Perceived Desire Fulfilment Theory Essay

Happiness, an elusive eight letter word with a mighty punch! Many have sought to define happiness, but found it a difficult task to do. While reading an article published in the New Yorker by Will Sorr on July 07, 2017 titled “A Better Kind of Happiness”, I was informed that happiness is more than just a word, happiness is essential to the well-being of human health. Dating back nearly two and half million years ago an ancient Greek Philosopher and scientist, Aristotle, proposed the idea of eudaemonic happiness. He stated that “happiness was not merely a feeling, or a golden promise, but a

Happiness. It is not tangible, measurable or even understandable. Yet, above all other things, it is what people seek the most. Individuals draw happiness from a number of different sources,presumably causing the confusion as to why happiness can not be traced back to a specific object. Still, how can you possibly meet the expectations of being happy? This article will attempt to demystify the subject of happiness.

People travel through life with what seems like a single goal: to be happy. This may seem like a selfish way to live, however this lone objective is the motivation behind nearly all actions. Even seemingly selfless deeds make people feel better about themselves. That warm feeling experienced while doing charitable acts can be described as happiness. But what is authentic happiness? There is an endless possibility of answers to this question, and man seems to be always searching for the solution. Although one may reach his or her goals, there is always still something one strives for in order to be happy. In the book Stumbling on Happiness, Harvard psychologist Daniel Gilbert takes the reader through

Hedonism and the desire-satisfaction theory of welfare are typically seen as archrivals in the contest over identifying what makes one’s life better. It is surprising, then, that the most plausible form of hedonism is desire satisfactionism. The hedonism theory focuses on pleasure/happiness while the desire-satisfaction theory elucidates the relevance of fulfilling our desires. Pleasure, in some points of view is the subjective satisfaction of desire. I will explain the similarities and the differences between the desire-satisfaction theory of value and hedonism. I will also discuss the most successful theory and defend my argument by explaining how the theory

Happiness is one of the most significant dimensions of human experience. Many people can argue that happiness is a meaningful and desirable entity. Studies indicate that everyone pursues happiness in various aspects of their life. Our four fathers saw happiness as a need, so they made the pursuit of happiness as one of the three unalienable rights branded in the Declaration of Independence. There is a sense of complexity behind the meaning of happiness; its definition is not definite. Think of happiness as a rope; there are many thin fiber strands bonded together to become the strength of the rope. Like the analogy of the rope, there are numerous factors that can contribute to an individual’s overall happiness in life. This study is going to

Happiness is a reprise from the many trials and turmoil of life, and so it is natural that we should actively seek it. Ironically though, in our naïve belief that we can somehow augment the amount of happiness in our world, we are actually making our world more depressing to live in. Both John F. Schumaker, in The Happiness Conspiracy, and Ray Bradbury, in Fahrenheit 451, argue that our myopic pursuit of happiness is actually counterproductive. The two authors attempt to persuade the reader that happiness is, and should be, an almost-serendipitous byproduct of a truly fulfilling life, and therefore should not be an explicit objective.

Hedonism is the idea that well-being of people comes about through pleasure. Pure hedonism is the thought that it arises through and only through pleasure and both Bentham and Mill advocate different approaches for which hedonism may be the basis of human well-being. Both Philosophers then go on to construct theories of morality on the basis of this idea such that what should be maximised in a moral dilemma is the cumulative welfare of all individuals as measured by their particular approach for deciphering which course of action will yield the most well-being for all. However, the focus of

The amalgam of the human experience and the pursuit of happiness is that of an instinctive and inexorable nature; perchance in happiness lays the fundamental purpose of the human experience. Happiness, throughout the lapse of time—regardless of multifarious discrepancies, such as nationality or age, has proven to be an all-inclusive search. Whether it is derived from power, wealth, success, or elsewhere, happiness is a perpetual pursuit. Illustrious philosopher Aristotle believed “happiness depends upon ourselves (Aristotle)”, speaking to a notion of happiness being an individual endeavor.

According to the classic sense, a life full of happiness is a life that manifests wisdom, kindness, and goodness. However happiness has been twisted by a secular culture and the classic sense has given away to “pleasurable satisfaction”. Pleasurable satisfaction depends on external circumstances going well. Moreland points out that because of this the modern sense of happiness, “pleasurable satisfaction”, is unstable and varies with life’s circumstances. Pleasurable satisfaction becomes increasingly addictive and enslaving if it becomes the dominant aim of one’s life. By contrast, classical happiness brings freedom and power to life as one ought, as one increasingly becomes a unified person who lives for a cause bigger than one’s self. Western culture has been disillusioned into seeking happiness as their main priority in life. Although, happiness is important, when its importance becomes exaggerated, it leads to a loss of purpose in life, and even depression. What Western cultures need to realize is that true happiness can never be achieved. Over the past 50 years, levels of health, wealth, and liberties have increased, but levels of happiness haven’t.

What then is happiness? Perhaps happiness is a basic and familiar concept, yet it may occur to be perplexing when one has to convey it through the medium of words. Lyubomirsky defines the term as “the experience of joy, contentment, or positive well-being, combined with a sense that one’s life is good, meaningful, and worthwhile” (Lyubomirsky 32). It is often subjective, personal, and can stem from a myriad of activities: some may experience similar feelings by engaging in sports, spending time with family and friends, others while reading or simply being in solitude. Due to the personal nature and subjectivity of happiness, a handful of myths pertaining to this concept has emerged. Three happiness myths were presented within the chapter: 1. Happiness must be found. 2. Happiness lies in changing our circumstances. 3. You either have it or you don’t. The first myth greatly piqued my interest, since I, too, have once externalized happiness and assumed that it would be found outside.

The hedonist would argue that pleasure is the only intrinsic good in life, that joy and suffering are the only distinguishing marks of things beneficial or harmful to the human being. To the hedonist, life is like the common balance scale with suffering on one side and pleasure on the other. With pleasure being inversely related to suffering, in order to maximize the good of life, the hedonist strives to minimize suffering, thereby maximizing net pleasure (pleasure minus suffering).

In part one of our book, “The Good Life,” we studied five different philosopher’s viewpoints on what is needed in order for a person to have a good, fulfilling life. They all included the concepts of pleasure and happiness to some extent in their theories, but they all approached the ideas in different ways. The two hedonists we studied, Epicurus and John Stuart Mill, place heavy emphasis on the importance of pleasure. They both believe that pleasure is a necessity in the ideal life. Jean Kazez agreed with their viewpoints in her theory and said that happiness was a necessity for a good life. Epicurus and Mill also argue that there is nothing else that we ultimately desire beyond pleasure and that it is an intrinsic good.

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

Jeremy Bentham’s quantitative hedonism is a viewpoint that quantity, intensity, and duration of pleasures determines the value of that pleasure. Bentham argues that happiness is the ultimate good. He argues that the definition of happiness is pleasure accompanied by an avoidance of pain. Jeremy Bentham believed that creating the greatest combined happiness was the key to correct moral behavior.

Happiness is the fundamental objective of life. This bold statement is unanimously agreed upon among generations of people on every corner of our planet. However, the real question that has been contested for centuries is the true meaning of happiness? The true meaning of happiness is one of the most highly debated philosophy topics in history. Most famous are the writings of Aristotle and John Stuart Mill who both paint very opposing pictures of happiness. Mill believes happiness is obtained through pleasure and the absence of pain. On the other hand, Aristotle insist happiness is obtained through living a fulfilling, virtuous life. This passage will examine Aristotle 's and Mill 's views on happiness as well as give an opinion one which philosophical theory is most convincing.