Is happiness what we should be striving for?

[cafeenman]

I read in a recent thread in another forum that happiness is the ultimate thing that humans should try to achieve.

Is that true?

Where does Peace of mind fit in?

[simonm]

I read in a recent thread in another forum that happiness is the ultimate thing that humans should try to achieve.

Is that true?

Yes.

Where does Peace of mind fit in?

Whatever makes you happy...

[cafeenman]

What if my happiness causes another person's suffering?

Edit: What I mean is what if a thing that makes me happy also causes another person to suffer. For example, I just happen to enjoy foreclosing on people's mortgages because I like to see them living in the street.

[simonm]

Cafeenman

What if my happiness causes another person's suffering?

Well, I didn't say that one should pursue happiness by whatever means, to whatever ends.

If, in your pursuite of happiness, others are made unhappy, perhaps you should find another way of achieving happiness?

Then again, it depends on whether you give a damn.

[cafeenman]

Originally posted by simonm
Cafeenman

Well, I didn't say that one should pursue happiness by whatever means, to whatever ends.

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. But part of the question is my assumption that some people do achieve their happiness in ways that are not beneficial to others.

So I'm wondering what the ultimate goal should be. I guess we first have to decide if we're talking about the individual or society. Even if we're talking about peace of mind, there are those who can do bad things and still live with themselves quite contentedly.

Maybe it's just too vague of a question. But whenever I hear the word "happiness" spoken as the if it's the holy grail, it makes me wonder if the pursuit of it isn't the root of a lot of problems - not so much because it is often pursued in the wrong fashion, but because it's the wrong thing to pursue.

[simonm]

Cafeenman

So I'm wondering what the ultimate goal should be. I guess we first have to decide if we're talking about the individual or society.

Society does not get happy or sad. Individuals do. This is about the individual.

But part of the question is my assumption that some people do achieve their happiness in ways that are not beneficial to others.

As I said, there are many ways to achieve happiness. Why must we pursue those ways that lead to the unhappiness of others?

Maybe it's just too vague of a question. But whenever I hear the word "happiness" spoken as the if it's the holy grail, it makes me wonder if the pursuit of it isn't the root of a lot of problems - not so much because it is often pursued in the wrong fashion, but because it's the wrong thing to pursue.

I don't think it is the root of our problems. I truely believe that many people go about it in the wrong way.

People embrace that which makes them unhappy and then wonder why. People are sold things that they are told will lead to happiness but yet only lead to discontentment with one's self (such as religion and materialism).

The problem is that most people don't really pursue happiness. They pursue things which they believe will lead to happiness.

[cafeenman]

Originally posted by simonm
[B]
Society does not get happy or sad. Individuals do. This is about the individual.

This is the only thing you said that I don't fully agree with. I do agree that it is the individual, but the sum of the individuals makes up the society. So at least in my mind you can say the society is happy, unhappy or other although I know I'm actually talking about the top of the bell curve.

As I said, there are many ways to achieve happiness. Why must we pursue those ways that lead to the unhappiness of others?

We don't have to, but some people do because of their own unhappiness or whatever their issues are. Certainly healthy people don't relish in other's misery and misfortune.

I don't think it is the root of our problems. I truely believe that many people go about it in the wrong way.

People embrace that which makes them unhappy and then wonder why. People are sold things that they are told will lead to happiness but yet only lead to discontentment with one's self (such as religion and materialism).

The problem is that most people don't really pursue happiness. They pursue things which they believe will lead to happiness.

I fully agree with this. In my utopia it would be nearly a capital offense to market things with the underlying theme that "You're not good enough." This would include almost anything that is marketed to make you "cooler" or more attractive to the opposite sex, etc.

Whenever someone buys something marketed like that there are a couple things that are going on. First, the buyer has fitting in or self-esteem issues or feels "thats how the game is played." Secondly, the people who use these tactics are rewarded although I don't hold them ultimately responsible. I think the consumer who buys it is responsible. I still don't like those who prey on people using these techniques, but it's up to the consumer to not create the demand.

Honestly, I think people were probably a lot happier when their concerns centered around basic survival and a margin of comfort. Now everyone is miserable and we think that we've advanced. I'm perplexed.

[simonm]

Cafeenman

This is the only thing you said that I don't fully agree with. I do agree that it is the individual, but the sum of the individuals makes up the society.

Soceity may or may not benefit from particular decisions and events that occur but it does not get happy or sad. Individuals do.

You asked what the ultimate goal should be and then said that it depended on whether we are talking about society or individuals. Whilst society may have different goals than individuals, it is individuals who are happy or sad.

Some people say they are doing what's best for "society" as a way of justifying actions that are bad for individuals. However, society doesn't suffer or get sad. Individuals do. We would do well to remember that.

We don't outlaw murder because it is bad for society. It is bad for the individuals who would be murdered.

It is claimed by some that it is better for society that drugs are outlawed. They then use that to justify taking rights away from individuals.

[simonm]

Infact, I shouldn't have even said that society has goals. It doesn't. Individuals have goals.

[cafeenman]

Actually, when I read my reply, I realized I was agreeing with you on that statement. So I think we agree that we pursue happiness the wrong way. But I'm still not convinced that happiness is the ultimate goal.

I don't know why either. Maybe I just think it's an unrealistic goal. I've never really come up with any answers other than what we've already discussed.

At the present, I think the goal that would be the most realistic (although we are far from achieving it) is that people are just content - neither happy nor sad. Then we can shoot for happiness.

[simonm]

I don't really know what you mean when you ask if happiness is what we should be striving for?

What else is there?

Well, I suppose that maybe we can only know happiness if we've known sadness. Perhaps then we should only strive for not being sad?

[cafeenman]

What I meant was on a daily basis is that what our lives should be about? When I say "should" I mean is it the best way to live our lives considering reality?

In my mind, the reality is that we probably aren't going to achieve happiness except for brief moments. We would probably have more of those moments if we weren't trying to achieve them. Pretty much what you said - we aren't happy because we try to achieve things we think will make us happy but don't.

Maybe we should be trying to achieve rational thought and mental health instead which will in turn bring us happiness as a by-product.

Does that explain my question better? I know I'm not getting it across very well as it's hard to define what I actually mean.

[cafeenman]

Here's an example. There was a debate in another forum where someone decided to bash smokers. His contention was that smokers cause health problems for others. The actual research only shows this to be true for people who are around smokers for extended periods - family members, co-workers, and pets. But that breathing the smoke in an outdoor area is pretty much harmless.

Personally I think it's a witch hunt. I'm a smoker and I make almost every concession possible to others. I don't light up around non-smokers unless they're in my home. I go down wind away from people when in public areas. I don't throw my butts on the ground.

He still wasn't happy and demanded the only place I can smoke is in my car.

What he wasn't willing to acknowledge was that his car puts out more deadly toxins in a single trip to work than my cigarette smoke does in a year. But his whole argument centered around my smoke causing his health problems. He didn't want to make any changes in his own lifestyle that would have a much greater affect. He was quick to tell others to change their life styles though - even when it didn't affect him one way or the other.

My point being that his irrational thought is causing him a lot of unhappiness and my willingness to get drawn into it didn't do much for mine.

[Pix]

Happiness is all

If the people around you are happy and you're happy within yourself then I think you have peace of mind

[simonm]

Cafeenman

Maybe we should be trying to achieve rational thought and mental health instead which will in turn bring us happiness as a by-product.

That's not really what I meant. I think that we should be directly pursueing happiness as opposed to pursuing things that we beleive will lead directly, or indirectly, to happiness.

I believe that happiness is merely a state of mind. Ones materialistic circumstances are irrelevant. The secret to happiness, I believe, is realising that we don't have to achieve anything else to deserve happiness. We can just be happy.

That may sound almost too obvious to be worth mentioning but, if you think about it, you may realise that most people won't let themselves be happy because they don't believe they should be.

There was a debate in another forum where someone decided to bash smokers. His contention was that smokers cause health problems for others. The actual research only shows this to be true for people who are around smokers for extended periods - family members, co-workers, and pets. But that breathing the smoke in an outdoor area is pretty much harmless.

That guy is a knob-head. 'nuff said.

[Bonker Gudd]

I'm hoping to achieve happiness by getting so hammered that I can walk around with an idiot grin and no thoughts at all

[cafeenman]

Originally posted by simonm
[B]
That guy is a knob-head. 'nuff said.

I whole-heartedly agree. The point wasn't really about smokers though. It's about the amount of energy something gets in the overal scheme of things. I mean think about some of the stuff people get indignant about.

Do we care that we cover millions of square miles with asphalt? Do we care that we kill off anything that we want to? Do we care about the amount of pollution we put into the environment? Apparently most people don't. But a lot of people like to get up in arms about relatively nothing. I don't think those people are capable of achieving happiness no matter how simple it should be.

I guess I agree that happiness is the ultimate achievement, but again, I don't think it's a realistic goal considering the general state of the human psyche.

[simonm]

I guess I agree that happiness is the ultimate achievement, but again, I don't think it's a realistic goal considering the general state of the human psyche.

Don't worry about other people...

You can't make them happy but you might make yourself happy.

[cafeenman]

Originally posted by cafeenman

I guess I agree that happiness is the ultimate achievement, but again, I don't think it's a realistic goal considering the general state of my psyche.

[simonm]

Originally posted by simonm
...you may realise that most people won't let themselves be happy because they don't believe they should be.

[kedaman]

Simon
If I saw some guy who was being happy, I would ask him why he was being so happy, and he would answer almost certainly mention an event that contented his needs. Some year later, I would ask him, if he is still happy about it, he would look concerned at me and ask why I'm asking him that now (supposely this was quite a trivial thing).

I see some poor children in a third world country get extatic about getting anything for food at all, while children in a welthy family in a welfare country take for granted that they get food everyday. Are they happy about it?
No matter how wealthy you are, could you be happy unless some of your needs actually were contented?

The point I'm making is that your mood isn't a state of mind, it tells you when you have been satisfied/put out of balance, an instrument measuring the derivative of the state of your needs.

[simonm]

kedaman

The point I'm making is that your mood isn't a state of mind, it tells you when you have been satisfied/put out of balance, an instrument measuring the derivative of the state of your needs.

I know what you're saying.

However, has the rich boy who is disatisfied with his dinner unhappy because his needs have not been met or put out of balance? I would say not.

I think that it is easier to achieve a happy state of mind when one's basic survival needs have been met. However, happiness does not equate to your needs being satisfied.

At least, that's what I believe, anyway.

[GlenW]

Kedaman, you're a real bundle of laughs aren't you?

[siyan]

wasn't there a song entitled "All you need is love" or something?

-C

[kedaman]

Simon

Originally posted by simonm
However, has the rich boy who is disatisfied with his dinner unhappy because his needs have not been met or put out of balance? I would say not.

No.. I assume that this rich boy is disatisfied because of some other need, not the primal need of having something to eat. We aren't talking about the same need here simon - maybe this boy is dissatisfied because he doesn't like cooked carrots or soemthing? My argument is valid in context of a need.

The poor boy doesn't care what food he gets as long as he can eat something. This is just an example of how you develope new needs when others have been satisfied.

I think that it is easier to achieve a happy state of mind when one's basic survival needs have been met. However, happiness does not equate to your needs being satisfied.

I disagree, assuming your basic survival needs are permanently satisfied you won't be able to satisfy or dissatisfy those needs anymore, which unables you from making you neither happy or unhappy, you get bored and develop new needs. Find new goals and pursue them. No matter what you do you will not be able to be more happy about something than you get unhappy about it.

At least, that's what I believe, anyway. [/B][/QUOTE]

[simonm]

Kedaman

No.. I assume that this rich boy is disatisfied because of some other need, not the primal need of having something to eat. We aren't talking about the same need here simon - maybe this boy is dissatisfied because he doesn't like cooked carrots or soemthing? My argument is valid in context of a need.

I realise it's not the same need. I would say that the rich boy has not developed new needs, but new expectations. I wouldn't call them needs as they have nothing to do with survival (an arbitary definition, I know, but one that I find useful in this context).

The rich boy's unhappiness is purely down to state of mind and nothing to do with meeting his survival needs.

OK, I can imagine that you might just rephrase your argument with the word "expectation" instead of "need" and argue that it still applies but I don't think so.

Your original point was that we can't just adopt a happy state of mind when our survival needs are not being met. The rich boy doesn't have that excuse. He can learn to be happy with what he's got.

How can happiness ever be achieved if you keep shifting your goal posts. Realising that is the key to happiness.

I disagree, assuming your basic survival needs are permanently satisfied you won't be able to satisfy or dissatisfy those needs anymore, which unables you from making you neither happy or unhappy, you get bored and develop new needs.

Your conclusion here is premised on the assumption that we can only be happy by satisfying needs (be they survival or otherwise). I am suggesting that we can be happy, not by inventing a never-ending list of new needs that we need to satisfy, but by stripping away our "bogus" needs and focusing instead on our state of mind.

[InvisibleDuncan]

I think we should all be striving for the emancipation of Cornwall.

[simonm]

Hapiness is a cigar called Hamlet...

[Fried Egg]

I think we should all be striving for the emancipation of Cornwall.

Hey! Don't think you can slip one past me!!!!

[kedaman]

Simon
You're not going to make it easy for me are you

I would say that the rich boy has not developed new needs, but new expectations. I wouldn't call them needs as they have nothing to do with survival (an arbitary definition, I know, but one that I find useful in this context).

How does survival relate to happyness? I think you are overcomplicating things, I think expectation is used in the context of expecting a supply nessesary to keep a balance.

Your original point was that we can't just adopt a happy state of mind when our survival needs are not being met. The rich boy doesn't have that excuse. He can learn to be happy with what he's got.

You have misunderstood me. First happyness relates to a need, it doesn't nessesarily have to be a primal need - we're not discussing biology but psychology. Second happyness is the reaction to a satisfaction of that need - meaning it is put into balance, once it is satisfied, the need is not active and doesn't induce happiness.

I am suggesting that we can be happy, not by inventing a never-ending list of new needs that we need to satisfy, but by stripping away our "bogus" needs and focusing instead on our state of mind.

My theory says that happiness is paid with unhappiness, and also that stripping off all needs means the end of both happiness and unhappiness - think of dying as an example.

[InvisibleDuncan]

Originally posted by Fried Egg
Hey! Don't think you can slip one past me!!!!

Didn't think it would take you long to turn up. I'd have thought that would get your vote, though.

[simonm]

Kedaman

You're not going to make it easy for me are you.

Not in a month of sundays!

How does survival relate to happyness? I think you are overcomplicating things, I think expectation is used in the context of expecting a supply nessesary to keep a balance.

I am not relating survival to happiness.

I make the distinction between needs and expectations only because expectations can be stripped away and needs can't.

happyness is the reaction to a satisfaction of that need - meaning it is put into balance, once it is satisfied, the need is not active and doesn't induce happiness.

I know what you are saying and it is similar to a theory that I once conceived of regarding the neurology of the brain. My theory stated that anxiety was increased (by the brain) when our biological needs were not being met and decreased when they were being met. I concluded that pleasure was sensation of reducing anxiety (and hence why people get thrills out of danger sports).

However, does pleasure equate to happiness? Pleasure is fleeting but does happiness need to be? Not necessarilly.

My theory of happiness came to me a few years later like a bolt of truth out of the blue. OK, I was on acid at the time , but once I realised it, I couldn't understand how I had never realised it before. I realised that our own minds are the biggest obstacle to our own happiness and constantly set obstacles to achieving this. It was only by truly realising this that happiness can be achieved in a more than fleeting fashion.

[Jack Daniels]

Originally posted by Pix
Happiness is all

If the people around you are happy and you're happy within yourself then I think you have peace of mind

Yup hang around happy people and ppl will wanna hang around you cause your happier, then they become happry and everyones happy !!!

[then stub out the joint if a coppa comes along ]

[info25]

Originally posted by simonm
Cafeenman

I believe that happiness is merely a state of mind. Ones materialistic circumstances are irrelevant. The secret to happiness, I believe, is realising that we don't have to achieve anything else to deserve happiness. We can just be happy.

Just a thought:
One saying that I always remember is "People who don't desire anything will get everything". I think unhappiness is caused because we're unsatisfied with something, and if we don't desire anything, or in other words, we are always satisfied with what we have, it's possible that we'll achieve happiness.

[kedaman]

Simon
Define happyness

I'm not sure if we're talking about the same thing now.

[simonm]

I don't think I can define it but I can tell you that it's spelt like this: HAPPINESS

[rinoaheartilly]

Happiness, happiness the greatest gift that I posses
I thank the Lord I've been blessed with more than my share of happiness

To me this old world is a wonderful place
And I'm just about the luckiest human in the whole human race
I've got no silver and I've got no gold just a whole lot of happiness in my soul
Happiness happiness...

Happiness to me is an ocean tide or a sunset fading on a mountain side
Or maybe a big old heaven full of stars up above
When I'm in the arms of the one I love
Happiness is a field of grain lifting its face to the falling rain
I can see it in the sunshine I breathe it in the rain happiness everywhere
Happiness happiness...

A wise old man told me one time that happiness is nothing but a frame of mind
I hope when you go to measuring my success
That you don't count my money count my happiness
Happiness happiness...
Happiness happiness...

[Jack Daniels]

happiness is dynamic.

[Jack Daniels]

opps i'll go with vicki

[SeaHag]

Its all about God. Ask J4U