What is happiness? Why is it important?

Great Debates
1

In this thread about lying several posters make the claim that the truth has no value on its own, but that the happiness provided by truth or a friendly white lie is the only thing that counts in the grand scheme of things. This leads me into a complex circular argument which could best be summed up as “what exactly is this happiness thing,” and as a corollary, “why is it so damn important”?

I mean, I get what the dictionary definition of happiness is, intellectually. I have felt happy myself from time to time. But I can’t grasp why happiness is prized above all other emotions as being the way people are Supposed to Feel. Why is happiness a better Way to Feel than anger? Than sadness? I guess I just don’t see what’s so great about feeling happy, at least in that superficial “joy” way, and not in a deeper philosophical sense (which could maybe better be described as “fulfilled”).

Is happiness so important that it is preferable to societal change, and if so why? For instance, one of my favorite short stories (“The Euphio Question” by Kurt Vonnegut) is about a machine (the euphio) that tunes into a certain brain wave, producing a constant stream of happiness. The machine’s detractors say that it will destroy society since nobody will be compelled to create things to make other people happy or excite their emotions. Its supporters say pretty much what Priceguy said in that other thread, “happiness is important because it, well, makes people happy,” and that change isn’t necessary since people will be able to experience happiness directly; in short, civilization has reached a joyous dead end, and we should feel happy about it. It doesn’t really have to be stated that I find the supporters’ platform monstrous, but is this everyone’s reaction? Is happiness truly preferable to Truth, Reality, and Change, and if so, WHY?

I just don’t see how “happiness is important” is not a circular argument. I see change and growth as being the most important things in life and happiness (at least the happiness that would be elicited from someone telling you you’re not fat when you are, or that you’re a great singer when you’re not) is a static emotion; it does not help people change and evolve. Terminally happy people: what is so wonderful about your favorite emotion that makes it more important than The Truth, and by extension, Reality? What does happiness feel like to you? What makes happiness so wonderful that we’d give up our art, music, and literature for quick-fix spell in front of the family euphio? Am I missing something, or is “happiness” (and again, I’m talking about the superficial happiness created in a world of lies, not a deep unity with the cosmos kind of happiness) really not all it’s cracked up to be, and a philosophical dead end to boot?

(I just noticed that I repeat a lot of the same rhetorical questions here. This is because I am really frustrated.)

2

A journey happiness is, not a destination. :slight_smile:

3

Part of your question is about values: what makes a worthwhile life? What is more important: growing as a person “honesty”, or keeping things cosy “happiness”?

I believe the theory quoted in one of my old threads answers this question in a very practical way. It postulates about 16 fundamental human “drives” of which curiosity ( the need to grow) is one, and harmony (social acceptance) another. Other drives include independence, and power, which will be often linked to emotions like anger.
What drive and corresponding emotion is important to you, you personally, is hardwired in you by genes and upbringing. When faced with a choice, you value growth and honesty over harmony, but others make other choices. Trying to change your values seems less efficient then just finding out what they are and try to build your life and your valuesystem around them.

It takes all sorts to build a nation, harmonyseekers and thruthsayers.

Just my 2 cents, I hope that made sense.

4

Thanks Maastricht, that’s an interesting thread. I still wonder, though, why society at large favors some drives (such as acceptance) over others (such as idealism). I guess I just don’t understand people whose drives are static, who see happiness as an end result. I could never be happy in a world without change, but to hear some people talk, once you get into a place where you’re happy, you should stick with it. I’m just trying to understand what makes conservatives* tick.

*not political conservatives, but conservatives in the philosophical/psychological sense, change-fearing harmony-seekers

5

I’ve found in life that happiness is something that you don’t recognize until much, much later. In other words, in the present you always feel that there’s something missing, some goal you have to achieve, some object you need, to make you truly happy. Then years later you look back at a certain time of your life and say, “I was really happy then, at that time. I just didn’t know it.”

6

No cite handy, but I recall some study documenting that most people’s happiness is fairly static. That is it is more part of your temperement than contigent on events. Happy people tend to fairly quickly settle back into happiness even after significant life setbacks including dealing with chronic disease, etc. , whereas unhappy people are that way no matter how cushy life becomes … whatever luxuries they have just become their new norm which they can only subsequently be deprived of, but never make them happier than they are predisposed to be.

So to answer the op, happiness is a state of well being that we are each set to experience to some large degree.

7

If we assume that humans are, at base, animals and our emotions are the reslt of evoultion:

Happiness is the state where we feel that we have succeeded in fulfilling our evolution-demanded goals.

So if we look at a wolf pack

  1. We would have the goals of being accepted by the pack and contributing to it (…you need to be accepted to receive the contributions of others and thus an individual failing can be glossed over by others who were better that day.) Contribution = food gathering.
  2. Finding a mate and mating.
  3. Maintaining individuality and not getting walked on by other wolves
  4. Or even asserting dominance to take charge of the pack–in the belief that a leader who is strong and able is better than no one, or someone unskilled.
  5. Rasing your pups to be productive members of the pack.

So simply, happiness is a feeling we have when life is going good for us, and it seems like our and the pack’s future is on track and doing well.

Certainly one could take drugs or use other artificial means to produce the same emotion, without the need to actually fulfill your obligations–but then I am against drugs for exactly this reason. It seems pointless to me to cheat away your own happiness and rely on chemicals where you could get a similar result by readng a book or such–but that is a different discussion.

8

That is indeed an interesting thread. It’s true that we all have different tendencies made up from genetics and enviorment. That’s why happiness is different for everybody. For some it’s a sense of purpose. That might be a certain career or a family and kids. Others, perhaps the conservatives you wonder about, lean toward security. They tend to find something comfortable that feels safe and stick with it. Are they truly happy? I don’t know. I’ve known a lot of people who stayed in an unhappy situation because they didn’t know what else to do.
No matter what mix of qualities we are and what we see happiness as, change is inevitable. We can go with it or struggle against it. If the change is something we don’t want to happen it’s pretty normal to struggle against it. That can be painful.

I think the search for whatever makes us happy is part of self discovery. As the changes come we have to ask the question again and again. What is happiness for me? Sometimes we get what we thought would make us happy only to discover it wasn’t what we imagined it would be.
You’ll see in in the other thread that my own contention is that it takes courageous personal honesty and a commitment to the truth to make the self discovery work.

I think another importent question is do we look inside ourselves for happiness or do we look outside? That requires that personnal honesty I mentioned. In this culture so much of what we desire depends on the opinions of others. We look to our parents and peers for approval and acceptance. Too often we deny our own true desires to gain this approval and acceptance.

9

Perhaps because you only have one life to live, so why live it in a state of perpetual angst?

10

Good for you, 'cause it is. As I stated in that other thread, and have stated in many threads before, if you do not agree with the statement “physical and mental pleasure is good, physical and mental pain is bad”, then my moral philosophy is not for you. I cannot bring any arguments to bear at all if you do not agree with that statement. Luckily, I’ve never spoken to someone who didn’t agree with that statement. Furthermore, whenever someone says “X is more important than happiness” and I ask why, the answer comes back something like “Because X makes us happy”, which shows clearly that happiness is the important thing, not X.

What do you value that does not gain its value from its promotion of happiness?

11

When I experience a moment of happiness after Star Wars, I’ll think about this some more. But you should ask yourself this question which always perplexed me:

Why does Thomas Jefferson list the pursuit of happiness as an inalienable right in the Declaration of Independence? What is so important about the pursuit of happiness for Americans and moreover everyone in the world? Hobbes lists life, liberty and property. Happiness seems ‘unofficial’, something you wouldn’t think judges and lawyers would put in an arguably legal document.

With this, happiness is somthing noble which should be attained. I thought about it… Maybe happiness is something that has to do with individual liberty and independence. For example, I might have happiness from watching Star Wars while you may prefer another film. As it was said by** cosmosdan** happiness is different for everybody.

There more to life than basic necessities. In this sense, the source of happiness could be anything from a luxury like watching a film in one’s home theater to the more simpiler pleasures of life such as playing with a loyal dog. Happiness is more than survival. People can survive with basic food clothing and water. There are children who have those but never get to enjoy their childhood. Happiness is a state of mind and a one person’s happiness is another’s misery. A person does not *need * happiness. A person could live their whole life without ever experiencing joy or happiness.

Happiness is at it’s root, intrinsic. And happiness seems to be unneccesary. We could go through life without any expression but every now and then we smile and laugh and sometimes wink. Why, then, did Thomas Jefferson believe that the pursuit of happiness was an inalienable right? What is happiness so important?

12

But if happiness is the desired result no matter what, then why not just take drugs to circumvent the dirty things that get in the way and go straight to the happiness? I agree with you, but I’m wondering why I do. If you can get just as much of a “high” off of artificial means, then why go through the work of reading a book (which might have parts that will make you sad), or doing volunteer work (maybe you’ll feel better at the end of the day, but you’ll also experience physical fatigue, which could be put in the “sad/bad” emotional column), or attending religious services if that’s your thing (you have to get up early, and that doesn’t make anyone happy). Looking at it number-wise, say you have a +5 positive feeling from attending church, but a -1 negative feeling from getting up early and having to dress up nice and drive there. That gives you a net result of +5 happiness. If there’s a drug that can give you +5 happiness, and you can take it at home, in your pajamas, in bed, then you don’t lose any of those points. Isn’t it more logical to take the drug?

(And until someone says that there’s no drug that can simulate real happiness, I’m speaking in hypotheticals. The story I mentioned in the OP made sure to say that the happiness generated by the euphio was not a temporary buzz, but a deep and lasting harmony with the universe kind of happiness.)

Well, there are things I do that bring me less happiness than other things I might like to do, but I do them anyway, to make other people happy. You could say that gives me happiness by proxy, but it’s still not the maximum amount of happiness that I could be having. For example, say I have the option of either going to see a play (which I know will be terrible) that one of my friends is in or staying home and reading a book. If I were looking out for only my own happiness quotient, I would stay home, and I’d get more “happiness points” (see above) than I would going to see an awful play, because no “pain points” would be subtracted from the total. But I’d probably choose the play. The happiness I’ll get from the play, once I subtract the “pain” of having to travel to the theater, find seats, uncomfortably socialize with people, etc, will definitely be less than what I’d receive if I stay home. Why shouldn’t I stay home, then, if I should choose the option that causes the least amount of physical/mental pain?

13

And it sure doesn’t make me happy that I can’t do basic math. This should say “that gives you a net result of +4 happiness.”

14

You’ve misunderstood me. I do not draw a distinction between your own happiness and the happiness of other people.

Because you cause happiness in your friend by being there. You’ll have to try to decide if it’s worth it, ie if the net happiness in the world goes up or down by you so doing.

15

Yup.

16

There’s no sure-fire way to tabulate this though. How do I know my friend cares that I’m there? What if she’s mad at me (without my knowing it) and my being there causes her quotient to go down? Without knowing her “score” I don’t know if the net happiness of all people is going to go up enough to offset the negatives that will be subtracted from my own happiness quotient. I can only judge based on what’s in my own head and a general “feeling” that she would want me to be there, but that second part is by no means exact.

17

So why does anyone do anything else? Why don’t we just sit around in a drugged/hypnotized/lobotomized state all the time?

18

Two external reads that may be engaging on this topic: Americans Now Need Psychologists To Tell Them What ‘Happy’ Is and The Hedonistic Imperative.

19

No, you can never be sure; you can just have a good idea.

Because the perfect drug you hypothesised doesn’t exist.

20

Because

  1. Civilization would end if everyone did it. I mean, if you’ve already got the feelings of having accomplished everything in life needed for the continued prosperity of civilization–without actually having done a darn thing–I doubt anyone would feel any motivation to do them for real.
  2. Similarly, we would all lose any desire to advance ourselves and would never learn anything past the point where we had started the drug.
  3. No one would be making food, nor eating it. And no one would care as the drug would make them happy though they were starving to death.
  4. etc.

So pretty much, after some people started doing the drug, no one else would. And if you’ve never tried the drug, you’ll never know the feeling of complete happiness and content, so it won’t matter to you that you’re missing it.