This Is Water And Six Myths About Happiness Summary

This is Water, was a commencement speech given by David Foster Wallace at Kenyon College in 2005. Ever since this speech has been given it has become well known. Because of the length, it can be hard to read through the speech while trying to understand the whole idea of it. Wallace fills the speech with stories, examples, and vivid ideas while trying to convince these college graduates how to view life in a positive perspective. While this speech is packed full of ideas he manages to give it in a way outside of the norm for commencement speeches. Yet still gets all the information to the graduates and anyone else who listens to it.

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

I believe that one of the ultimate questions that all members of the human species asks is ‘How can I find happiness?’ and reflected in this question is a desire to find a happy, fulfilling, quality life. Many people try to find such happiness through their careers, material possessions, and all manner of other pursuits. What a large portion of these people do not realize is that happiness and the elements necessary to achieve a quality life may not come from place, position, or possession but from attitude. In both Gilgamesh by Stephen Mitchell and Sunny Chernobyl by Andrew Blackwell, the reader can see these ideas explored in great detail.

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.

The author of “This is Water”, David Foster Wallace, uses the anecdote of the wise old fish and the younger fish to show us the importance of being aware of our surroundings. At the end of the speech when Wallace states “This is water” again it is trying to remind us that life is what you let it to be.

“What the hell is water?” “This is Water” was originally given as a speech to college students before it was published in essay form. David Foster Wallace, in his essay “This is Water”, addresses the importance of awareness and perceptiveness of others. He believes this and proper education can help people become well-adjusted to the world around them. He adopts a humorous, personal, and important tone in order to accomplish his rhetorical purpose.

Many people tend to become frustrated with their daily lives and start to have a negative mindset of blaming other people for their problems. In David Foster Wallace’s speech, “This is Water,” he informed the audience of the importance for everyone to know they have a “natural default-setting,” which is the automatic way that a person feels they are the center of the universe and that negative situations are other people’s fault. He also discussed the importance of trying not to act in this “natural default-setting”, and try to think of problems that other people have to go through in their lives. The main purpose of Wallace’s speech was to persuade the audience to fight the urge of staying in their natural default setting to prevent frustration in a person’s daily life.

In “This is Water” Wallace speaks from his own experiences in order to help others; he went through depression before finally hanging himself in 2008. One should not think of this as contradicting his points, though. This act shows that Wallace, too, was human, and capable of mistakes. Furthermore, he wanted people to have better lives than he did, and he believed they can do so by following his advice.

Mankind must by this time have acquired positive beliefs as to the effects of some actions on their happiness; and the beliefs which have thus come down are the rules of morality for the multitude, and for the philosopher until he has succeeded in finding better. That philosophers might easily do this, even now, on many subjects; that the received code of ethics is by no means of divine right; and that mankind have still much to learn as to the effects of actions on general happiness, I admit or rather earnestly maintain.

Joel Kupperman in Six Myths about the Good Life: Thinking About What Has Value evaluates that humans as a whole want more comfort and pleasure in life as he it “may represent a tendency that is wired into normal human nature” (Kupperman 1). Through the explanation of pleasure as well as its arguable counterpart, suffering and the discussion of their values in addition to the counterargument of hedonic treadmill, Kupperman’s views about the role of pleasure in living a good life can be strongly supported and evaluated.

Happiness: a Human Disease -- An Examination of the Allegorical Theme of Existentialism in the Happy Man

The famous philosopher Ralph Waldo Emerson once stated that “To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment.” The world is full of people who are conformists as well as people who stand for themselves and follow their own values. Emerson explains that by being yourself you are already part of something great. However, the question still lingers: Which is the real cause of genuine happiness? There have been many claims argued by various sources, such as Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, Ursula Le Guin’s The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, Shirley Jackson’s The Lottery and Sherry Turkle’s TED Talk titled “Connected, but alone?”. All have come to a consensus

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.

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.

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