. In their experimental studies, Ferguson and Sheldon also explore the components that influence one’s happiness level and conclude that the efficiency of intentional activity practiced to increase happiness is lower than that of the motivational mindset (1). This idea corresponds with that expressed by Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, and Schkade, who say that set point contributes to 50% of happiness (116). However, the studies by Ferguson and Sheldon argue that mindset can be changed while Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, and Schkade maintain that it is fixed (117).
The factor of intentions condition was investigated to determine its correlation with the circumstances and the combined influence on the state of happiness one experiences. In other words, the researchers attempted to identify whether or not one could intentionally influence their level of happiness and what was required for the successful change. The music represented circumstances, the groups of participants were asked to listen to two different compositions (one was positive, the other one had ambiguous character). The instructions given to the participants determined their style of music listening – that was the researchers’ way to operationalize the variable. The feeling of happiness and the intention to change it were measured before and after the participants listened to the music. Also, the pressure to feel better experienced by the participants was estimated and taken into consideration. The intention is the subject variable because it was measured based on the comparison of the results of two different groups of participants whose actions were determined by the instructions.
The groups of participants of Study 1 were asked to listen to two different music compositions – a positive Rodeo by Copeland, and an ambiguous Rite of Spring by Stravinsky. The effect of each composition was measured based on the intentions of the listeners who were either actively trying to feel happier or remained neutral. The possible difficulties with the validity of this variable originate in the individual perceptions of various people. Music perception is subject to unique tastes, and its perception varies from one person to another. The characterization of compositions as positive and not positive is very vague in this reference. However, the manipulation achieved the goal as in the majority of participants the positive music resulted in the feeling of happiness.
I believe that the best way to explain 2×2 ANOVA to the individuals unfamiliar with it is by stating that there are two variables – high intention and low intention to feel happier, each of which would be measured based on two different circumstances – happy music or ambiguous music. For ease of comprehension, I would illustrate my explanation by drawing a table with two lines (representing the groups according to intention instructions) and two columns (representing the types of music). Such a table would be an ideal demonstration of the 2×2 structure.
Works Cited
Ferguson, Yuna L., and Kennon M. Sheldon. Trying to be happier really can work: Two experimental studies. The Journal of Positive Psychology 8.1 (2013): 23-33. Web.
Lyubomirsky, Sonja, Kennon M. Sheldon, and David Schkade. Pursuing Happiness: The Architecture of Sustainable Change 9.2 (2005): 111-131. Web.
The paper is dedicated to the study of factors influencing the happiness of women, whose lives were affected by the Katrina Hurricane, one and four years after the hurricane (Calvo, Arcaya, Baum, Lowe, & Waters, 2015). The study used a validated questionnaire to determine the happiness of women, where the same questions were asked one and after four years after the hurricane. The surveyed women were mainly non-Hispanic black origin, the average of 25 years old, having two children.
Main body
The level of happiness of the respondents one year after the hurricane has significantly decreased (the number of women who chose a “not at all happy” option has increased by 3.5 times), remaining almost intact even after four years. The biggest number of respondents selected a positive ‘somewhat happy’ answer both after one and four years. The amount of “very happy” respondents has increased after four years, almost reaching the pre-hurricane values.
About one-third of the respondents lost a family member, and a major part of them had severe to enormous damage caused to their properties. The average amount of their total household income increased 1.4 times in the course of four years. The social support of the women has significantly increased one year after the hurricane, experiencing a slight reduction 4 years later. The number of times the respondents were attending religious services has slightly increased after four years, compared to the results of one year after the hurricane.
Conclusion
Approximately eight percent of women reported that they became less happy four years after the hurricane, compared to one year after. However, this unhappiness is most likely linked with the absence of a partner. The respondents who reported high happiness rates were more likely to report the same rates one year after. Most probably, it is linked with the characteristics of the personality that were not taken into consideration in this study.
The index of baseline happiness did not depend on the stressful situations, linked with property damage or death of a family member. The income of the family, the factor of religiosity, as well as hurricane-related stressors had no significant influence on the happiness of a woman both in one year and four-year perspectives. Only the factor of losing a close person could pre-define the decrease in the level of happiness after one and four years after the hurricane.
References
Calvo, R., Arcaya, M., Baum, C. F., Lowe, S. R., & Waters, M.C. (2015). Happily ever after? Pre-amd-post disaster determinants of happiness among survivors of Hurricane Katrina. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16(2), 427-442.
Nowadays, people spend plenty of money and time trying to prolong their life and make them healthier and more active. They read the latest publications devoted to health issues, increase the number of vitamins in their daily ratio, eat healthy food, jog and attend gyms. Many people used to exert a considerable amount of effort, trying to avoid stress, lower blood cholesterol levels, increase lung capacity, avoid the effects of overeating and air pollution (Gandelman & Hernández-Murillo, 2013). Happiness is an essential way of maintaining robust health and prevention of development of the disease. Nevertheless, this issue requires in-depth analysis and investigation. In particular, indispensable points are studying the considerable influence of human health from a physiological point of view and methods of its prevention.
Effects of the Emotions
Undoubtedly, positive and negative emotions affect a humans physical and mental health. The main characteristics of the impact of feelings on human health are the rapid pulse and palpitations, the dilatation of pupils, and changes in the skin. Positive human emotions contribute to the formation of endorphins in the brain, which has beneficial effects on the immune system, which provides to the recovery of a person and increases the activity of the immune system (Argyle, 2013). Stability of emotional experience is an incentive for balanced nutrition, regular exercise, and rejection of bad habits. Nevertheless, there is another side of this problem that includes individual differences between the peoples perception of the world. Such a situation can result from the different types of upbringing and life values.
A Positive Way of Thinking
The positive way of thinking is a kind of thinking activity, in which the individual sees in the solution of all vital issues and tasks mainly dignity, success, luck, and life experience. Everyday life consists of constant stress and emotional experience that constantly accumulate and cannot let a person relish (Zhang & Chen, 2018). Another way to transfer consciousness to the state of joy is positive statements, i.e., affirmations. Despite the reality of the modern world, a significant number of stress factors affect our mental and physical stress. There is a salutogenic model that reveals this influence of the stress factors and shows its impact on the person’s health.
Happiness by Helping Others
One of the most appropriate options to raise the spirits by helping people. Usual charity, volunteering, or even friendship are the most appropriate activities for that. These variants will allow cheering up both yourself and other people (Argyle, 2013). Despite the high number of advantages of this option, this choice cannot fit everyone. Some people are occupied with the gratification of their personal needs that is why they are not able to spend time for volunteering or charity.
Happiness as an Outcome of Positive Thinking
Positive thinking is a kind of art that can give a mentally harmonious and healthy state, as well as emotional balance. Indeed, the power of thought has a great significance on a persons well-being, but, despite these facts, the perception of the world and lifes valuables. The individual can improve oneself by directing the thinking process toward the positive (Sabatini, 2014). The reverse trend will be seen if the individual’s thinking is directed to the negative side, i.e., such a person can go not by the path of progress, but by the route of degradation.
Conclusion
The modern life of the individual is filled with stressful situations, anxiety, and depressive states. Emotional loads are so high that not everyone can cope with them. In such circumstances, the only way to resolve is a positive way of thinking. Such thinking is the optimal method of maintaining inner peace and harmony. Without dispute, happiness can improve personal health, prevent the development of some diseases and maintain the stability of functionalization of the whole organism. Nevertheless, this issue is highly individual and contributes to the in-depth analysis. Despite all the mentioned facts, happiness is a subjective feeling that depends on the world outlook and individual perception.
References
Argyle, M. (2013). The psychology of happiness. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. eBook.
Gandelman, N., & Hernández-Murillo, R. (2013). What do happiness and health satisfaction data tell us about relative risk aversion? Journal of Economic Psychology, 39, 301-312. Web.
Sabatini, F. (2014). The relationship between happiness and health: Evidence from Italy. Social Science & Medicine, 114, 178-187. Web.
Zhang, Z., & Chen, W. (2018). A systematic review of the relationship between physical activity and happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies. Web.
It often happens in our lives that some people are constantly smiling and are happy with their lives, while other people are constantly complaining of the situations, happening in their lives, they are disappointed with their families, children and more often than not with themselves. But what is the nature of this phenomenon? Is the ability to be happy a born gift or can it be cultivated through the life of a man? Giving three examples of the living people, of different gender, age, and occupation, who managed to cultivate happiness in their lives, it can be proved, that the possibility of that can be lived out. Still cultivating satisfaction with life is not an easy matter for a person, as it demands a change within the inner viewpoint and the relation to the outer displays.
The first person to speak of is a forty-year-old man, who seems to attract people to himself like a magnet with his outstanding sense of humor, positive mood, and charming smile. Both women and men willingly talk to him and going by the fact that he is always in high spirits, no one can tell what his occupation is. To be more exact, what are the duties of his job are. When during the talk it turns out that he is a Police Chaplain (i.e. he has to go to the mothers and families of the people, who recently died and tell them about the loss they had to experience.), everybody is astonished. And seeing tears, horrors every day, he still manages to keep up himself and build up other people.
The second one is a forty-three-year-old lady, who is teaching at the University. She is a brilliant analyst and her head is an inexhaustible mine of information. She seems to be always happy with her life, her family, and her work. Her students praise and respect her for the work she is doing. And she is doing her best, putting her soul into each class. This gives her good feedback. It is hard to imagine that she might be ill or depressed. But lately, her son was examined and the tomography of his heart showed that the ventricle is expended and it gets bigger and bigger. It is probable; that he will need to be operated on very soon, otherwise he might die. The other day she mentioned, she was happy for her son, so the people thought he got better. But this lady pointed out that he did not get worse.
The third and the last one is an eighty-three-year-old lady, who is a private entrepreneur. She might have retired a long time ago. But she is really happy with her occupation. She is one, who has a big family, including her children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren. Though one of her daughters was born with Down’s syndrome, the lady is really happy to have her and she does not regret a moment in her life.
I took my time to meditate on what unites these three. They are of different gender, of different occupations, have different social statuses, and come from different backgrounds. But the three of them are always happy and satisfied with their lives. And it occurred that they are relying on eternal values instead of people and consequently, they manage to put the priorities right. While one is asking “why this or that happens?” the other one might reply “just because it is to happen”. Sometimes there are situations, people are not able to do anything about. But the relation and the reaction to those inevitable occurrences are essential as they might either make good or harm to our organism. Moreover, the fact, which has been proved by psychologists remains, if you are positive, you will have positive feedback. So, let us get positive in our lives and be happy as a consequence.
Personal happiness is one of the most important and complex philosophical issues. According to Mill, utilitarianism states that an individual should perform those actions that produce the most happiness, but that one’s very character should also be directed to the same end. The aim of the paper is to explore the main tenets of utilitarianism and happiness, apply them to personal vision of happiness and compare it to Aristotle’s notion of happiness and ideal life. Thesis Mills claims that Happiness is linked not only with the regulation of actions, but with the self-education of the sentiments; this position would be rejected and opposed by Aristotle who sees happiness as an ultimate and universal thing, a perfect in itself.
Main text
According to Mill, happiness is concerned not only with the regulation of actions, but with the self-education of the sentiments. This is so not merely because the character one has affects the actions one does, which in turn affect the level of happiness overall, though of course this matters. Rather, self-education is important in coming. Happiness enables those human beings who possess to understand the important difference between ‘higher’ and ‘lower’ pleasures.
Mill underlines that what is important—what the greatest happiness principle itself required—is to get people straight on these secondary principles. In his writing on these contentious issues, Mill is of course attempting to state what he believes; but he is also using the skills of a rhetorician to persuade (Mill 82). This knowledge is in the background in Utilitarianism. Mill explains that utility or happiness consists in pleasure. Mill supposes that pleasure in happiness can be proved, and this is part of his proof of utilitarianism itself. Happiness is connected with ethical theory, sanctions’ and moral motivation. Mill’s position on sanctions are closely tied up with his arguments for utilitarianism.
For instance, if driving or reading promotes m happiness, then to that extent it has a tendency to promote my happiness. And to the extent that it promotes unhappiness, through providing me with a splitting headache hours later, it has a tendency to promote unhappiness. According to Mill,
By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure. To give a clear view of the moral standard set up by the theory, much more requires to be said…But these supplementary explanations do not affect the theory of life on which this theory of morality is grounded—namely, that pleasure, and freedom from pain, are the only things desirable as ends (Mill 81).
Happiness can be seen as a systematic account of what makes actions right or wrong. Mill states his understanding of happiness is that: ‘Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Mill 43).
Mill would not be content even with an intuitively founded utilitarianism. There must be a first principle in happiness and it cannot be self-evident, since this would imply some special moral sense which people do not have. But this is not to say that utilitarianism and happiness can be proven. According to the utilitarian principle, happiness cannot be offered up as just obvious to those who properly understand it. Mill rejects the idea that it would be a simple issue to demonstrate that common happiness has been shaped largely by the utilitarian principle, though that principle has remained unrecognized. People are by nature concerned with their own happiness.
This issue of happiness can be extended to others even if they are not fully being aware of it. Mill recognizes that it would be as impossible to be a single-level act utilitarian and succeed as it would be to negotiate a complex voyage without navigational aids (Mills 99).
This understanding of happiness would be rejected by Aristotle who supposes that happiness is the most perfect of all things. Aristotle believed that happiness is chosen for its own sake and never for anything else; it is never chosen for the sake of honor or pleasure as Mill supposes. For Aristotle, happiness is not just an end, but a perfect end. Aristotle says that:
Now something that is pursued for its own sake we call more perfect than what is pursued because of something else; and something that is never chosen because of something else we call more perfect than the things that are chosen both for their own sake and because of the other thing (Aristotle 77).
Aristotle would criticizes Mill’s understanding of happiness as self-education of the sentiments. For Aristotle, happiness is more perfect than things like wealth which are always chosen for the sake of something else. Happiness is perfect like honor which is selected for its own sake. The complete whole which is happiness is the activity of complete virtue in a complete life. So that when Aristotle goes on to list examples of moral and intellectual virtues, the virtues are parts of happiness. For instance, a human’s virtue whose activity is the supreme good is a virtue which is constituted by the several virtues (Aristotle 72). Aristotle underlines that “Just as good bodily condition is compounded of the partial virtues, so is the virtue of the soul considered as an end” (Aristotle 101).
For the ideally happy man the issues good, pleasant, and noble coincide in their application. People can bring this into relief by examining the cases where the concepts do not coincide (Aristotle 45). Pleasure has already been discussed: what kind of thing it is, and in what sense it is a good; and how things which are pleasant simple are noble, and things which are good more simple are also pleasant. There cannot be pleasure except in action: and so the truly happy man will also have the most pleasant life, Aristotle singles out two factors which happiness must fulfill. Happiness must be perfect, and it must be self-sufficient. The perfection of happiness is his main argument.
The property which must now be considered is its self-sufficiency. Aristotle, in making self-sufficiency a requirement of happiness, defines the self-sufficient as “that which on its own makes life worthy of choice and lacking in nothing” (Aristotle 91). Aristotle’s requirement that happiness must be self-sufficient is used as a principal argument by those who wish to press an inclusive interpretation of the concept of happiness. If happiness on its own makes life desirable and lacking in nothing, then, so it is argued, it cannot be restricted solely to contemplation (Aristotle 62).
In contrast to Aristotle, Mill supposes that the happiness of each person—that is, the pleasurable experience of each person—is a good to that person. The suggestion that pleasure is desirable is hardly difficult to accept, and one might be forgiven for wondering why Mill thought he had to argue for it. The paragraphs following paragraph 3 provide the answer. Mill uses the same type of argument in an attempt to demonstrate something much less plausible, that people desire nothing other than happiness or pleasure.
Mill underlines that the only reason a person can give why the general happiness—that is, maximum pleasure overall—is desirable is that each person desires his own happiness. It is easy to see why so many interpreters over the years have been deeply concerned about this part of Mill’s position. The gap between hedonism and the utilitarian view of the greatest happiness is vast, and Mill appears to be trying to leap it in one bound. The phrase ‘every human being’s happiness is a good to every other human being’ is almost certainly meant as equivalent to “the sum of all individual happiness is a good to each human being” (Mill 51).
So a desire by any person deliberately and consciously, independently of customary morality, to maximize happiness would almost certainly be disastrously self-defeating. Mills explains that since his theory about moral thinking will in fact produce the most happiness overall, messy as the theory is, it is justified by the supreme principle of practical reason, the principle of utility.
We cannot know for sure whether any action of ours was or was not the maximizing action, so it is not clear how we are to decide when to feel guilty. By recommending that we follow customary morality most of the time, Mill makes it difficult for us to feel guilty about doing what is really wrong. If I lie, for example, and it is indeed a failure to maximize utility, I shall feel guilty about lying. My conscience is likely to be unaffected by my failure to maximize (Mill 72).
Mill means that good is additive, in that two people’s goods have twice as much goodness, other things being equal, as either of them taken alone. What Mill needs in his position to prove is what he denies in this letter that that argument contains. For the egoist could agree with Mill’s additive assumptions, but deny that goodness translates directly into the rationality of ends. As moralists, then, readers might be expected to allow that, since happiness is a good, other people’s happiness should matter to them.
So to prove his case that happiness alone is desirable Mill must defuse this objection (Mill 62). One of the obvious candidates which one of Mill’s intuitionist opponents would have offered as an end different from happiness is virtue. Mill agrees with this and supposes that people do desire virtue. One strategy he might then have adopted would have been to claim that people desire virtue only as a means to happiness, whereas his own criterion for desirability involves desires for ends.
One way he could get to his conclusion would be by arguing that virtue is in fact an enjoyable experience. His desire criterion is intended to locate which objects are desirable. If it turns out to be the case that everything people desire is in fact an enjoyable experience, then he can claim that nothing other than enjoyable experiences is desirable, even if people desire happiness for themselves independently of its being enjoyable (Mill 44).
Summary
In sum, Mill supposes that happiness is concerned with the self-education of the sentiments while Aristotle idealizes this state. One way he could get to his conclusion would be by arguing that virtue is in fact an enjoyable experience. His desire criterion is intended to locate which objects are desirable. If it turns out to be the case that everything people desire is in fact an enjoyable experience, then he can claim that nothing other than enjoyable experiences is desirable, even if people desire virtue for themselves independently of its being enjoyable. Mill needs only the first claim in this argument, since all he wishes to suggest here is that it is only pleasurable experiences that are desired. Recall that full human happiness includes both the claim that welfare is constituted by pleasurable things, and the claim that these emotions are valuable because they are enjoyable.
Works Cited
Chang, L. Aristotle on Happiness. VDM Verlag Dr. Mueller e.K. 2008.
Positive psychology is a science of positive features of the life of a human being, including happiness, welfare, and prosperity. It stretches back in history a long way. The modern studies of happiness and ancient views on the good life relate and contrast to each other from different angles.
Ancient Concept of Happiness and Good Life
The ancient studies and views on happiness and excellence in life mainly focus on virtue. The scholars and philosophers, from East and West, put across various perspectives on the reality of happiness.
The prominent Greek philosopher Aristotle says that every individual strives for happiness as an effective comprehension of their intrinsic qualities and thrives to achieve it as a goal of human life. In his Nicomachean Ethics, he analyses human intellect and personality with relation to happiness, in which he drew a beautifully balanced relation between happiness and virtue. A eudemonic person chooses to do what reflects his best characteristics as a human being and utilizes external or material goods only to produce conducting conditions for achieving eudemonia.
Aristotle’s concept of virtue and doctrine of the mean
Aristotle differentiated virtues or excellent qualities as moral virtues and intellectual virtues. Moral virtue depicts the manifestation of an individual’s personality developed by the actions and choices that become habitual. It’s measured as a mean between two extreme qualities; is excessiveness and deficiency. However, intellectual virtues focus on rationality focus on rationality and pragmatic intelligence. It depicts one should know in every condition how to do the right thing at the right time in the right way. (Charles Sylvester).
Epicurus however expressed some inclination towards ethical hedonism and subjective happiness. According to him, happiness is freedom from pain in the body and a disturbance in the mind. A man starts every act of choice and evasion from pleasure, and using this experience of pleasure as the criterion of every good thing, he returns to it.
Stoic emphasizes the notion that the vital quality of human beings is rational thinking. He held the opinion that virtue contributes to eudemonia and vice prevents eudemonia (Juhi Sihvola). Controlling pain is not in our hands, though we can avoid it through tolerant and courageous acknowledgment of unpleasant things. Nothing can be detrimental to a virtuous man, either he lives or he dies (Socrates).
Steering towards the school of thought in the East, the idea of happiness is found more inclined from individual to humanitarian perspectives.
Confucius introduced the idea of compassion to happiness. His focus is on being righteous in one’s actions, rather than being hedonistic. He cultivated love and generosity towards humankind. A perfect form of virtue can be achieved if one follows five qualities in their life: solemnity, nobility of character, honesty, genuineness, and compassion. (Confucius).
In Taoism, Laozi’s emphasis was on living a life by the general pattern of nature, giving the arbitrary choice a second priority. It promotes people to concord with nature and mankind by focusing on simplicity and harmony in their lives. However, an opinion worth mentioning is that it’s hard to free the world from subjective human values.
Gautama Buddha, a Nepalese-born founder of Buddhism, also concurs with the existence of sorrow in suffering in human life but he attributes it to the penchant of human desire. The desire must be eradicated and this could be achieved through his Aryan Eightfold Path that that suggests a right form of view, objective, action, speech, profession, effort, awareness, and meditation pursued by an individual. (Inderbir K Sandhu).
Modern Concepts of Happiness and Good Life
The modern theories on happiness came forward with more liberalism in them. Modern happiness and satisfaction are eventually things that are determined by an individual’s evaluation of his mental and sentimental states (Charles Sylvester). It provides a very supple concept of happiness- different for each individual and based mainly on fulfillment of his desires. In the modern era, the concept of subjective well-being (SWB) has emerged.
Subjective Well-being
It is that field of positive psychology in which it is tried to figure out how people assess their lives. Their different aspects of life are examined to judge how they perceive their experiences and feelings (Charles Sylvester). It gives a picture of their general degree of happiness and contentment.
English terms such as happiness, well-being, and flourishing can have greatly different implications which make our interpretations of the Greek term more complex (Thornton Lockwood). But the difference of opinion between the two lies with the practical notion, not on a semantic or conceptual basis. The concept of subjective well-being and desire-satisfaction attributes largely to the fissure of contrast between ancient and contemporary approaches. (Julia Annas).
In Richard Kraut’s view, the essential constituent of happiness is an optimistic mindset towards life. One is happy with their life when their wishes and desires are fulfilled, whatever they may be.
Wayne Sumner retorts that virtues are not necessary to be achieved. In his view even ethically challenged people to feel happy and positive with their lives if they believe that their desires are getting satisfied (independent of the authenticity of their belief).
Juhi Sihvola argues with Sumner’s denial of some of the primeval views and claims to be aligned with the ancient concept in her view that a positive attitude towards life is both essential and adequate for one’s happiness.
Edip Yuksel divides the concept of happiness into temporal and permanent happiness: the first is our present response to a certain pleasant experience, while the second is our sense of self-satisfaction from our overall aspects of life. It all depends on an individual’s personality, the context of his action, and his culture as to what he considers right or wrong, and eventually, that determines his contentment and happiness.
The Relation between Earlier and Contemporary Concepts
The modern concepts of happiness and virtue brought along many contrary angles to what ancient scholars stated, but the chief concepts still relate strongly.
Well-being is used by modern moralists as satisfaction and complacency with one’s life, but it also presents a notion of good and valuable life. L. W. Sumner highlights the point that if eudemonia is considered more as “well-being” than happiness, then its link with virtue, as stated by Aristotle, could be justified.
Though Sumner has articulated the debate that immoral and bad individuals can be equally happy as the virtuous ones (as there are people who incessantly desire for more) but even at this age, with exceptional technological advancement and unparalleled access to knowledge, there’s no impartial degree of good and bad desire. The ancient developed strict beliefs and virtues including an instinctive sense of morality and natural moral character. It teaches us how to actualize the ideal of the good life. This can also be comprehended from Edip Yuksel’s idea of permanent (real) happiness.
Conclusion
These approaches on happiness share a common structure: we all implicitly strive for an ultimate purpose in all our actions, but different theories present contradictory versions of its contents. The concept of happiness modified with the time but it always indicated a notion that ultimate happiness, in the context of a good life, cannot be purely achieved if one violates what Mahatma Gandhi stated as- “Happiness is when your thought, your speech, and your actions are in harmony.”
References
Yuksel, E. Happiness, and Virtue as a Mean. 2009. Web.
From Eudemonia to Happiness. 2009. Web.
Sihvola, J. (2006). Happiness in Ancient Philosophy. 2009. Web.
Julia, A. (1995). The Good Lives and the Good Lives of Others. 2009. Web.
Lockwood, T. (2004). Bryn Mawr Classical Review. 2009. Web.
The introduction. The semantic meaning of happiness
While discussing the psychology of happiness, some basic issues concerning the meaning of the term must be considered. First of all, it should be pointed out that the issue of happiness is regarded quite ambiguously. For instance, for most of people happiness is recognized to be a subjective phenomenon.
For some individuals the semantic meaning of the term is mostly associated with well-being or flourishing. Other people determine happiness as a person’s emotional state, which has nothing in common with material welfare. In other words, the second category of people defines happiness as a feeling of harmony and internal quiet.
The psychology of happiness is closely related to philosophy, as the science of happiness is based on three major theories, namely “the emotional state theory, the life satisfaction theory, and hedonism” (Haybron, 2011, para. 1).
The body
Some fundamentals on happiness
According to philosophical point of view, happiness can be regarded as a state of mind or, as a certain kind of pleasure a person’s mode of life is based on.
As far as, we are to speak about the psychological importance of happiness, we are to reveal certain mental states happiness is determined by. Thus, it should be noted that to be happy it is necessary to gain pleasure, life satisfaction, etc. On the other hand, a positive emotional condition can be also regarded as happiness.
Generally, one is to keep in mind that there are a lot of misconceptions concerning the issues, which make us happy.
Special investigations show that “our enduring level of happiness (H) is determined by our happiness set point (S), life circumstances (C) (influenced by aspects of temperament and character such as depression and sleep quality) and intentional or voluntary activities (V)” (“The Psychology of Happiness,” 2010, p. 2).
Sonja Lyubomirsky is of the opinion that the variable S is equal to 50% of happiness, material welfare is equal to 10%, and 40% of happiness depend upon a person’s actions and intentional activities.
Depression as an opposite state
In our days, depression is considered to be one of the most widespread psychological states, when a person cannot enjoy anything because of some unpleasant and difficult situations. It must be pointed out that in the UAE depression is prevalent, but the reasons of the mental state differ from ones, which other countries face.
Generally, in most case, depression in the UAE is caused by work-related problems, including stressful conditions of work for expatriates. Of course, the financial crisis cannot be neglected too.
Those, who are separated from family, cannot find a social support; so, a lack of functional relations causes stress and, therefore, depression. In other words, one can make a conclusion that it is the loss of control, which influences people’s mental state.
Loss of concentration and apathy are recognized to be the most common signs of depression. The situation can be aggravated, if persons start to reconsider their whole life. Thus, they may suddenly realize that did not start a family in time, did not make money in time, etc.
Some variables happiness depends upon
People cannot be happy, if all the time they think how to survive in the modern world. On the contrary, constant attempts to resolve certain conflicts, earn more money, etc. cause the feeling of dissatisfaction and tiredness. Moreover, if people have no social support, the stress can cause more serious mental disorders than depression only.
The feeling of happiness also depends upon a person’s free choice. “Some studies have shown that economic development, democratization, and rising social tolerance have increased the extent to which people perceive that they have free choice” (“The Psychology of Happiness,” 2010, p. 4).
In other words, to help people feel good, it is necessary to think about the policy the government relies on. Unfortunately, people cannot live alone; they need constant support and interaction. Moreover, their internal state depends upon numerous factors, and social medium they live in impacts on their worldview and confidence.
Still, when speaking about a person’s emotional state, one is to keep in mind that human beings cannot feel happy the same way. Their understanding of happiness will be always different. For instance, the above-mentioned free choice can be also regarded as a negative component.
Thus, some individuals can satisfy their needs and feel good; others cannot feel good while satisfying their needs, because they try to find the best possible choice and cannot decide what they want.
In other words, the feeling of happiness is a subjective issue. Some people may have certain problems with health; so, for them, happiness means the absence of health problems. Others do not need any treatment, but they are economically disadvantaged; so, such individuals think that if they earn more money – they will be happy.
An analysis of people’s common values or expectations
However, in spite of the fact that happiness is a subjective issue, for certain groups of people some things can be regarded as common values or expectations. Of course, the simplest example is related to persons’ well-being. Thus, while people have different incomes, they can be divided into three major categories: poor people, middle-class people and people, who are in easy circumstances.
Correspondingly, one can probably determine one common aim for each group. So, it seems that the representatives of the first category can be happy, if their incomes are equal to the incomes of middle-class people.
The demands of the representatives of the second category are more complicated, due to the so-called hierarchy of persons’ needs. So, middle-class people want to be richer than they are. People, who are in easy circumstances, can suffer from the so-called interpersonal conflict. Of course, the above-mentioned assumptions should not be regarded as totally reliable; they are based on the general concepts concerning the modern society.
Hierarchy of persons’ needs must probably be considered in details. Thus, there is a need to point out that when some aims are achieved, new objectives appear. So, to feel happy, human beings are to set certain aims and every new aim is to be more complex and, therefore, more valuable. However, constant struggle for happiness or gaining aims can cause utter exhaustion, which can lead to depression.
“Experts in the burgeoning field of positive psychology hold that people usually guess wrong about what will bring them happiness. Money, for example (beyond enough to cover life’s basic needs) doesn’t predict happiness” (Allison, 2011, para. 3).
The conclusion
As far as happiness is recognized to be a subjective variable, one can determine the common conception of the issue. So, developing self compassion, achieving flow experience, expressing gratitude, and using character strengths are the most widespread paths to happiness.
References
Allison, K. (2011). The Power of Positive Psychology: Finding Happiness In A Cold Ocean Swim. Harvard Health Publications. Web.
The values of humanity nowadays are considerably biased towards wealth acquisition, which is especially true for economically developed countries like the U.S. Many people, though, in particular very affluent and successful, find themselves unsatisfied in their lives and not rarely suffer from depression, as less rich and even poor people do. I believe that material well-being does not necessarily mean happiness; money can only contribute to a happy life if it is being operated wisely. I think this way for three main reasons. First, the evolutionary background of the human species does not imply the high level of life people experience these days. Second, people are psychologically predisposed to wanting more than they have, so the richer people are, the less feasible it is to satisfy their demands. Lastly, growing wealth is accompanied by higher risks and responsibilities, which can cause more stress and disappointment.
Thesis Statement
Reason One: First, the evolutionary background of the human species does not imply the high level of life people experience these days.
Reason Two: Second, people are psychologically predisposed to wanting more than they have, so the richer people are, the less feasible it is to satisfy their demands.
Reason Three: Lastly, growing wealth is accompanied by higher risks and responsibilities, which can cause more stress and disappointment.
Body Paragraph One
REASON ONE: In my opinion, we tend to associate happiness with money because it allows us to spend our free time effortlessly, but in the end, having money does not necessarily mean fulfillment and happiness.
Supporting detail: There are many examples of people of middle-class and even very poor who were able to value simple pleasures and manage their resources effectively, and many are disappointed and depressed with almost unlimited resources as well.
Supporting detail: With the invention of novel amenities of life, we can devote our time to self-development, education, and spending of money, the time our ancestors spent on getting food or finding shelter
Supporting detail: If we view happiness as a healthiness of mind and soul, it becomes clear that being happy is more about finding a place in life and managing available resources than acquiring more and more goods.
Body Paragraph Two
REASON TWO: When happiness is associated with money, a person recognizes material amenities as a basis of a happy life. In this scenario, happiness becomes unreachable and short-lasting
Supporting detail: People who associate their well-being with less material things like love, friendship, and respect have more chances to feel happy since all these spiritual pleasures are dynamic and focused rather on the process than on a destination.
Supporting detail: When a relationship is based on material security, it is unstable and not honest, so it can only provide a semblance of happiness
Supporting detail It is undeniable that a moderate amount of money – enough to meet daily needs but not enough to be a subject of exploitation- can make life better and contribute to happiness.
Body Paragraph Three
REASON Three: It is difficult to argue that money brings opportunities and contributes to physical and psychological well-being. At the same time, it is no less obvious that, in most cases, money does not come from anything.
Supporting detail: The most rich and affluent people have become so because they worked hard in the past or continue to present
Supporting detail: It is also common for people to sacrifice their relationships, hobbies, and even dreams in the pursuit of money, dive into risky businesses and constantly engage in stressful situations which do not contribute to their happiness.
The values of humanity nowadays are considerably biased towards wealth acquisition, which is especially true for economically developed countries like the U.S. Many people, though, in particular very affluent and successful, find themselves unsatisfied in their lives and not rarely suffer from depression, as less rich and even poor people do. I believe that material well-being does not necessarily mean happiness; money can only contribute to a happy life if it is being operated wisely. I think this way for three main reasons. First, the evolutionary background of the human species does not imply the high level of life people experience these days. Second, people are psychologically predisposed to wanting more than they have, so the richer people are, the less feasible it is to satisfy their demands. Lastly, growing wealth is accompanied by higher risks and responsibilities, which can cause more stress and disappointment.
With the rapid development of science and technology, people approached a very special and unique type of existence, far from what all other creatures on Earth experience. Our reality weekly resembles what life was like centuries, especially thousands of years ago when humans spent most of their time attempting to survive. With the invention of novel amenities of life, we can devote our time to self-development, education, and spending of money, the time our ancestors spent on getting food or finding shelter. In my opinion, we tend to associate happiness with money because it allows us to spend our free time effortlessly, but in the end, having money does not necessarily mean fulfillment and happiness. There are many examples of people of the middle class and even very poor who were able to value simple pleasures and manage their resources effectively, and many are disappointed and depressed with almost unlimited resources as well. If we view happiness as a healthiness of mind and soul, it becomes clear that being happy is more about finding a place in life and managing available resources than acquiring more and more goods.
Probably everyone has noticed how fast we get used to something good. When we get what we want, the moment of satisfaction is fleeting, and without our noticing, the thing we wanted badly today is taken for granted tomorrow. When happiness is associated with money, a person recognizes material amenities as a basis of a happy life. In this scenario, happiness becomes unreachable and short-lasting. People who associate their well-being with less material things like love, friendship, and respect have more chances to feel happy since all these spiritual pleasures are dynamic and focused rather on the process than on a destination. On the other hand, one could disagree that money can provide opportunities to obtain love and respect, and make a good living for a family, but it is not as simple as that. When a relationship is based on material security, it is unstable and not honest, so it can only provide a semblance of happiness. Undeniably, a moderate amount of money – enough to meet daily needs but not enough to be a subject of exploitation- can make life better and contribute to happiness.
It is difficult to argue that money brings opportunities and contributes to physical and psychological well-being. At the same time, it is no less obvious that, in most cases, money does not come from anything. The most reach and affluent people have become so because they worked hard in the past or continue at present. It is also common for people to sacrifice their relationships, hobbies, and even dreams in the pursuit of money dives into risky businesses and constantly engage in stressful situations which do not contribute to their happiness. Therefore, in certain conditions, money not only does not bring happiness, but it even does the opposite thing.
Financial well-being is paramount in the contemporary world driven by science and technology, with unlimited opportunities and a rushing pace of life. At the same time, money itself is not the currency in which happiness is sold. People who disagree say financial well-being is the basis for all opportunities in life. However, I believe we cannot buy fulfillment and self-esteem; we can only forge them by personal effort. Moderate affluence may contribute to happiness, but it can also cause disappointment and stress. Money is, of course, a helpful instrument, but when it comes to how people feel about life, it is mostly about balancing our values and expectations, operating wisely with what we have, and especially our spiritual relationships with people. It is crucial to think about happiness and how to reach it, but the effort should be made towards improving relationships and becoming enriched as personalities rather than in the mere pursuit of money.
Conclusion
Financial well-being is paramount in the contemporary world driven by science and technology, with unlimited opportunities and a rushing pace of life. At the same time, money itself is not the currency in which happiness is sold. People who disagree say financial well-being is the basis for all opportunities in life. However, I believe we cannot buy fulfillment and self-esteem; we can only forge them through personal effort. Moderate affluence may contribute to happiness but can also cause disappointment and stress. Money is, of course, a helpful instrument, but when it comes to how people feel about life, it is mostly about balancing our values and expectations, operating wisely with what we have, and especially our spiritual relationships with people. It is crucial to think about happiness and how to reach it, but the effort should be made towards improving relationships and becoming enriched as personalities rather than in the mere pursuit of money.
Happiness is very essential in each and everyone’s life as it makes life enjoyable and motivates someone to move on. There are many factors that contribute to an individual’s happiness, for instance, satisfaction in one’s family life, work, love relationships and even good academic performance.
Money is also a contributing factor but only when combined with other aspects like mentioned above. This paper gives an insight on why I don’t believe that money can buy happiness. I don’t believe that money can buy happiness since some aspects that leads to happiness for example respect, power love and a feeling of appreciation and belonging cannot be bought but rather attained naturally.
The more one earns, the more the needs that are to be satisfied and so money is essential to a certain level after which it becomes a problem and make people less approachable and more egocentric affecting their social life negatively hence hindering happiness in their lives. Money also impairs people ability to enjoy life and the many things they have acquired through their wealth despite being in a better position to purchase items of choice because life’s little pleasures are overlooked.
Money helps us to have a comfortable life as we can be able to cater for our needs but it surely cannot buy us happiness. This is because happiness in our lives is brought about by the little pleasures that life holds for us for example the joy attained through socialization with others, satisfaction in work and family life among others and not in the big pleasures attached to wealth and money.
Materialistic people are generally unhappy as they tend to ignore the little things that bring about happiness in life in search of bigger things with the hope of being happier which does not come to pass.
According to Luscombe (2010), money contributes happiness when it is acquired to a certain amount ($ 75,000) in a year after which no greater happiness is attached to the money. He argues that the lower an individual’s income falls below $75,000 per year, the unhappier he or she may be but at the same time, earning more than this does not guarantee any much happiness.
This shows that as much as money is essential in acquisition and satisfaction of our needs, it does not guarantee our happiness by its own and other aspects of life have to be incorporated to attain happiness.
Happiness can be viewed as the way one feels at a particular moment for example either emotionally well or not. It can also be viewed as the inner satisfaction an individual feels about his or her life in general in regard to what is happening. Money seems to make life appear to be working out well but it actually does not contribute to a person’s emotional well being that leads to total happiness.
Lower income does not in itself lead to sadness but make people stressed up by the problems that face them. For instance those with family problems like those who are sick, separated or divorced are not happy irrespective of the amount of income they earn hence money just help improve living conditions and brings a person to a life he or she thinks is better but do not necessarily lead to happiness.
There is more to happiness than money and there are people who are without money but are happier than those with lots of money depending on the circumstances that face them and the conditions in which they live.
People who delight in their work for example those who are involved in more social work and lot of human contact seem to achieve much higher levels of happiness as compared to those whose work involves dealing with machines and less human interaction since there is a good feeling that comes along with sharing of experiences, ideas and opinions with others.
For example hairdressers, doctors, nurses, teachers and social workers tend to be happier due to the strong social relations they develop in their work between their colleagues and also with their clients. This shows that although income matters, our attitude towards life is essential plus the consideration of other factors that may lead to our happiness like love, respect and recognition.
The key issue towards attainment of happiness is the ability to have just enough money to cater for the basic needs for instance food, clothing, shelter and health and some little more for emergency and concentrating on how you spend your time and not what you can acquire.
One should work on his or her strengths, purpose, the people and things that make life worth living and not on the items perceived to bring happiness but in reality do not. This is because happiness is an attitude and making enough to facilitate basic needs and a little surplus creates some peace of mind hence happiness and lack of it causes pain and stress as one tries to make ends meet.
Does money buy happiness? If you ask anyone this question, the obvious answer will be yes. There is an intricate relationship between money and happiness, which confounds literal observation that money is happiness. Critical analysis of money-happiness relationship shows that socioeconomic factors determine the happiness of an individual; therefore, it is quite unsatisfactory to attribute money as the only factor and determinant of happiness.
There is a linear relationship between money and happiness; nevertheless, to some extent money has no effect to the happiness of an individual. “According to rank hypothesis, income and utility are therefore not directly linked: Increasing an individual’s income will only increase their utility if ranked position also increases and will necessarily reduce the utility of others who will lose rank” (Boyce, Brown, & Moore, 2008, p. 1).
If one has the highest-ranking income in a given social group or workplace, one tends to be much happier than the other one with the lowest-ranking income. Money facilitates things that bring happiness but itself does not bring happiness.
Money and Happiness
Since the general perception of money is that it is the ultimate source of happiness, many people work tirelessly day and night to ensure that they earn more money to satisfy their needs.
This belief is quite evident in the way people devote most of their time and energies in work places rather than spending time in pleasure by relaxing with family members and friends. Akin, Norton and Dunn (2008), observe that, “the amount of time the average American spends at work has grown steadily over the past several decades, despite the fact that this apparent investment comes at the cost of family and leisure time” (p. 4).
Although money brings happiness and satisfaction in life through spending to satisfy needs, people also derive pleasure in getting money. Life becomes happier if one is working extra to get more income. Otherwise, working overtime without commensurate income results into loss of happiness and morale of working amongst workers. Hence, money is a motivating factor in the work place and source of pleasure in satisfying needs of the family, and thus there is a linear relationship between money and happiness.
The relationship between money and happiness is very complex since money is not only a factor that determines happiness. The state of happiness results from diverse socioeconomic factors that make it hard to attribute to economic factors only.
Due to existence of the complex relationship, money can have direct relationship with the happiness, but up to a certain level of satiation where money has no effect on happiness. Easterlin paradox reveals that, “since the Second World War, despite getting richer, many countries have not shown improvement in average levels of happiness” (Albor, 2009, p. 38).
Easterlin paradox explains that social and economic factors do not have positive correlation yet they are the factors that influence the state of happiness in an individual, family, community and the entire nation. Improvement in economic factors in terms of increase in income levels does not mean that there is concomitant improvement in social welfare, which reflects happiness in the society.
According to Albor (2009), happiness is composed of seven factors namely, “family relationship, community, social affiliation, financial institution, work, personal freedom and personal values” (p. 44). Thus, money is not the only source of happiness.
Personal Life’s Experiences
My psychological understanding of the fact that money alone cannot buy happiness has helped me in coping with life’s great challenges because the world perceives money as the sole source of happiness. Earlier, I thought that money was everything in life, and that I could even buy happiness with it when deprived of the same.
My dream in life was to achieve great knowledge for the sole purpose of earning huge income that would make my life better and happier. “… priming individuals with the concept of money or wealth appears to increase their feelings of self-sufficiency,” (Quoidbach, Dunn, Petrides, & Mikolajczak, 2010, p. 2). I was so happy nurturing and fantasizing about money, wealth and happiness for I did not know the complexity of happiness because to me, money and happiness were equal.
I longed for the time when I would own as much money and property as I could to surpass everybody in everything including happiness, because money translated into happiness. Not until I gained psychological insight on happiness, only to realize that money was not the core factor in felicity realization.
Having gained psychological perception and understanding of what constitutes happiness, I now perceive life quite differently. I now understand that money is one of the factors that determine happiness, but not the only means to happiness.
Easterlin in explanation of his paradox argues that, “economic growth is a carrier of a material culture of its own that ensures that humankind is forever ensnared in the pursuit of more and more economic goods” (Albor, 2009, p. 47). From this argument, I understand that without psychological perception of what really constitutes happiness, the pursuit of money and wealth will enslave me.
On contrary, people amass money and wealth to have financial freedom, which means abundant happiness, but in real sense, they attain financial slavery. The business of managing and gaining more money is very hectic and weary as an individual spends many hours doing it than having pleasure. I have realized that for money to bring happiness in life there should be a balance between work and pleasure, otherwise overindulgence in money making will lead to enslavement.
I have experienced that the more money one owns, the more he/she walks deeper into this enslavement. Owning a lot of money and wealth is quite challenging because it demand immense psychological attention, which overwhelms the happiness derived from them. At some instances when I have a lot of money, I find myself quite unstable, for I am busy running up and down spending it to attain satisfaction; regrettably, the very goods I buy do not satisfy my thirst for happiness.
Research study by Akin, Norton, & Dunn, (2008), demonstrates that, “…adult Americans erroneously believe that earning less than the median household income is associated with severely diminished happiness- a false belief that may lead many people to chase opportunities for increased wealth” (p. 11). With changed psychological perception, I cannot pursue happiness by indefinitely striving to hoard money and wealth since I will be striving after the wind, and that is vanity.
Life’s Experiences of Others
Many people poorly understand the relationship between money and happiness. They think that the only means to attain happiness is through the satisfaction of human needs that literally money can buy. However, money cannot buy everything that determines happiness, for instance, good friends, friendly community, and personal values amongst other key factors that define happiness.
Due to lack of psychological understanding of real meaning and source of happiness, many people grope in economic circles thinking that happiness lies there. False perception of happiness has made many people to struggle endlessly in pursuit of financial happiness, which never materializes. People think that solutions of many problems they encounter in life lies in money, because money pays education, rent, food, healthcare and many others needs.
Smith (2008) cautions this form of thinking for people assume that they “…might work longer hours to make more money, but then face heightened anxieties regarding childcare cost, comminuting, diminished leisure, physical and mental costs that accrue for the well-being of the families” (Smith, 2008, p. 20). In the course of achieving happiness through financial means, the process is tedious and very demanding making people to lose happiness instead of gaining more.
As aforementioned, money alone cannot have overwhelming influence on happiness since there are other factors that influence the status of happiness. These factors are personal values, personal freedom, family, community, work and social affiliation.
These factors constitute happiness; unfortunately, due to poor psychological understanding, many people neglect them and focus on the financial aspect of happiness only. Below poverty level, money is the overriding factor of happiness and as the financial status changes above the poverty level, others factors gradually become dominant.
International comparison of average levels of happiness shows that, “…among poorer countries, gains in income are accompanied by dramatic increases in happiness, but among richer countries, higher income do not buy more happiness” (Albor, 2009, p. 39). This confirms that, at the level of satiation, money no longer determines happiness but other factors begin to have significant influence. Thus, achievement of the greatest felicity requires consideration of all factors that constitutes happiness.
All the factors, which constitute happiness, are in two broad categories, social and economic factors. Economic factors partially influence happiness because the perception and the source of happiness lie in the social context of life, as happiness is not quantifiable in terms of money. According to Albor, “happiness is a universal feeling that all human beings have the potential to experience” (2009, p. 40).
Happiness is a contagious feeling, which makes everybody happy in the family, community, workplace and the whole world. I have noticed that, people think that money is everything in life, for out of their abundant riches; they afford to live in seclusion where they get satisfaction of their wealth and money while the surrounding people are struggling in abject poverty. Only the sight of the poor people makes them lose happiness.
Moreover, they live in great fear of robbery attacks and property loss, wishing to have their own continent, free from the eyesore status of the poor. All these happen because they have poor psychological understanding of happiness. If they could embrace social factors, they could derive ample happiness from their environment by relating to and assisting the poor.
In pursuit of happiness, young people do not have the right perception of what constitutes happiness. Given the choice between the money and schooling, they would prefer money, because they do not understand that money gives short-lived happiness. Regardless of virtues, and values we instill in children, they still perceive that money equals happiness.
Smith (2008) argues that, “… rather than setting off to follow their deepest passions, many of our most talented and driven graduates just need to get a job, whatever job that best allows them to begin their a life of paying off debt,” (p. 23). Young people have abandoned personal development, which is another source of happiness and are busy pursuing financial pleasures that give short-lived happiness.
In youths, there are many pleasures money can buy, hence, money has blinded their life’s priorities due to false satisfaction of needs that brings happiness. A rich person without personal development is as a fool is a sea of knowledge who wants to satisfy psychological needs out of folly. For one to achieve lasting happiness it requires understanding of the factors that significantly contribute to happiness and not mere stereotyping that money is equal to happiness.
Conclusion
Money and happiness have linear relationship but up to a certain level of satiation where other factors of happiness such as work, family, community, social affiliation, personal values and freedom, come into effect. Poor psychological understanding of happiness has led many people to believe erroneously that, money is the only source of happiness.
It is true that money brings happiness but the misunderstanding arises in the cumulative source of happiness. People derive happiness from both economic and social aspects of life, but rarely do people consider the social aspects. Social aspects demand psychological understanding of happiness; however, many people fail to realize its importance as source of happiness in the family, community and the entire society.
Therefore, people should be wary in attributing money as the only source of happiness for they will pursue happiness in vain, unless they come to the realization that social aspects are also integral part of happiness. Thus, happiness and money have partial relationship; whereby, money facilitates things that bring happiness but in itself, money lacks the capacity to bring happiness.
References
Akin, L., Norton, M., & Dunn, E. (2008). From Wealth to Well-Being? Money Matters, but Less People Think. Journal of Psychology University of British Columbia, 2(5), 1-20.
Albor, C. (2009). How Much Can Money Buy Happiness? Is the Debate Over for the Easterlin Paradox? Radical Statistics, 1(98), 38-48.
Boyce, C., Brown, G., & Moore, S. (2008). Money Happiness: Rank of Income, not Income, Affects Life Satisfaction. University of Warwick Psychology Journal, 1-16.
Quoidbach, J., Dunn, E., Petrides, K., & Mikolajczak, M. (2010). Money Giveth, Money Taketh Away: the Dual Effect of Wealth on Happiness. Association for Psychological Science, 20(5), 1-5.
Smith, N. (2008). Poverty, Money, and Happiness. A University Dialogue on Poverty and Opportunity Journal, 20-25.