Category: Happiness

In his book Civilization and Its Discontent, Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, claims that it is a brute fact that achieving happiness is impossible. Despite this, he says people employ various, ultimately unsuccessful strategies to compensate for this fact. One of these means, and the only one that Freud seems to feel provides any sense of satisfaction as to why happiness cannot be obtained, is found in the realm of religion. For those who are not fully ingrained in the religious pursuit and even for those who are, the inability to discover happiness leads to a number of ways in which people seek to at least avoid pain. Eventually, Freud says people turn to love as the answer to this desire for happiness. When this fails, we attempt to control our social worlds through a variety of means and then finally come to accept that guilt and unhappiness are pervasive and they again seek the answers they failed to find in religion. This cycle of a fruitless search for happiness is discussed throughout Freud’s book.

In his book, Freud indicates that the question regarding the purpose of human life, a question that continues to be asked throughout the ages, is only seen to be answered satisfactorily to those individuals who believe in religion, by religion. However, a look into the ways in which men live their lives suggests a different answer. Examining the way in which people live their lives, the answer seems obvious, people seek happiness. “As we see, what decides the purpose of life is simply the programme of the pleasure principle. This principle dominates the operation of the mental apparatus from the start” (Freud, 1930: 23). Although we strive to feel pleasure in all things, Freud points out that the human being is incapable of feeling anything more than contentment in the absence of any strife. On the other hand, there are many aspects of life that are, by their nature, capable of inflicting pain or discomfort, including biological forces upon the human body, the external world in general and the actions of other men in particular.

To ensure a life full of happiness, Freud suggests people use several different means of fulfilling the pleasure principle while attempting to ignore reality. The pleasure principle refers to the demand felt by all humans to take care of needs immediately. “Just picture the hungry infant, screaming itself blue. It doesn’t ‘know’ what it wants in any adult sense; it just knows that it wants it and it wants it now” (Boeree, 2006).

This search for pleasure and escape from pain introduces various means and strategies in which the individual might seek to avoid pain and seek pleasure including isolation, inclusion and in the dulling of sensation. Sensations can be dulled through various, including intoxication, trancelike separation or sublimation of instinctual desires to other activities. “A satisfaction of this kind, such as an artist’s joy in creating, in giving his phantasies body, or a scientist’s in solving problems or discovering truths, has a special quality which we shall certainly one day be able to characterize in metapsychological terms. At present we can only say figuratively that such satisfactions seem ‘finer and higher’” (Freud, 1930: 26). Despite this, in all cases, Freud insists that the feelings of pleasure are of a much milder quality than the satisfaction of the cruder, baser, instinctual pleasures. In addition, none of these activities can provide a safeguard against the world of pain, always having some means of allowing upsetting events to come in and shatter the illusion of contentment. Tying these concepts back into the realm of religion, Freud suggests that all religions are just such illusions, alternate forms of perceiving the world around oneself as a means of recreating reality to suit one’s own wishes.

Finally, Freud introduces the concept that some people will turn to love as an answer to the pleasure principle, as a natural conclusion drawn from the experience of sexual love. “Sexual love has given us our most intense experience of an overwhelming sensation of pleasure and has thus furnished us with a pattern for our search for happiness” (Freud, 1930: 29). However, love also opens us up more than any other technique to the possibility for hurt as “we are never so defenceless against suffering as when we love, never so helplessly unhappy as when we have lost our loved object or its love” (Freud, 1930: 29). Although he indicates that love and beauty come closest to fulfilling our needs for happiness, both also make us most vulnerable to pain, concluding that the pleasure principle can never be fulfilled, but neither can the pursuit of it be abandoned.

Having concluded that there is nothing that can be done to eliminate the effects of nature on our bodies, nor that there is anything that can be done to change nature itself, there remains only one area of contention in the human world we feel we might have some control, and that entails our social world. “And yet, when we consider how unsuccessful we have been in precisely this field of prevention of suffering, a suspicion dawns on us that here, too, a piece of unconquerable nature may be behind – this time a piece of our psychical constitution” (Freud, 1930: 33). Regardless of how much individuals may feel the answer to the problem of civilization is to return to an earlier, more primitive, organization, Freud indicates this reversion would not provide the solution because the basis of civilization remains at the heart of the problem. “I call this contention astonishing because, in whatever way we may define the concept of civilization, it is a certain fact that all the things with which we seek to protect ourselves against the threats that emanate from the sources of suffering are part of that very civilization” (Freud, 1930: 33).

It is a known fact that human beings cannot exist without the presence of other human beings, at least to some extent, for companionship. Even when the social group is taken down to its most basic elements, that of the immediate family unit comprised of mother, father and child or children, there remains a need for association and a built-in mechanism to re-establish that association at any time it might begin to break down.

This mechanism is identified by Freud in the emotion of guilt. “Since civilization obeys an internal erotic impulsion which causes human being to unite in a closely-knit group, it can only achieve this aim through an ever-increasing reinforcement of the sense of guilt. What began in relation to the father is completed in relation to the group” (Freud, 1930: 80). In making this argument, Freud suggests that the sense of guilt is “the most important problem in the development of civilization” and that “the price we pay for our advance in civilization is a loss of happiness through the heightening of the sense of guilt” (Freud, 1930: 81). This pervading sense of guilt, Freud asserts, is not always recognized as such because it sinks into the unconscious. “It appears as a sort of malaise, a dissatisfaction, for which people seek other motivations” (Freud, 1930: 83). Here, too, then, it is seen how religion becomes a crutch for humanity in its recognition of this guilt, renaming it sin, and its promise to release the individual from sin, or guilt, through proper behavior as it is defined through the church.

Works Cited

Freud, Sigmund. Civilization and its Discontents. 1930.

John Stuart’s theory of utilitarianism

John Stuart Mill developed a theory of happiness based on his belief. He was an economic, political, and social philosopher. Stuart analyzed the issue of happiness from the perspective of utilitarian theory. In his book, utilitarianism, Stuart advocated for the definite course of action that resulted in the most desired result. The theory put a condition that for a human being to achieve the highest level of happiness, then every achievement has to be a result of the use of an appropriate means. For an individual to achieve full happiness, the course of action in every matter has to be analyzed such that the projected outcome is the most desirable of all. Consequently, the outcome of a course of action that is on the course of being undertaken or is to be undertaken lies in the value of the outcome. One can conclude that conforming to those actions that give the greatest satisfaction to the individual will result in overall happiness (Mill & Crisp, 1998).

Conflict of Stuart’s theory

Stuart’s theory contrasts with other theories that dictate that the action itself must be pleasant, or must elicit happiness for the person executing the particular action to be happy. Certain principles have to be adhered to in the course of action in order to achieve the desired outcome. The effect of utilitarian rules on the individual is not taken into consideration. In that essence, the conflict in Stuart’s theory is that the contribution of the action or the means in realizing an achievement is nullified.

Societies around the world have cultures that are analogous to each other in many aspects. Most cultures advocate that in the quest for achievement by an individual, the means of achievement are considered. The value of achievement is not critical to many cultures, and the sanctity of the means is paramount. However, in some cultures, the most important aspect of actions is the outcome of the action to the individual. However, this theory does not take into account the effect of the actions on the individual (Mathews & Izquierdo, 2009).

Comparison with the trend of contemporary society

Stuart views the issue of ethics from the perspective of the results of an action. Any action that results in a pleasant feeling for an individual then justifies the means. On the other hand, the word, happiness, is relative according to other sociologists. The opinion of what happiness is to an individual influences nature of the outcome to an individual. An individual may spend time and effort using an unpleasant method of trying to achieve an outcome that will make him or her happy.

Moderation of utilitarianism doctrine

Stuart’s theory has an effect on the society we live in since the communities in it exhibit the characteristics of adoption of Stuart’s propositions. In today’s society, the course of action that generates the most desired outcome for an individual is more important to a particular person. Traditional cultures, which advocate for observation of norms and ethical rules while going about seeking gratification, are ignored. People tend to modify the culture and label the most productive means as the way to happiness (Malloch & Massey, 2006). Modern societies will endure undergoing torturous processes in order to achieve a certain goal. In this case, the achievement of the goal is ultimate happiness, and this is an endorsement of Stuart’s theory.

Stuart’s theory on happiness and the opposing theories are both too radical for practical application. In addition, we realize that Stuart seems to envision a contemporary society in his book, utilitarianism. A moderate application of Stuart’s theory where the concept of the rules is dynamic is more effective in a multicultural society.

References

Malloch, T. R., & Massey, S. T. (2006). Renewing American culture: the pursuit of happiness. Salem, MA: M & M Scrivener.

Mathews, G., & Izquierdo, C. (2009). Pursuits of happiness: well-being in anthropological perspective. New York: Berghahn Books.

Mill, J. S., & Crisp, R. (1998). Utilitarianism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

The depth of human mind allows individuals to use it as a powerful instrument for examining the nature of reality and exploring the human potential. However, our perception of the world alters as soon as we gain more knowledge and experience.

The reality, therefore, is a complex set of acquired knowledge about information, as well as unique vision of an individual. It is logical, therefore, for people to cognize the world in different fashion because their attitudes and belief systems rely more on experiential dimension.

People should be aware of the importance to control and train our mind in order to understand the objective reality and become much happier. Our mind, therefore, is the major obstacle to become happy and achieve harmony with nature and the surrounding world.

Mind is the main mechanism that permits individuals to interpret reality, but the extent of objectivity and perception depends largely on the level of self-confidence.

Training mind reveals much more opportunities for humans to perceive the world. In particular, it blurs the boundaries of consciousness and expands our understanding of how world is represented.

According to Buddhist thinking, mind training “…is training in stability in order to “reveal the mystery” of the ultimate nature of reality, our own and that of other phenomena” (Wallace 80).

Buddhism also proposes two approaches to mind training – release and control. The latter implies being able to sustain attention on a specific object which is aimed at taking control of our actions and thoughts.

Focusing attention on a specific object allows an individual to establish priorities in case the attention is straightforward.

Foci of attention do not only change attitude, but also provide more information about the reality that was hidden due to the established frames of attention.

Mind training does not change our outlook or the mechanism we perceive reality. Rather, it can transform our attitudes, which does not imply changing our identity.

In this respect, physical and verbal conduct reflecting individual attitudes and perceptions should influence identity and, as a result, certain circumstances entail radical changes.

Maintaining the extent of spiritual engagement, but changing the mechanisms of interpreting reality is the key to training and controlling our actions.

The models of cognizing reality also depend on our understanding of what reality and experience imply, as well as how it transforms our consciousness.

Being aware of these concepts can induce the corresponding shifts. Therefore, mind and consciousness takes responsibility for the way perceive reality.

With regard to the above, it is highly important how human mind approaches specific realities, which is the ground of the Buddhist philosophy.

Cultivating mind is important for understanding how various processes affect our perception and attitude to the world. In this respect, faith and confidence are key factors affecting belief systems.

However, people believe in or accept something because they have confidence in it, but not because it is written in religious scriptures, or because a certain philosophical or religious movement accepts it.

In other words, human mind is not subject solely to rational explanation of the world. Many aspects lie beyond the reason and intellectual thinking and can be cognized by emotional faculties.

One way or another, blind acceptance is inadmissible because thinking process cannot capture the depth of the processes and activities.

There is an assumption that, in order to accept happiness, dissatisfaction is the first step to reach the goal. The idea is slightly congruent with Descartes’s deliberations on the concept of ambivalence and oppositions.

A person can conceive the concept of happiness and peace as soon as he/she realizes what it means to be upset, discouraged, and angry. All these aspects are also differently perceived and depend largely on the set of experiences an individual gains in the course of life.

Consequently, dissatisfaction, as the ground thesis in Buddhism, entails suffering and endless searching. Individuals should undergo suffering, sorrow, and pain to understand how happiness can be achieved. As a result, being happy means being liberated from sorrow and suffering.

Our understanding of happiness is strongly associated with the way our mind approaches reality. People can differently evaluate specific situations.

Some individuals might think that happiness is impossible to achieve unless they are bound by stereotypes and prejudices whereas others firmly believe that happiness is possible as soon they found the boundaries of their consciousness. Contextual reality, therefore, is largely constructed by the way we measure external processes.

The core sense of mind training does not consist in sustaining firm beliefs and attitudes about various concepts. Indeed, specific vision of reality is largely predetermined by the extent to which individuals focus on self-confidence and self-development.

Self-centered approach to perceiving reality often prevents from interpreting it in an objective way. The point is that people mistakenly think that craving is the key to achieving peace and happiness.

In fact, to perceive the reality as it is can be possible through denial and removal of the existence of sel. According to Buddhism, self-delusion is the main cause of unhappiness.

At the same time, human mind is capable of achieving happiness by interpreting reality in its own way, which is also a kind of self-delusion.

The human mind has the ability to interpret reality differently in the course of gaining experience and evolving. Deep reflection on the transformation of human mind and human consciousness are brightly represented in the Chinese philosophy.

In particular, the Chinese philosophers adhere to the evidence of existence of a specific pattern that shapes the ultimate reality and that stands separately from human perception.

Therefore, human nature has the capability of disclosing the reality of thing differently because of a set of factors shaping their vision. In this respect, reality can also be regarded as a combination of individual realities.

It is logical to assert, therefore, that reality cannot be perceived as an ultimate representation of things, but the one that is characterized by the presence of individuals.

The sense of belonging of the individual to the whole reality is closely connected to the spiritual dimension, as well as to the degree to which a person identifies himself/herself with the reality.

In addition, although the way we perceive things stands beyond the ultimate reality of things, human nature is still rooted in the ultimate representation.

Thus, individuals originally have knowledge of things and recognize the efforts to cognize the reality.

The fact that the mind is the precursor all conditioned things is justified because it predetermines the quality of our life, as well as our future actions.

The human mind is also the forerunner of all conflicts and misunderstandings because of the previously cultivated perceptions and concepts. Therefore, retraining and controlling the mind is the key to understanding and reconciliation.

False images and interpretation of the ultimate reality will not contribute to avoiding ideological confrontations. In order to cognize the ultimate reality, the Buddhist philosophers argue that individuals should know, control, and train their minds to liberate from existing stereotypes.

Moreover, asserting that human nature is inherent part of ultimate reality also seems logical. As soon as we become aware of the importance of training and controlling our mind provides new perspectives of setting our consciousness free.

There are people who live in the realm of ideas, image, symbols, and concepts. However, this world does not characterize the real state of things. This is where theory is distinguished from empirical experience.

Accumulating knowledge from practical experience can be valued because it contributes to resolving and understanding the essence of things.

Reluctance to understand reality can lead to conflict because the conditioned dimension implies abiding the things that are not actually presented as we see them.

Despite the fact that the reality exists independent from human mind, the conflicts and confusion will still be generated as long as humans stop distorting the ultimate reality.

In conclusion, it should be stressed that the human mind should not have ideological and stereotypical boundaries because it prevents them from perceiving objectively the ultimate reality.

However, because human nature originates from the objective reality, our belief system, perceptions, and attitudes should also be regarded as representation of this reality.

Therefore, people should focus on training, controlling, and cognizing their minds in order to avoid conflict and confusions, as well as achieve happiness and harmony with other people.

Work Cited

Wallace, Alan B. Buddhism with an Attitude: The Tibetan Seven-Point Mind-Training. US: Snow Lion Publications, 2003, Print.

Money has always been known as the symbol of wealth, the key to happiness, and the backbone of livelihood. There is also a widespread opinion that money positively affects the growth of happiness. However, with this drastic growth comes a severe decline, and this is because of the human instinct to be acquisitive. The current essay discusses happiness and argues that the veritable happiness and satisfaction with life come not from money but self-actualization and positive thinking.

One of the fundamental explanations of why happiness is not about money lies in flawed human nature. In the book Leviathan, the prominent philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1651) described the state of nature where people live before the government appears and argues that every person wants to possess as many goods as possible. However, the number of goods is finite, and, therefore, people enter into the state of war of all against all in pursuit of wealth (Hobbes, 1651). Thus, it becomes apparent that even though money gives people access to numerous goods, services, pleasures, and opportunities, they are not always a synonym for joy or health.

Some people might argue that richness is a synonym for happiness because it allows one to actualize oneself through helping people in need. For example, in 2000, Bill and Melinda Gates grounded a foundation aimed at fighting inequality, poverty, and diseases all over the world (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, n.d.). Nonetheless, this case is rather an exception from the common rule. Novack (2008) mentions statistics provided by the Internal Revenue Service revealing that “rich are evasive when it comes to taxes” (para. 1). Indeed, richness and greed seem to be closely related. As 18th-century Scottish economist Adam Smith (1776) famously said, “it is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest” (p. 30). World War II is an amplified example of how one persons strive for money and power led to 60 million casualties all around the world. Besides, the modern case of the trade war between China and the US, initiated by the Trump administration in 2018, shows what the ruling elites are capable of destroying the lives of citizens of other countries if financial gain is at stake.

Many people believe that money is the key to happiness because money buys us tangible property such as cars, houses, and gadgets. Furthermore, money is used to pay tuition fees, electricity and water bills, purchase food and clothes, and, therefore, they are the primary means of survival. From this, one might fallaciously infer that money buys happiness. Still, one should not forget that money is incapable of purchasing the desire to learn or live. For instance, prominent actor Robin Williams, Linkin Parks singer Chester Bennington, and coal billionaire Dmitry Bosov committed suicide even though they were not poor and enjoyed fame and public acclaim. The reasons for suicide are another topic for discussion. Nonetheless, the previously mentioned examples should be used to remind us that money alone is not a guarantee of happiness, satisfaction with life, and good health. Money and fame could not prevent a person from depression, incurable illnesses, or alcohol and drug addictions. What is more, money could even stimulate the appearance of some of these problems. Thus, wealth is not a guarantee of happiness and satisfaction with life.

Finally, most people would love to get wealthy without the hard work and impossible tasks that come with it. They think that by doing so, they would never need anything from anyone ever again. From one point of view, money undoubtedly brings independence and is exempt from poverty. Even though there are ways how to earn easy money, these ways are not always legal, honest, or morally right. Without a doubt, winning a lottery is not a crime. Nonetheless, some researchers claim that money could bring self-satisfaction only if earned from hard work. The study conducted by Brickman, Coates, and Janoff-Bulman (1978) proves that lottery winners were in a better mental state before becoming wealthy without any effort. Undoubtedly, after the win, test subjects were immensely happy; however, after the lapse of time, their level of happiness equals one of the paralyzed people (Brickman et al., 1978). And this comes from the fact that with drastic growth in wealth comes a severe decline in happiness.

Taking everything into account, it is vitally important not to forget that one could find happiness in life regardless of any life circumstances. Joy and self-actualization are not about the size of income. Instead, it is about doing what one loves, having friends, staying fit and healthy, and loving and being loved. A person could be genuinely happy when looking at the shining sun, talking to parents, or reading a worthy book. The critical takeaway from the present paper is that joy with life could be accomplished by self-satisfaction and optimistically looking forward to the future without overabundance.

Works Cited

Bill & Melinda Gates foundation (n.d.). Web.

Brickman, P., Coates, D., & Janoff-Bulman, R. (1978). Lottery winners and accident victims: Is happiness relative?. Journal of personality and social psychology, 36(8), 917-927. Web.

Hobbes, T. (1651). Leviathan. St. Pauls Church-yard.

Novack, J. (2008). Rich cheat more on taxes, new study shows.Forbes. Web.

Smith, A. (1776). The Wealth of Nations. (E. Cannan, Ed.). ElecBook Classics.

First of all the scientific definition of success should be given. Happiness is an emotional or affective state that is characterized by feelings of enjoyment, pleasure, and satisfaction. As a state and a subject, it has been pursued and commented on extensively throughout world history. This reflects the universal importance that humans place on happiness.

States associated with happiness include well-being, delight, inner peace, health, safety, contentment, and love.

Aristotle believes that happiness stays within a completely final and autonomous end. The calculation behind this theory is that every man is striving for some end, and every action he does must be due to this wish to reach this end. He argues that for a human to be happy, one must live an energetic life of virtue, for this will in turn bring him closer to the end. Though some may believe that these events that the man selects to take are what make happiness, Aristotle argues that these actions are just a mere part of the striving toward the end.

Aristotle also says each man has a general concluding end within which each of the deeds fits and makes sense. This being a righteous act, could also be seen as a different action which some may deem is what brings a man to a state of happiness. When all is said and done, nevertheless, each man is striving towards the same end, happiness. This is why Aristotle believes that this end is self-adequate, meaning that all the actions the man took to accomplish this end are just structuring blocks toward the most attractive end. Happiness in the sick man resides in avoidance of pain and suffering, while the rich man finds his happiness in how others regard him. Each action simply drives the man to do more virtuous actions, bringing him closer and closer to his end.

Happiness is based on Success, it is the primary aim a person may strive for or the primary hope one has when starts an activity. Since we were younger our parents always stimulated us to do our best and to work hard at every assignment we had, either in school or in social life activities. No, we grew up, so we can realize our parents’ experience. We had a sense of happiness after we got our school certificates. We enjoyed the taste of happiness by experiencing success during primary and secondary schools.

The best taste a person can have in his life is happiness because of success. Whatever the hard of the work or the difficulty we can face but after we got the pleasing results of our acts we feel happy and satisfied with what we achieved.

The happiness measures are different among the people themselves. I mean there are classes of people find happiness in (How Much Money They Have!) or other class may fine the happiness in what they have achieved in their working life. But in my point of view, happiness is the main feeling that comes from the success of any useful act a person can do. To the people who think that happiness lies in collecting money only, I would like to send a message to them: happiness is in the way of spending the money not the way of how to collect it.

Anyway, people regard happiness as having lots of things (financial or actual). These days, this sentence has a big part not all.

The money Talks, the Money do, and the money maintain, it is only for the essentials and things but not among friends and relatives. I could wish to have the family members near in every difficult situation as an aspect of happiness, to be healthy as a bull, which is probably the main aspect of happiness. To live with the beloved person or someone who loves you and you reciprocate this feeling together. This may be called happiness.

In Muslim countries, happiness is regarded as the reaching of Heaven after summarizing the whole life, as Allah promised it to the believers. Happiness is the highest or the supreme feeling a person can feel in the warship

One aspect of happiness is achievements. It may reflect the activities and works of the state’s efforts to the people. It may appear in the eyes of the victor in a battle, whose aim is to win, in spite that there are no winners in the battles as both parts always lose, despite the volume of the losses. After all, the statement is either victory or defeat. The governors may feel happy if they achieve the setup goal to increase the people’s welfare or the successful implementation of the large-scale plans

I continue the topic of the achievements, it is necessary to emphasize, that the sportsmen know it the best, as the achievements for them are the essence of the whole their life. Every sports fan knows it, when pulling for some team one feels happy if it wins the game or the championship.

We can see the happiness in the eyes of the poor people when the charity associations arrange the charity actions, during the Aid occasions or religious occasions throughout the year, when the Red Cross Association practice its role for the refugees all over the world, to help them struggle against the natural and techno genetic disasters (Earthquakes, tsunami, volcano eruptions, epidemics, etc).

Achieving the aims of all matters is the most significant factor to bring happiness, not only for individuals in particular but also for society in general. It is easy to prove not just by repeating all the said above factors and arguments, but also by telling the fact, that there is nobody in the world who would feel unhappy after achieving the setup goal, especially, if one had been intentionally approaching it.

Some may argue if the goal achieving factor is the only for feeling happy. The answer will be “NO”, as to set the aim one should have some interests, life priorities, hobbies, and ways of leisure time spending. The fact is that one even does not have to set the goals, as possessing the mentioned above factors, the goals are usually set up by themselves.

The issue of happiness had risen in lots of the poems, dramas, novels, movies, etc, but everyone comes to the full realization of this issue only on one’s own, as everyone just feels happy only within the circumstances one creates.

Another factor that is very important for feeling happy is described in the story by Jerome K. Jerome “Nicolas Sniders’ soul”. It is said, that one can achieve the greatest ever success in life, become the richest and the most powerful. But all the wealth and powers of the world will never bring happiness if everyone bedamns you. To be happy, people just need to learn how to smile at the surrounding people. The world has drowned in vanity, and people started forgetting how to enjoy life. They try to find happiness in yoga, Feng-Shui, some exotic non-conventional religions and believes, and so on. Everything that we need to be happy is to forget the everyday routine which we create ourselves, and let alone all the puddings and breathe with the full lungs. All these may be summarized in a short expression: bring happiness to others, and you will be happy yourself. To some, it may seem paradoxical how it is possible to share the happiness and stay happy oneself, but real happiness is in the soul, but not in the things that surround us, and it is an axiom that as more soul you give, the bigger it becomes. And anyone with BIG BIG BIG soul is the happiest.

Anyway, the people are as happy, as they are determined to be, thus, if you want to be happy, just be, and never mind the circumstances.

According to world statistics, the happiest people in the world are Canadians. Despite the high level of unemployment and the great number of small cities, where the most important things like phones, hospitals, or even food shops are difficult to reach, Canadians just enjoy the surrounding nature, these people are the freest from the prejudices, as guests are always welcomed, and they may take the beverages and use the phone without asking the hosts. It shows their simplicity of life views, as they realize the insignificance of all these little things and the importance of sincerity in relations and communication.

All people live according to various principles. Some people follow one specific principle, others refer to various life principles depending on situation. It is possible to judge each of the existing principles from the point of view of correctness and morality.

Considering the greatest happiness principle as the main idea I ought to live in accordance with, it is essential for me to consider all pros and cons of this principle, to refer to the usefulness for of this issue and to consider the harm which may be caused.

The main idea of the greatest happiness principle is that “one should always act in each way as to bring about the greatest amount of happiness possible for those who are affected by one’s actions” (Hamilton 67).

Therefore, the main idea of the greatest happiness principle is to make sure that more people are satisfied, however, the volume of the satisfaction is not discussed as well as the level of harm caused by other people who are not involved in the majority of those who are happy.

The reference to the greatest happiness principle is supposed to be useful in determination of personal actions as it brings pleasure to the greater number of people, this principle supports general ethical and moral living rules and it is aimed at improving social situation in the whole world.

Bringing pleasure to those who are involved into action is one of the main reasons why people are to act in accordance with such statement.

When people perform some tasks and their main purpose is to please all those who are involved into the action, people work for their personal benefit, therefore, the final outcome is completed with the highest quality.

Moreover, having been satisfied with the outcome, people are satisfied with the process of their work, as a result, the general well-being of people is improved. Making a greater number of people happier, moral and ethical rules are followed as it is hardly possible to make others happy while violating personal values.

Finally, it is essential to consider social improvement in the whole world as a result of following the greatest happiness principle. When the final purpose of an action is satisfaction of personal needs and making a person happy, a well-being of a concrete personality is increased.

Therefore, the general social improvement may be seen. Thus, acting in accordance with the greatest happiness principle, we act for the benefit of the world society.

The greatest happiness principle is an effective life principle. Living for the personal benefit and trying to satisfy the needs of others while making those happy we contribute to the social well-being.

There are a lot of examples when making better for ourselves, we contribute to the greatest happiness of others (Burns 53). Let’s consider a care for children in schools and kindergartens as an example.

Working in such establishments, we perform our work in a quality way to get the higher salary. Moreover, we work for the benefit of children, therefore, we are interested in making them happy.

Thus, being happy, children come home and make happy their parents as when children are satisfied with everything, there is nothing greater in the world.

However, there are some objections to the greatest happiness principle. First, the pragmatic objection states that following this principle we are aware of the final outcome of the happiness and, therefore, we know what happiness is.

This is impossible as making some actions which are good for others, we may harm another person. The outcome of the action cannot be the same for all people and even when the intentions are the best ones, one person may be harmed.

Second, the moral objection states that happiness is a mere pleasure and cannot be valued. Speaking about the pleasure committed in favor of one particular aspect, pleasure may spoil a person, making him/her desire more and more pleasure which does not bring any real value (Veenhoven 2).

To understand the negative effect of the greatest happiness principle, the following example may be considered. Let’s imagine the situation when a crime was committed, a very cruel and severe.

After some time has passed, the criminal is found. The society is satisfied and these people have a desire to revenge. However, additional investigation shows that this person is not guilty.

A police officer is to make a decision whether to satisfy the desire for happiness of all people and to release a person, or to keep him/her is a jail until the society calms down. In this case, a police officer acts controversially to the desire of the majority of people to be happy.

This is exactly the reason why the greatest principle of happiness cannot be applied to all the cases. The happiness of the vast majority of people should be measured with the effect which may be caused to others.

Works Cited

Burns, J. H. “Happiness and Utility: Jeremy Bentham’s Equation.” Utilitas 17.1 (2005): 46-61. Print.

Hamilton, Christopher. Understanding Philosophy for AS Level AQA. Nelson Thornes, 2003. Print.

Veenhoven, Ruut. “Happiness as an aim in public policy.” In Alex Linley and Stephen Joseph. Positive Psychology in Practice. 1-11. John Wiley and Sons, Inc, 2004. Print.

Introduction

Critically contemplating being called a human, one may not hesitate to concur with other prominent philosophers that humans have been programmed to external search for happiness. Happiness in this world is unquestionably the teleological end of every action of a human being. It is the highest goal of humans and the state is established to make its citizens attain their goals. However, Aristotle believes that happiness may only exist in a nation if virtue flourishes. Attainment of the flow’s state is a key driver of happiness. Flow generates positive feelings; while long-term benefits may assist one live a happier and more fulfilling life. Hence, finding flow is the key to striking a balance between the challenge and one’s skills. The essay makes proof of how the flow state’s conception of happiness is similar to Aristotle’s conception of happiness. Aristotle’s concept of happiness is an expression of virtue that is similar to the flow state, happiness is a combination of the baseline level where basic needs are fulfilled and a broader area managed by an individual.

Discussion

Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi studied and observed the psychological concept of the flow state concerning happiness. Csikszentmihalyi claimed that happiness is not rigid rather it is a blend of a baseline level in which basic needs are met and a wider area managed by a person (Golden, 2018). After a person gains a little beyond the level of average poverty, their material resources do not influence how happy they feel. Hence, one thinks that to be happier one needs to have a higher salary or a nicer house is wrong. In many instances, individual happiness emanated from within a person. In congruence with this argument, Aristotle noted that people can understand and know things and recommends that it is their nature to desire understanding and knowledge (Aristotle’s Psychology, n.d.). Individuals in life find true satisfaction during the consciousness state referred to as flow. In this state, they are wholly absorbed in a task, mostly a task that entails their innovative abilities (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). In this optimal experience, people feel strong, alert, perfect, and at the top of their capabilities.

Csikszentmihalyi is widely seen as one of the inspiring forces behind positive psychology based on one focus on happiness and creativity. Csikszentmihalyi always mentions the origins of positive psychology back in Aristotle’s times (Waterman, 1990). Csikszentmihalyi maintains that happiness does not just occur if one wants to know how to flow, then one can expect to be happy practically regardless of the circumstance. It should be prepared for and cultivated by an individual, by creating challenges that are neither simple nor demanding for a person’s abilities (Aristotle’s Psychology, n.d.). Aristotle’s conception of happiness concurs with these as being is the flow state, which in the sense of balancing both self-enlightenment and leisure understanding.

Further, Csikszentmihalyi observed that optimal experience or happiness as self-reported by individuals in much social-scientific research, does not emanate from where they frequently contemplate it does, in free leisure time. For example, when a person is watching TV is related to mild depression (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). However, the optimal experiences of an individual’s life happen when in the flow state, where a person is involved in a challenging task that has clear objectives and feedback and needs ever more skill and total focus (BPsySc, 2019). In this state of flow, a person is swept into an almost endless loss of self-consciousness state. This agrees with the classical concept of happiness from the perspective of Aristotle that leisure is understandable and the basic thing in life. Aristotle argues that the four disciplines of leisure, drawing, reading and writing, physical training, and music, can develop a person’s mind and personality (Golden, 2018). Aristotle affirmed that practicing leisure may bring happiness to one’s life.

Moreover, the mind is described as part of the soul by which it understands and knows. Aristotle argues that people should plan and have deliberate contemplation about alternatives and strategize, and chart a course of action. According to the theory of Aristotle, concentrating on the perfection of given leisure may develop one’s flow in life (Waterman, 1990). In agreeing with Csikszentmihalyi’s observation and claims, Aristotle noted that flow improves a person’s mind from the work or leisure influence generating an optimal experience of happiness. This state of flow establishes a blissful emotion and no worries which, in modern society have contributed to a lack of confidence and anxiety (BPsySc, 2019). The modern era way of gaining happiness has been focused on material possession because of the media and its financial gain agenda. Currently, people are being negatively influenced by material possessions leading most of them to develop mental illnesses like chronic pain, depression, and toxic relationships. According to Robert Stebbins, attaining the state of flow is always challenging because of external distractions (McBryde, 2010). In this modern era, there are distractions like psychological pain or trauma, technology, the economic standard of work and education, and peers. All of these drain a person’s energy and loss the flow’s balance. Csikszentmihalyi stated that if one understands how to flow, one might expect to experience happiness regardless of what will be going through comprising during serious conflict times. However, in the conception of happiness in the current world a majority of them still perceive happiness as a possession but ignore that this influences them negatively (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Hence, being in the flow state, this in the sense is striking a balance between self-enlightenment and leisure understanding.

However, Aristotle’s concept of happiness’s key element is virtue. He argued that in pursuing happiness, the most significant aspect is having complete virtue. Aristotle further noted that happiness entails selecting the greater good but not necessarily having short-term or immediate pleasure; thus happiness is a goal and not a temporal flow state (BPsySc, 2019). How people feel concerning themselves, and the happiness they get from living, depends on how their minds filter and interpret daily experiences. The inner harmony determines whether people are happy, not on the controls they can exert over the great forces of the world (Golden, 2018). Hence, happy life entails a life full of the types of tasks that crowd negative emotional disorders and order consciousness optimally. Csikszentmihalyi has illustrated how to attain the state of flow via sports, music, sex, tasting, and dance, through career and work at all the social strata levels, through solitude times and with other persons, and even during tragedy chaos. The main factor to flow is control in the flow-like state, people should exercise control over their consciousness contents other than allowing themselves to be passively measured by external factors. This aligns with Aristotle’s belief that happiness is the ultimate human good; therefore, it is an ultimate educational goal (Waterman, 1990). Happiness is carrying out any pleasing task even when the disordered chaos and mental evil cannot be held at bay.

Conclusion

In conclusion, most people as the innermost inspiration in which people are completely centered describe the flow state of an activity or situation at hand. However, each person may encounter a state of flow under different situations and activities. The activities that one may experience flow under can be different from the activities that would make another person encounter similar levels of flow. Therefore, remaining steadfast with the state of flow, experiencing oneself in contemplation, and practicing leisure may lead to a sufficiently positive effect on the civilization and rediscovery of the happiness conception.

References

Aristotle’s Psychology. (n.d.). Aristotle’s Psychology (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Web.

BPsySc, H. C. (2019). The philosophy of happiness in life (+ Aristotle’s View). Web.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row.

Golden, L. (2018). Modern psychological conceptions of happiness and the classical idea of happiness. Web.

McBryde, D. (2010). The foundations of Aristotle’s ethics. Web.

Waterman, A. S. (1990). The relevance of Aristotle’s conception of eudaimonia for the psychological study of happiness. Theoretical & Philosophical Psychology, 10(1), 39–44.

The truth can simply be described as a statement of fact. The quest for knowledge and the need to satisfy curiosity makes people crave for the truth. However, the truth is sometimes ugly or bitter and may be dissatisfying rather than satisfying. This paper presents a philosophical position that postulates that the truth is greater than happiness. The truth is sometimes ugly and may cause a person to become unhappy. However it is always better to find out the truth even if knowing the truth about something will cause someone unhappiness.

People seek the truth to gain knowledge and it is possible that their happiness will depend on their access to this knowledge. The truth presents knowledge to a person through a statement of fact. While the truth may make someone unhappy, the inherent satisfaction of gaining knowledge and becoming aware of the actual facts about a phenomenon, entity, person, or self, is achieved and any possible unhappiness will likely fade after sometime. However knowledge is not gained when the truth is withheld, and unhappiness becomes evident. Individuals are usually eager to satisfy their curiosity, and embrace the option of knowing the truth over the option of being apparently happy without the truth. The absence of truth brings only apparent happiness because people will continue to seek the truth no matter how content they appear.

People generally believe that all problems may be resolved. Therefore, people will rather be exposed to the truth and live with the perceptual ‘unhappiness’ than live in apparent ‘happiness’ without knowledge of the truth. In a nutshell, once people’s curiosities are not satisfied, they will be unhappy. Concealing the truth from them, no matter how ugly it is, will certainly lead to unhappiness since their curiosity will not be satisfied. The only way the truth will be concealed and still lead to happiness is when the truth is substituted with a lie (or a ‘fake truth’).

No matter how bitter or sweet the truth is, it is much healthier than happiness. Anybody may be happy, if they become aware that happiness is not precisely dependent on their external environment, their strength, their ability, their style, their beauty, etc. When the truth is hurting, it is possible for a person to identify what is wrong, and make possible efforts to improve the situation, character, behavior, company, or whatever the subject is. What is more important is not how one feels but how one becomes. If an ugly truth is substituted for a lie, then a person may only achieve an escape route, instead of true happiness. The reality remains before the person and it will eventually emerge and overcome the person except they face it.

It is obvious that people value happiness over the truth. The truth may contain much sadness or happiness. When the truth is concealed, the potential happiness that is concealed remains an illusion. However, false happiness supersedes no happiness, particularly when the false happiness does not contain positive hope. If a person takes the bitter truth seriously, then the person does not experience any form of happiness. A lie may console a person if the lie is about something positive. Nevertheless people eventually lose their joy when they discover that they believed in a lie.

The definition of happiness varies from one person to another depending on the context and aim of the definition. Therefore, Happiness is defined by various people in different contexts, but its main meaning is retained. This paper is going to analyze various views of Happiness from different people.

People exhibit three forms of life, which comprise a life of political affairs, life of study, and life of joy. Each of these lives has a parallel amount of happiness. Even though it requires some external fortunes and social interactions, a person’s happiness entails excellence and independence (Hughes 52).

Shakespeare suggests that happiness is determined by social security and acceptance. This is represented by characters from all diverse backgrounds whose happiness is determined by their social relationships with others. Aristotle appreciates that joy depends on a person’s purpose and the uppermost good that he hopes to attain. The truest happiness arrives through the task of a person’s highest function: the utilization of the coherent rule of mind (Hughes 57).

Based on this principle, Aristotle classifies varied types of lives and illustrates the impending happiness each can provide. The first one is “The universal run of individuals and the crudest,” which identifies happiness with a life of joy. The second one is “The civilized and vigorous men”, which gets joy in the life of political affairs based on reputation. A thoughtful life gives a person the highest amount of happiness because it involves life, which is strongly minded by actions. This contrasts with sheer possession. Aristotle argues that since the achievement of any person is determined by the accomplishment of his goals, then the happiness of a person can simply be achieved through the accomplishment of his goals (Raymond 2013).

Aristotle unreservedly distinguishes joy on the maximum order level as a position achieved through the inner improvement of an individual, rather than the social improvement. A person is by character, a political and a social creature; therefore self-effectiveness cannot be defined in orientation to self-loneliness. Aristotle understands joy on the uppermost level as essentially independent (Hughes 67).

Aristotle criticizes the ordinary run of persons who select the life of joy, which they capriciously obtain and lose. Although he views the political life from the perspective of prominence on nobility and excellence, Aristotle judges it as too trivial as it depends on those who bestow it, rather than those who obtain it. The uppermost happiness is achieved internally and independently by the implications of intellectual growth putting into effect the cogent part of the mind. Regarding self–sufficiency as the main component of happiness, moral good is a person’s ownership, which cannot be taken away from him without effort (Raymond 2013).

According to Shakespeare, the happiness of a person depends on the way he or she perceives his or her social position and acceptance. For instance, Roderigo hangs around for the love of Desmonena. However, Roderigo’s incapability to win Desmonena’s love results in frustrations. Casino desires to regain the conviction of Othello, but he cannot look up the lost honor since he fails to identify Lagos’s operations. Although Othello obtains happiness through Desdemona, his happiness was found short-lived when his social insecurity outweighed his mind and untangled his marital happiness. People need the feeling of social reception before attaining pleasure (Raymond 2013).

According to Utilitarianism, Bentham‘s moral theory postulates that human happiness is just the attainment of joy and avoidance of pain. He further argues that the hedonistic value of a person’s action is simply evaluated by considering the intensity of pleasure felt, the time that felt pleasure ends, the sureness and quickness of the presentation of action, and the possibility to create collateral gains and avoidance of the collateral injuries. Considering all these matters, a net value of every action for any person impacted arrives (Kemerling 2011).

According to the principle of utility, the happiness of a community is the sum of every person’s interests. Moral responsibility is defined based on the uppermost cheerfulness of the maximum number of individuals who are impacted by the act of a task. Punishing a criminal is a correct method of combating a crime because it hampers the possible results of the action. Therefore, actions are right relative to the encouragement of happiness, and wrong as they have tendencies to create the opposite of happiness, which is pain (Kemerling 2011).

The economics of joy donates an aspect to the behavior of economics that lifts queries about its value in the scrutiny of the public rule. Habituation happiness is the actuality that the reported happiness of people relapses to the bottom level. Behavioral economists define projection bias as the tendency of people to mistake the present situations for permanence; for instance, purchasing a lot of food during hunger. Habituation means that joy does not react to durable changes, and the projection bias means that pleasure reacts excessively to impermanent changes (Arik 2012).

Conclusion

Happiness is the eventual end and purpose of human life. It is neither a pleasure nor a virtue. It is the application of virtue. Happiness cannot be realized till an individual dies. Hence it is a target and not an impermanent situation. Happiness is the excellence of a person’s nature. Because a person is a cogent animal, human pleasure is determined by the application of his reason. Happiness needs intellectual meditation because this is the final realization of a person’s normal abilities.

Works Cited

Arik, Lavinson. Happiness, Behavioral, Economics and Public Policy. New York, Henry Bolt and Co., 2012.

Hughes, Gerald. Philosophy Guidebook to Aristotle on Ethics. London: Routledge, 2001.Print.

Kemerling, Garth. “Pages of Philosophy.” Utilitarianism. New York: MacMillan, 2011.

Raymond, Bradford. “Happiness and Social Acceptance”. Aristotle and Shakespeare. 2013: n. pg.

The research conducted in the different countries during which people were asked how satisfied they were with their lives clearly indicated the existence of a non-linear relationship between the amount of money and the size of happiness; if the money allows you to get out of the dire straits and enjoy the comfort of the middle class, it is possible that you will be happier; but it is unlikely you will experience something like this when there are millions and tens of millions dollars on your account.

Upon getting used to the money, wealthy people take it for granted; acquisition of goods does not bring as much content as it did, while the abundance of choices becomes tiresome. In this case, the amount of money does not affect the enjoyment of life; the general content with life depends on the various factors, such as health, family, the ability to take pleasure in ordinary activities, and so on. Although money can spare people from many problems, it cannot buy happiness.

Wealthy and poor can be equally unhappy

Money itself is not able to make someone happy or unhappy. Monetary means only afford the opportunities, and these opportunities allow us to build the life that we want. Nevertheless, happiness is an inner state, and it does not depend on material wealth. One can be happy both with money and without it. Wealth itself is not able to bring happiness into your life; neither can poverty.

Money cannot buy health, love, and friendship

Although money allows purchasing medications and high-quality health services, it cannot buy health. Buying a comfortable bed will not buy healthy sleep. By paying money to a person, you will get an employee, but you cannot pay someone to be your friend. A big bright house can be bought, but the warmth of the family and the domestic hearth cannot.

People from wealthy families can graduate from any educational institution, even the most prestigious ones, but they cannot buy intelligence. With the money, you can have access to a variety of activities, but you cannot buy friendship and love. To summarize, “the consumption of durables, charity, personal care, food, health care, vehicles, and housing is not significantly associated with happiness” (DeLeire & Kalil, 2010).

Earning money takes all of your time

Since money is time, wealthy people usually are quite busy. They spend all of their time working or supervising the work of their employees. Due to such a lifestyle, many of them do not have a family. If they are lucky to acquire one, it is very likely they will not have enough time to spend with their spouses and children.

The material benefits cannot be compared with the neglection the children experience when spending time with their nannies and private tutors instead of their parents. To justify themselves, parents tend to buy off with expensive toys and gadgets. Instead of family celebrations, trips to the country, and time happily spent together, and the children get new phones, tablet PCs, and branded clothing.

From the side, it may look like happiness, but the child, no matter how contemporary and tech-savvy he/she was, would be much happier taking a walk in the park with its parents. According to most economists, in order to be successful in the future, the children’s human capital requires the investment of both money and time (Mayer, 1997).

Money allows you to have what you want

Money is a means with which people can afford high-quality food, medical care, as well as gym and fitness club membership. All of this helps them maintain their physical health. At the availability of funds, individuals can evolve intellectually, buy the necessary books, and earn a degree in the best universities around the world. With the necessary funds, people have the opportunity to travel, visit any places on the planet, get inspired, and develop the way they wish.

Money increases confidence

Money helps stimulate emotions that lead to positive results. For example, new clothes often make people more confident. The acquired self-confidence can help get the desired position, make a good bargain, or just add a little bit of abandon to your manner of walking. Money can buy fresh impressions and equipment, one’s favorite hobby.

Because of this, an individual develops his/her creativity and achieves balance. For those who are concerned about security, the availability of money on the bank account helps to gain confidence in the future, because these funds can be used to cover the unexpected expenses such as car repairs or an emergency medical care for a family member.

Financial stability can consolidate the marriage

There are various examples when financial problems destroy the family. This statement was once again confirmed by Jeffrey Dew in his 2009 work, where he showed the relationship between financial problems and divorce. According to Dew’s research, couples with no assets were about 70 percent more likely to divorce over a three-year period compared to couples with assets of $10,000 (Dew, 2009).

What is more, being single and not having a partner casts many people down and drives them to despair; needless to say, a comfortable partnership becomes a source of happiness. In this case, money plays an important role in creating and maintaining good relations in marriage while minimizing stress. One can afford to hire a nanny, a charwoman, or other household staff in order to spend more time with the family and avoid being distracted by minor issues.

Money can only buy happiness up to a certain point

Despite this, one cannot just buy happiness itself. The work of Angus Deaton, the expert at Princeton University, and Daniel Kahneman showed that despite the fact that rich people have a more positive attitude to their life, there is no direct relationship between wealth and the emotional state of contentment (Kahneman & Deaton, 2010).

In addition, they found that the more significant performance measures of daily emotions are health, loneliness, smoking, but not money. The researchers argue that money can buy satisfaction but not happiness; however, the lack of sufficient funds has a negative influence on both.

Despite the fact that in the majority of cases, people associate happiness with material prosperity, it is the satisfaction with the financial situation, rather than happiness, that they feel. Although money has the capability of increasing one’s confidence, consolidating the matrimony as a result of financial stability and providing various opportunities for the development, it cannot buy true love, health, friendship, and faith of the people.

Sometimes, earning money may take all of one’s time, preventing the individual from building a relationship or spending time with its family and friends. In addition, money is not a guarantee of happiness, since people both with low and high income may be equally happy or unhappy.

References

DeLeire, T., & Kalil, A. (2010). Does consumption buy happiness? Evidence from the United States. International Review Of Economics, 57(2), 163-176. Web.

Dew, J. (2009). Bank on It: Thrifty Couples are the Happiest. Web.

Kahneman, D., & Deaton, A. (2010). High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being. Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences, 107(38), 16489-16493. Web.

Mayer, S. (1997). What Money Can’t Buy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.