Happiness

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ethics
  3. » Happiness

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Sean K
 
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2008 09:28 pm
Sorry Mods, please move to the approprite thread... but,

Happiness!

What is happiness?

Is it a universal principle, or a totally personal perception of your current state of awareness in your particular environment?

Even in your own environment, is your happiness the same as anyone elses?

Even if you are a twin, living the same life, can you measure what happiness is, to indicate a general basis by which to design your life to achieve happiness?

Or, is happiness totally random? We can do all we can to design of lives to be happy but kaos rules thus negating any efforts on our behalf?

Does nothing else matter in the achievement of happiness but a state of mind?

Can a Buddhist really achieve enlightenment, and become a Bodhi?

Can anyone achieve eudaimonia?

In the end, is all we really want to do is survive, which equates to the final happiness? Survival of the organism?


Just a general discussion on what happiness is, and how to achieve it perhaps?

Smile
 
de budding
 
Reply Sun 17 Aug, 2008 05:01 am
@Sean K,
I'm not a fan of these preconceptions of happiness, I try to avoid this happiness-idealism by denying all forms of happiness other than those which I freely and spontaneously experience as part of the 'flow' of events. I see too many people trying to 'set themselves up' for happiness so that it comes from the future and falls into their lap, as if it would stay there given the chance.

Seems to me that there is little happiness, mostly anticipation or contentment. The former the more powerful of the two and most common. Largely, people can not appreciate the subtleties of contentment which is, usually, the arival of something which has been anticipated. What most people seem to do is take anticipation and stock pile it, store it into a big ball and release it all at once in (usually done in company.) This I call 'jumping for joy' and it isn't real happiness, in fact it is the most fleeting way to experience something.

So how to obtain happiness? Don't limit yourself to anticipation-happiness only, don't try to force excitement and happiness where there is none. Work on very consciously recognising an experience which has been anticipated (or not) so that you can take time to extract and appreciate things as they happen, not as you for see or remember them. This is contentment and it is subtle, reserved and perhaps not as exciting as anticipation but, it is potent and deeper.
 
nameless
 
Reply Wed 20 Aug, 2008 01:52 pm
@Sean K,
Sean K wrote:
Just a general discussion on what happiness is,

Happiness is a feeling, like sadness, grief, joy, boredom, etc... Appearing at the 'correct' times in one's life.

Quote:
and how to achieve it perhaps?

Humans (but not limited to) have, generally, a full spectrum of 'feelings' (those humans that are considered 'healthy'...).
Feelings come and go.
If you don't 'like' one feeling, just wait a bit and you will find yourself 'with' another feeling.
If you 'grasp' at one, just wait and it, too, will be gone, creating misery (another feeling).
If you seek 'one feeling' to 'hold' for life, then again, a feeling of disappointment and disillusionment will accompany another moment.
The flow, flows, and the wheel turns.
Enjoy it, whatever the universes 'bring'.
 
de budding
 
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 05:15 am
@nameless,
nameless wrote:
Happiness is a feeling, like sadness, grief, joy, boredom, etc... Appearing at the 'correct' times in one's life.


Humans (but not limited to) have, generally, a full spectrum of 'feelings' (those humans that are considered 'healthy'...).
Feelings come and go.
If you don't 'like' one feeling, just wait a bit and you will find yourself 'with' another feeling.
If you 'grasp' at one, just wait and it, too, will be gone, creating misery (another feeling).
If you seek 'one feeling' to 'hold' for life, then again, a feeling of disappointment and disillusionment will accompany another moment.
The flow, flows, and the wheel turns.
Enjoy it, whatever the universes 'bring'.



So your saying there is a limited palette of emotions we can experience at any one time. If we grasp or try to sustain the experience of one, like happiness, you will cause a backlog of emotion (opposite to that which you are trying to sustain) which will flood through you at some point or another.

I like the idea that we shouldn't try to govern our emotions. We should try to manipulate our perspective of said emotions perhaps so we can appreciate pain, respect suffering and the strength it gives us.

At no point should we ever chase or demand anything of our emotions, only allow them to flow. Sounds to me like the philosophy of 'suck it up' or
'make the best of it'. Or any other quick retort usually used to keep those who complain quiet; but this attitude carries poetic undertones of appreciation for the good and the bad... if we can genuinely find the artistic attitude to embrace pain and suffering for all that it gives us, then we would all be truly happy all the time.

Dan.
 
GoodVibes7
 
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 05:42 pm
@Sean K,
Briefly, happiness requires harmony (love) & contrast (preferably in the form of growth). Without the latter, boredom ensues.
 
nameless
 
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 05:52 pm
@de budding,
de_budding wrote:


So your saying there is a limited palette of emotions we can experience at any one time.

I don't know if we can experience more than any one 'point' on that pallette at any one moment.

Quote:
If we grasp or try to sustain the experience of one, like happiness, you will cause a backlog of emotion (opposite to that which you are trying to sustain) which will flood through you at some point or another.

One moment here we are with this feeling, this emotion; another moment here we are with that feeling... all moments of existence are synchronous. What a moment 'is', is all it can be.

Quote:
I like the idea that we shouldn't try to govern our emotions. We should try to manipulate our perspective of said emotions perhaps so we can appreciate pain, respect suffering and the strength it gives us.

Yup! Pain hurts, but I'd give up none! All the feelings are deeply enjoyed!

Quote:

At no point should we ever chase or demand anything of our emotions, only allow them to flow. Sounds to me like the philosophy of 'suck it up' or
'make the best of it'.

There are those who love chasing feelings and trying to grasp them, and those who hate it, and everyone else.. All us Perspectives are unique!


Quote:
Or any other quick retort usually used to keep those who complain quiet; but this attitude carries poetic undertones of appreciation for the good and the bad... if we can genuinely find the artistic attitude to embrace pain and suffering for all that it gives us, then we would all be truly happy all the time.

True! One can still be a 'happy' person while in the most excrutiating of pain! But it is the pain at the forefront of thought, for most...
 
Deftil
 
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 07:45 pm
@Sean K,
I think of happiness as "the enjoyment of certain feelings" and that it is caused by chemical reactions in the brain that give one pleasure. Different things make different people happy, but the chemical reactions in the brain are extremely similar in different people.
 
Sean K
 
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 09:08 pm
@Deftil,
Deftil wrote:
I think of happiness as "the enjoyment of certain feelings" and that it is caused by chemical reactions in the brain that give one pleasure. Different things make different people happy, but the chemical reactions in the brain are extremely similar in different people.


Yep, defining what 'happiness' is is probably important to discussing how to achieve it and maintain it.

And, I pose the question; can individuals achieve happiness without fitting into their environment?

In the short term we can all play, and have fun, and achieve, to satisfy ourselves, but if this is in contrast with our culture and environment, then ultimately those around us will be negatively effected, thus negatively effecting ourselves.

To build a foundation for the ultimate happiness don't we need to establish what is the best way to live for all those around us, and then act in a way to satisfy that? Upholding the virtues of our culture might be the first step, whatever they may be.

I think this might come before exceeding expectations, etc..

Just thinking out loud here, I'm a novice at this..

Smile
 
de budding
 
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2008 02:33 am
@Sean K,
[quote=Sean K]
To build a foundation for the ultimate happiness don't we need to establish what is the best way to live for all those around us, and then act in a way to satisfy that? Upholding the virtues of our culture might be the first step, whatever they may be.

I think this might come before exceeding expectations, etc..

Just thinking out loud here, I'm a novice at this..

Smile[/quote]

To build a foundation for 'happiness' you first must define happiness by cutting all ties with things which bring about negative emotions. But to stop us inhibiting everyone else while in personal pursuit of happiness, the best we can do for 'all those around us' is be empathetic and courteous. This is a compromise where a select few 'enlightened' ones, who appreciate all emotion, end up babysitting the masses, or the herd, who need constant stimulation and comfort to feel joy.

Ideally what 'all those' need to do to enter our utopia delusion (in that we delude our perception of negative emotions in order to create a general contentment) is learn to appreciate the full spectrum of emotion like us. There is no 'ideal' for happiness, only tolerance and appreciation can bring about contentment... any other tour de happiness seems to head in the direction of drugs, promiscuity or ultimate-laziness.

Dan.
 
Deftil
 
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2008 04:00 am
@Sean K,
Sean K wrote:

And, I pose the question; can individuals achieve happiness without fitting into their environment?


It's possible for very few, because we are pretty social creatures. Each of us in different degrees, but being at least somewhat social is something most people have in common.

btw Bertrand Russell published a book in 1930 called The Conquest of Happiness that I want to read at some point.

Powell's Books - The Conquest of Happiness by Bertrand Russell
 
ogden
 
Reply Sun 31 Aug, 2008 09:38 am
@Sean K,
Sean K wrote:
What is happiness?

Is it a universal principle, or a totally personal perception of your current state of awareness in your particular environment?

Even in your own environment, is your happiness the same as anyone elses?

Does nothing else matter in the achievement of happiness but a state of mind?Smile



Happiness (contentment or joy), being emotions, are most definately a physiological condition; brain chemistry.

The internal or external influences that produce the condition of happiness are generally universal in that we all share some commonalities. As in, we all generally take comfort in the same things. On the other hand, we can assume that what makes one person happy is not allways what makes everyne happy. So even if the mechanics of happiness is the same for everyone, defining the conditions of happiness is somewhat inefable.

Brain chemistry can be manipulated with drugs and stimulated by external conditions, however; a healthy brain produces seratonin dopamine and oxicotin as a normal random function. I belive that the brain chemistry of happiness is unavoidable and that it comes to us in spite of seamingly adverse conditions.

Sean K, I really like your point about ones happiness and how it would (or should) be deminished when it is gained at the expense of others. I think that is a moral destinction that is very wise. One day I hope that humans can establish criteria for a "minimum quality of life" and take steps to ensure no one falls below this level.
 
Sean K
 
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 02:12 pm
@ogden,
ogden wrote:
Happiness (contentment or joy), being emotions, are most definately a physiological condition; brain chemistry.

The internal or external influences that produce the condition of happiness are generally universal in that we all share some commonalities. As in, we all generally take comfort in the same things. On the other hand, we can assume that what makes one person happy is not allways what makes everyne happy. So even if the mechanics of happiness is the same for everyone, defining the conditions of happiness is somewhat inefable.

Brain chemistry can be manipulated with drugs and stimulated by external conditions, however; a healthy brain produces seratonin dopamine and oxicotin as a normal random function. I belive that the brain chemistry of happiness is unavoidable and that it comes to us in spite of seamingly adverse conditions.

Sean K, I really like your point about ones happiness and how it would (or should) be deminished when it is gained at the expense of others. I think that is a moral destinction that is very wise. One day I hope that humans can establish criteria for a "minimum quality of life" and take steps to ensure no one falls below this level.


I agree that it is all brain chemistry but our environmental, sociological, experiential, hereditary experiences inform that.

They are all inputs causing our brain to respond.

One of my early comments was the thought that we could malipulate our environment, and ourselves, to create a higher probability/possibility that we could attain 'happiness'.

This was somewhat debunked earlier due to the fact that 'happiness' must be qualified by our 'expectations', which I agree with. Happiness, for most, is above the status quo. The ying yang chest nut.

It's a catch 22. The higher the level of expectation, the harder it is to achieve it. The old addage being 'dumb and happy' supports this principle. Expect nothing, and something nice occurs and you are ecstatic....

If we try to design life to achieve an expected level happiness, then if you achieve that happiness, it's only the 'norm'. Happiness is contentment above the expected result.

So, do we stop trying to design a life to be happy and just be surprised when something above average comes along and think, 'wow, I'm happy'?

I have to stop for now, as I'm not sure if there's any chain of comprehension in there.....

More vodka required.. :perplexed:
 
sarathustrah
 
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 06:04 pm
@Deftil,
Deftil wrote:

btw Bertrand Russell published a book in 1930 called The Conquest of Happiness that I want to read at some point.

Powell's Books - The Conquest of Happiness by Bertrand Russell


thats on my book list too! :a-ok: ...i love bertrand russell

happiness and its meaning is something i talk about frequently... since whenever someone is deciding to interpret whats happening to them as a negative experience i try to find the ways to switch that viewpoint...

because i maintain the philosophy voltaire mentions in Candide... everything is for a reason... and ends up bein for the best... even if never recognized or interpreted to be that way...

i say that happiness is as its been agreed, mostly chemical signals in the brain, based on developed/learned preferences... but is defined by the contrasting, unhappiness... which i still wonder... could we appreciate happiness if you never experienced anything bad or unpleasant.... wouldnt happiness lose its meaning?
 
Sean K
 
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 12:22 pm
@sarathustrah,
sarathustrah wrote:
i say that happiness is as its been agreed, mostly chemical signals in the brain, based on developed/learned preferences... but is defined by the contrasting, unhappiness... which i still wonder... could we appreciate happiness if you never experienced anything bad or unpleasant.... wouldnt happiness lose its meaning?
This is something I'm trying to find a way around.

Can we just be yang? And forget the yin?

The Dalai Lama always looks pretty bloody happy! lol

As far as 'experiencing' unhappiness to understand happiness, can't we just conceptualise it and view unhappiness to appreciate it, without having to physically experience it? Hmmm, I suppose that if you can conceptualise it, you are physchologically experiencing it....hm....

So, you need to personally experience the ultimate distress, to experience ecstacy?

:perplexed:
 
sarathustrah
 
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:13 pm
@Sean K,
Sean K wrote:

So, you need to personally experience the ultimate distress, to experience ecstacy?

:perplexed:


hehehe... i dont think you need to have the most excruciating experience to be able to have the most pleasurable... its that i think if there was no mental pain (because physical pain is very necessary and helpful though unpleasant)

>>like if there was no physical pain, you wouldnt feel the sting when sand gets in your eye, so you wouldnt know to rub it out, so you would me more likely to get an infection which could effect the vision permanently... or you wouldnt feel the pain of the poo reaching the end of the bowels and everyone would need diapers... pain is VERY helpful

but if there was no mental pain... unhappiness cause you dont have a hi def big screen tv... or cause your girlfriend dumped ya... or cause your loved one died... imagine the effects it would have

... because what would happen if a breakup no longer was painful? if cheating no longer upset your partner? if getting fired no longer made you stressed and worried.... imagine how humanity would start operating without any mental pain... would you attend a funeral if it didnt bother you the person is gone now? things would get crazy... not content... right?

instead of ABOLISHING pain like people think they want... i try to get people to come to terms with pain... to see it as necessary even if you cant understand how it could possibly be necessary... not to get rid of it... but to soften it... because it humbles us and should be experienced but you can still choose how bad youre gonna let it effect you and for how long...

is this all comin out right :Not-Impressed:
 
ogden
 
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 06:39 pm
@sarathustrah,
I think sensory stimuli is only a part of the happiness quotient. One must see happiness as a state or condition and cannot be apreciated (or even exist) without the condition of unhappiness. If your brain produced a level aspect (chemically) at all times, then you would have no way of perceptualizing any other state. Even if levels of one state do not determin the other, the fluctuation is the relivance that lets us know and apreciate our condition.

We dont have to actually experience the condition to get a valid idea of what it is. Humans are adept at empithizing.a We can feel so much real emotion by reading or watching a movie. This too is for our good so that we dont actually have to get burned to see that fire is dangerous.

I think what is so cool about the Dali Lama (and some other eastern religions) is that they emphisise manipulating themselves instead of manipulating thier external condition. You can willfully (and trough meditation)manipulate your own brain chemistry!

Dualism is a conditon that cannot be avoided. You cannot have yin without yang any more than you can have up without down.
 
sarathustrah
 
Reply Sun 7 Sep, 2008 01:35 am
@ogden,
ogden... you summed everything up perfectly... i agree with the whole post entirely...

you have a way with words
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ethics
  3. » Happiness
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/18/2024 at 05:20:17