Happiness Vs Happiness

When having good experiences, most people, if asked, would claim that they feel happy. However, if one decided to ask Martha Nussbaum, author of “Who is the Happy Warrior? Philosophy Poses Questions to Psychology,” she would most likely respond that she was feeling pleasured. In her article, she draws a restrictive line between pleasure and happiness. She introduces the viewpoints of many intellectuals who have spoken on the definition of happiness, and then offers her own opinions in regards to theirs. Her thoughts generally align with those of Aristotle, Plato, and the ancient Greek thinkers – the very ones she spent much of her higher education studying. Her main ideas, that happiness is too complex to be concretely defined and that pleasure is a feeling that we may experience while doing certain things, are well-explained and supported. She offers the idea that happiness is not an emotion – rather, it is a state of being that we should all hope to attain as a result of self-reflection. Nussbaum continually counters the beliefs proposed by psychologists, like the notion that happiness is a one-note feeling, or the concept that happiness is only influenced by positive emotions. In my essay, I will explain how Martha Nussbaum’s explanation of the complexities of happiness is superior, as well as how the ideas of two psychologists, Sonja Lyubomirsky and Daniel Gilbert, are faulty and disreputable. However, it is important to note that just because Nussbaum is the least wrong

As human beings we are naturally wired to seek happiness wherever we can find it. When we don’t, we may enter a stage of anger, anxiety, or distress. That’s why it is our personal goal to look for happiness and preserve it once we acquire it. Many have explored ways to find what triggers this feeling of “happiness” and what we can do to keep it; nonetheless, the evidence found is hardly sufficient to make a public statement on how to find happiness. For this reason, most of the time we speculate what might provoke this feeling of contentment. “Happiness is a glass half empty,” an essay written by Oliver Burkeman, highlights the importance of happiness and discloses how we can find delight through unorthodox methods. The prime objective of this piece of writing is to inform the audience about the effect of happiness on their lives and how their usual attempts of becoming happier can sabotage achieving this feeling. Furthermore, he wants to promote the benefits of pessimism and describe how it can help us in the long run. The author utilizes pronouns, logos, and pathos in order to prove his point and draw the audience into his essay, in an attempt of making them reconsider the way they live their lives and adopt this new pessimistic way that would greatly boost their level of happiness.

One might be led to believe that this society is a perfect place to live, since all the inhabitants are eternally happy. There are no wars, pain, or suffering, all definite pluses, yet readers must not judge too quickly.

Many theorist believe that happiness is the only important in people's life, and all that should matter to a person is being happy. The standard of assessing a good life is how much or quantity of happiness it contains. This openness of happiness, its generosity of spirit and width of appreciation, gets warped and constricted by the claim pretending to be its greatest friend—that only happiness matters, nothing else. Robert Nozick does not on the side of hedonistic utilitarianism, he gives several examples to show that there are other elements of reality we may strive for, even at the expense of pleasure. In this essay, I will focus on Nozick's opinion of the direction of happiness and the experience

Have you ever truly sat and considered what makes you truly happy? Often times, people answer directly with the response of money. We say this without deeply considering all that we have to be grateful for. Happiness is not achieved through wealth instead through experiences, the family we love, and the nature that surrounds us, literature has created a great impact upon the ideals we consider to create our happiness.

“But I don’t want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin.” “In fact,” said Mustapha Mond, “you’re claiming the right to be unhappy.” “All right then,” said the Savage defiantly, “I’m claiming the right to be unhappy,” This significant quote from Brave New World had moved innumerable readers’ heart, so do I. Exaggeration? No. It’s the satire to the false meaning of the universal happiness, and it’s this quote which made me had rethink what do I really want and the way of living I want to choose. Because the deep influence and rumination brought by the book, I would like to say

One day, Equality 7-2521 who was filled with joy, sang during dinner and was told off by a Council Member. He tells the Council Member the reason that he sings is because he is happy. The Council Member then retaliates that the reason he should be happy is because he lives with his fellow brothers. After that occurrence, while in his tunnel, Equality 7-2521 meditates on the meaning of happiness and realizes that it is forbidden to be unhappy and that his brothers are unhappy because they are afraid. What makes Equality 7-2521 happy is when he is in his tunnel performing experiments and pursuing his study of light, but in order to do so, he must sneak away because to his and everyone else’s knowledge, the society in which they live in reject an individual’s freedom to pursue individual happiness because true happiness should come from living beside/with your fellow brothers. When one is only able to achieve happiness through a group of people in a society, it is to be expected that its citizens will feel as if life is meaningless and painful. From what Equality 7-2521 has witnessed, it is evident that the flame of independence inside him is growing.

When we look to define happiness, many different ideas come to mind. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary uses three definitions for happiness: good fortune, a state of well being and contentment, and a pleasurable satisfaction. In Brave New World, Aldus Huxley argues that a society can redefine happiness through the government’s manipulation of the environment and the human mind itself. The government accomplishes this by mind conditioning throughout the process of maturing, keeping a caste-based society, and obliterating problems. The government thus defines happiness as the absence of all conflict. This differs from happiness as the American society sees it: the ability to pursue and enjoy individual desires.

Happiness is a fundamental right that all human beings are allowed to pursue of their own accord by the government. Yet, imagine a society in which all the thinking is done for their citizens, feelings are gotten rid of before they could be felt and it was encouraged to not accept the downsides of life. Throughout the pages of Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, he describes the lives of many characters. Specifically their relationship with the emotion of happiness. Bradbury brings to the attention of the reader of whether the characters are happy or distracted. A person cannot be happy if they do are not honest with themselves and if they do not feel or think for themselves. Through the experiences of the characters spoken about, it will be seen how happiness is not felt and lived, because their distractions take place.

The philosopher Aristotle once wrote, “Happiness is the meaning and the purpose of life, the whole aim and end of human existence.” This famous quote compels people to question the significance of their joy, and whether it truly represents purposeful lives they want to live. Ray Bradbury, a contemporary author, also tackles this question in his book, Fahrenheit 451, which deals heavily with society's view of happiness in the future. Through several main characters, Bradbury portrays the two branches of happiness: one as a lifeless path, heading nowhere, seeking no worry, while the other embraces pure human experience intertwined together to reveal truth and knowledge.

However, In Brave New World happiness comes from largely produced products. The main product being a pleasure drug called “soma”. Soma creates a false happiness to make the people of the New World adequate with there absence of freedom. Soma leaves users defenseless to the government. This drug creates a false state of mind and happiness. The inhabitants are conditioned to fit into their predestined social class. Stability and happiness are much more important than humanity. “No social stability without individual stability.”

He speaks of the idyllic order which has been created by the One State through numbers. The One State is a foundation of totalitarianism “total” power through the state. The reader will first notice this by seeing names have been eliminated and numbers assigned to all people. D-503 describes his sex partner as round, and her “name” is O-90, the author also depicts another character as I-330 as slender and sharp (8). The reader can see the pattern of the numerical naming system is totalitarian, because identity has been removed and individualism is replaced by conformity. There is a crack in D-503 logic when he notices the individuality of the people around him; this is contrary to the totalitarian

The world seems to be a dark and unforgiving place, but happiness is hidden within. It is found in a beautiful view, an uplifting song, or a compliment from a friend. According to the Ted Talk video, The Habits of Happiness, Matthieu Ricard claims that everyone “has a deep, profound desire for well-being or happiness”(Ricard 2:39). Ricard uses the three techniques of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos to captivate and move his audience. With the use of metaphors, personal experiences, and even graphs Matthieu explained to his audience the full force and perception of the bendable word that is happiness. This Ted Talk dove into philosophical meaning on just how to achieve well-being, without having everything in the world.

The everlasting question of "What is Happiness?" has been inquired since the creation of men. Unfortunately, the only agreed answer that humanity came up with is that all the creatures seek happiness, but no one has the concrete directions for achieving it. Our libraries are overwhelmed with books about happiness, but no dictionary definition explains which path men must take to be happy. No mathematician gave us the axiom which we could use to solve the problem of living in bliss. No scientist brought up the formula of fusing certain ingredients to produce the "drink of happiness". Still almost all the people consider that their ultimate purport in

Prior to reading this short story many readers might agree that the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people is a positive thing. As when the majority of people are happy, the chances of confrontation are lowered. However, when the situation that determines happiness is a great deal, it is no longer acceptable to ensure that the majority is happy, but every individual is content. Author Ursula LeGuin has provided readers with a compelling short story that encompasses many philosophical viewpoints. She challenges her readers to define moral ethics through the harsh and critical conditions that her characters face.