When we are young children, we are introduced to the concept of "living happily ever after". This is a fairy-tale emotional state of absolute happiness, where nothing really happens, and nothing even seems to matter. It is a state of feeling good all the time. In fairy tales, this feeling is usually found in fulfilling marriages, royal castles, singing birds and laughing children. In real life, an even-keeled mood is more psychologically healthy than a mood in which you frequently achieve great heights of happiness. Furthermore, when you ask people what makes their lives worth living, they rarely mention their mood. They are more likely to talk about what they find meaningful, such as their work or relationships. Research suggests that if …show more content…
Giving too much importance to upcoming events and future possessions, they rely on them to make their lives better, while studies and statistics clearly show that we usually “overestimate the intensity and duration of our emotional reactions” (Gertner, 447). As Gilbert says, a newly bought computer, car, or house, will very quickly lose its magic and fail in making its possessor happier.
This position only comforted my personal point of view. I see the notion of happiness as independent from any kind of belonging or social status. Indeed, every day, millions of married people long for their lost freedom, while others envy these same people who have succeeded in their relationships and found their significant other. The same way will the person who just purchased a highly expensive car will soon begin to notice its imperfections and dream of a better, stronger and faster engine. Therefore, the belief that satisfying desires will lead to happiness is a false one, and can only cause greed and insatiability. So if happiness is a “lasting” state of well being, shouldn’t it be inherent of something more durable in human nature, and depend less on external incentives?
The way I see it, happiness is in life itself. The Gilbert metaphor of a ‘psychological immune system’ (Gertner, 447) encourages my opinion that the stereotype of
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
Lyubomirsky defines happiness as the “experience of joy, contentment, or positive well-being, combined with a sense that one’s life is good, meaningful, and worthwhile” (184). She challenges the myths that people can find happiness by changing their circumstances and that people either are “born happy or unhappy” (186). Happiness is not something that can be found or something that not everyone can have. People make their own happiness, despite the difficulties they may face. Happiness comes by “choosing to change and manage your state of mind” (185). Lyubomirsky gives cases of people who are happy even though they suffer from losses and setbacks. These are the people whose circumstances should make them unhappy, but their intentional actions bring them joy. She also gives cases of people who have not suffered any major losses but are still unhappy because they may see events negatively and feel helpless before them. Lyubomirsky asserts that “changes in our circumstances, no matter how positive and stunning, actually have little bearing on our well-being” (186). Even though a person’s circumstances may be positive, those circumstances do not make them happy. Lyubomirsky uses a Subjective Happiness Scale to measure happiness, which takes the average of numerical answers to four questions. She argues that in order to become happier, “you need to determine your present personal happiness level, which will provide your first estimate of your happiness
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.
In “Happiness: Enough Already,” Sharon Begley argues that happiness is overrated and it should not always be a priority in your life.
looking at how to minimize pain and not maximize happiness. He starts the article by recounting
Happiness is a euphoric state, it is the light at the end of the tunnel, it is what individuals seek to achieve. Human beings inherently want to be happy. Happiness is unique because it has seven billion different definitions. In his book Immune to Reality, Daniel Gilbert argues that individuals are only as happy as the subconscious function of their brain allows them to be. Additionally, he questions the state of happiness by citing the psychological immune system. The psychological immune system is a subconscious process of the human brain, which favorably rationalizes human decisions whether they were right or not, regardless of outcome it always finds something favorable to take away. In Barbara Fredrickson’s Love 2.0, she introduces the vagus nerve as a biological apparatus to increase loving potential; Fredrickson links higher levels of loving potential to increased overall health. Most importantly, Fredrickson establishes the relationship between love and happiness as an interdependent one, “Having at least one close relationship like this is vital to your health and happiness” (108). Fredrickson believes that humans have the power within them to biologically alter themselves and to shape their own identity. Inversely, Malcolm Gladwell proclaims that human identity is shaped by the environment an individual is subject to in his book The Power of Context. Gladwell affirms that humans have the power to shape their identity, however only by changing the
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
According to the Dictionary, “happiness is the mental or emotional state of well being which can be defined by others. A pleasurable or satisfying experience.”. Of course that’s true, the feeling of happiness is what it’s scientifically defined as, but happiness is much more than that. Happiness could be a certain sound, a smell, even feeling a certain piece of clothing or a thick warm blanket. People spend hours even years trying to work for what they think is happiness. They work for hours to get large amounts of money, but they never find the happiness their looking for. That’s because happiness isn't materialistic, happiness isn't something you can buy with expensive items. Even though some people believe you can buy happiness, that’s
Some people argue that happiness helps make good decisions because happy people strive for the best result. David states, “[Positive emotions] help build vital social, physical, and cognitive resources that lead to positive outcomes and affiliations” (124). David points out that with the right amount of positivity, people make good judgments. The author acknowledges that happiness can have benefits, but she states that too much happiness could hurt human development because the mind does not consider the consequences of an action. Julie Norem, a psychology professor, points out, “’If you’re a pessimist who really thinks through in detail what might go wrong, that’s a strategy that’s likely to work very well for you’” (qtd. in Wallis). She explains
At the end of the day, the affluent are still not satisfied with their wealth or material items. Source D provides a great example. Even though the couple has purchased everything they could possibly want, they still feel “something is missing.” What they are missing is not a tangible object. It is not something one could go to a store and buy. They cannot obtain happiness in a nice little box on a store shelf. There is no price on happiness. Source A believes “happiness is desirable in itself and never for the sake of something else.” Nothing can supplement happiness. True happiness is “something final and self-sufficient.” People with affluenza can never find this happiness through the constant purchasing of more stuff. Happiness is achieved in many different ways for different individuals but not through wealth. For example, the mother in Source I begins to understand this when she becomes older one Christmas. She realizes no matter how many gifts she may receive,
Happiness: a Human Disease -- An Examination of the Allegorical Theme of Existentialism in the Happy Man
There are many distinctive definitions when it comes to the word happiness. Two psychologists, in particular, are thoroughly investigating the science behind this feeling. Barbara Fredrickson, who wrote the essay, Selections from Love 2.0: Love, Our Supreme Emotion, focuses on formulating positive connections with people through micro-moments. She believes that these conscious interactions are beneficial to positive resonance and to our mental well-being. On the contrary, Daniel Gilbert, who wrote the essay Immune to Reality, discusses how our brain exploits the ambiguity of bad experiences and unconsciously “softens its sting.” By doing so, we become immune to reality. Even though Fredrickson believes that accumulating conscious
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.
Our internal world governs our happiness, not conditions put upon us from our external environment or conditions we place on ourselves. To put it another way, our search for happiness is the very reason we’re unhappy (McLeod, 2007). Psychology considers happiness an emotion or mental state and a predictor of how well one’s life is going. Some say that happiness is a choice, and therefore a behavior that one chooses. Happiness is a way of interpreting the world, since while it may be difficult to change the world, it is always possible to change the way we look at it (McLeod, 2007).
When you hear the word happiness, what is the first thing that comes to mind? Do you think of material possessions like designer clothes and accessories, the newest iPhone with the highest possible storage capacity, or a shiny red supercar? Do you think the amount of money you have or your current financial status has an effect on how happy you are? Plenty of college students, myself included, would associate happiness with possessing items like these or just having a lot of money in general. In today’s society, one common belief about social class is that the richer and more money or things that one has, the happier this will make them. This belief is reinforced by countless advertisements we see and hear everywhere, whether that be on