How did happiness become the standard for a morally good life?

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

If a person was never happy then his/her life was a complete failure morally?

It seems like people narcissistically use their own happiness to rationalize/justify their own choices. This is evidenced by their condescending, judgemental treatment of those who struggle, suffer, etc., not to mention their complete lack of empathy and compassion.

Maybe reality is too complicated for people and it is easier to see everything in black and white. If you are happy, then you are a good person and you are doing everything right. If you are not happy then you are a bad person, you are doing something wrong, there is something wrong with you, etc. What a simple world we live in!

I see plenty of people who are happy, but I would not want to live like they do. Happiness is deceiving one's self or being deceived by others, maybe? Ignorance is bliss? It is better to be a happy pig than to be an unhappy human, maybe?

"What good does it do to adjust and integrate the self in a culture that is itself sick?" -- Ken Wilber, A Brief History of Everything.

 

[The Antigrrrl]

I avoid people who say " God wants me to be happy!". ( usually right before they do something awful ) No Cupcake, God wants you to be obedient and joyful, happiness is not required.
I think it is all part of the prosperity message stuff anymore " follow God, he wants you to be financially rich" ignoring the whole destitution/ torture / imprisonment etc. of the disciples.
I have heard of studies that show slightly stupider and slightly delusional people are the happiest also......

 

[Eudaimonist]

If a person was never happy then his/her life was a complete failure morally?

No, not necessarily, but that doesn't mean that happiness isn't a desirable goal.

It seems like people narcissistically use their own happiness to rationalize/justify their own choices.

Perhaps, but that doesn't mean that happiness isn't a desirable goal.

Maybe reality is too complicated for people and it is easier to see everything in black and white. If you are happy, then you are good person and you are doing everything right. If you are not happy then you are a bad person, you are doing something wrong, there is something wrong with you, etc. What a simple world we live in!

Perhaps, but that doesn't mean that happiness isn't a desirable goal.

I see plenty of people who are happy, but I would not want to live like they do. Happiness is deceiving one's self or being deceived by others, maybe? Ignorance is bliss? It is better to be a happy pig than to be an unhappy human, maybe?

You know the drill.

Happiness isn't about mindless bliss. The origin of happiness as a standard for a morally good life comes from Greek philosophy, in which happiness means a wise and successful life. This cannot be achieved mindlessly, and it was said that it is "better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied".


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Dave-W]

If a person was never happy then his/her life was a complete failure morally?

I know those who would say that was a complete SUCCESS morally.

Like WC Fields once said: "Everything I enjoy in life is either illegal, immoral or fattening."

 

[Gordon Wright]

Happiness proves nothing, but chronic unhappiness is a warning sign.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

Happiness isn't about mindless bliss.

People bask in illusion and myth. They call it happiness.

If it is not really happiness then what is it?

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

"Life is meant to be enjoyed" sounds teleological.

Life unfolds according to a final cause: enjoyment. If one did a survey of all past and present philosophical systems, what percentage of them would he/she find aligned with the latter statement?

 

[Black Dog]

If a person was never happy then his/her life was a complete failure morally?

That's a new one. Where did you get it from.

 

[Black Dog]

Like WC Fields once said: "Everything I enjoy in life is either illegal, immoral or fattening."

Now that I can agree with!

 

[Ana the Ist]

People bask in illusion and myth. They call it happiness.

If it is not really happiness then what is it?

Why do you think happiness is an illusion?

 

[Hank77]

No Cupcake, God wants you to be obedient and joyful, happiness is not required.

Wow, when did the definition of 'joy' change, must have been when I wasn't looking. Last I knew joy and happy were synonyms.

 

[Eudaimonist]

People bask in illusion and myth. They call it happiness.

If it is not really happiness then what is it?

A neurochemical high. Or just "bliss". I personally don't think that it deserves to be called happiness.

Let me toss this out there. Let's say that someone is hooked up to a machine that induces a neurochemical high. I would not say that this person is "happy", because happiness implies having the sort of life that one may be happy about. The feeling of what we call happiness arises from contemplation of one's life, and happiness in the fullest sense includes the activities about which one has such feelings. The "pursuit of happiness", for instance, is about more than getting jollies, but about creating the sort of life that is worthwhile and experienced in that way.

So, I would call such a machine a "bliss machine", but not a "happiness machine", even if the neurochemicals produced by a happy life are the same.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[The Antigrrrl]

Wow, when did the definition of 'joy' change, must have been when I wasn't looking. Last I knew joy and happy were synonyms.

They are to an extent but joy has a different connotation biblically. The way the world uses " happy" is not quite the same way the bible talks about joy. I hardly see people talking about being happy facing trials and tribulations for the sake of Christ, but they still may be joyful. Happiness is certainly no virtue when a person is doing thing that make God "unhappy".

 

[David4223]

MOD HAT ON

This thread has undergone a cleanup. Please ensure you are treating others with respect and courtesy.

Thank you.

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

If a person was never happy then his/her life was a complete failure morally?

It seems like people narcissistically use their own happiness to rationalize/justify their own choices. This is evidenced by their condescending, judgemental treatment of those who struggle, suffer, etc., not to mention their complete lack of empathy and compassion.

Maybe reality is too complicated for people and it is easier to see everything in black and white. If you are happy, then you are a good person and you are doing everything right. If you are not happy then you are a bad person, you are doing something wrong, there is something wrong with you, etc. What a simple world we live in!

I see plenty of people who are happy, but I would not want to live like they do. Happiness is deceiving one's self or being deceived by others, maybe? Ignorance is bliss? It is better to be a happy pig than to be an unhappy human, maybe?

"What good does it do to adjust and integrate the self in a culture that is itself sick?" -- Ken Wilber, A Brief History of Everything.

Killers, rapist and any bad person can be happy. Are they moral? Probably not. I don't think people that are un happy, Should continue to stay un happy. They need to try to find ways to be happy. Or they are basically wasting away. I feel un happy all the time, so I'm looking into a good habit I could get into. I might need to find a happier job, go to the gym, and walk more. Exercise helps me feel better. But I been lacking the exercising part for few years.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

Why do you think happiness is an illusion?

I did not say that happiness is an illusion.

People bask in illusion and myth and call it happiness.

I asked what they are really experiencing if it is not happiness.

I am not a psychologist. Maybe psychologists and/or sociologists have shown that illusion and myth are necessary for individuals and/or groups to function. But I would argue that people need to recognize illusion and myth and not confuse their benefits with something that should be a goal or a desired permanent state. I would argue that true happiness requires recognizing illusion and myth and adjusting to them wisely, not basking in them.

 

[bhsmte]

I did not say that happiness is an illusion.

People bask in illusion and myth and call it happiness.

I asked what they are really experiencing if it is not happiness.

I am not a psychologist. Maybe psychologists and/or sociologists have shown that illusion and myth are necessary for individuals and/or groups to function. But I would argue that people need to recognize illusion and myth and not confuse their benefits with something that should be a goal or a desired permanent state. I would argue that true happiness requires recognizing illusion and myth and adjusting to them wisely, not basking in them.

How do you determine "true happiness", that applies to other people?

 

[Ana the Ist]

I did not say that happiness is an illusion.

People bask in illusion and myth and call it happiness.

I asked what they are really experiencing if it is not happiness.

I am not a psychologist. Maybe psychologists and/or sociologists have shown that illusion and myth are necessary for individuals and/or groups to function. But I would argue that people need to recognize illusion and myth and not confuse their benefits with something that should be a goal or a desired permanent state. I would argue that true happiness requires recognizing illusion and myth and adjusting to them wisely, not basking in them.

Ummm...you know what? I think I'll just leave you to this one. Enjoy.

 

[Autumnleaf]

Commercials.

 

[Received]

Since when did happiness become the standard? Since the Nichomachean Ethics, for one, and that's hella long before deontology and consequentialism.

Happiness is more than just a feeling; it's a state attained and held for its own sake. When we're happy we're basically content; we're where we want to be, or more precisely we will in such a way as to continually attain the state of becoming we have. Aristotle conceived of happiness as the good of all goods. Now, just because you're happy doesn't mean that whatever character you have is worthy of emulation. The real task isn't with just being happy, because anyone can be happy even for a long stretch of time -- that's why happiness has the slightly ominous morpheme "hap", which means "fortune". The only way that you're going to move beyond happiness in this fortunate sense is through the development of character, character being how you condition your will in a habitlike way.

Why would someone want to act morally according to this theory? Because it's better to have a type of character which involves helping others than to have a type of character that's selfish or immoral. If you were to continually choose selfish actions, you'd develop a type of character that's pretty rotten, and with this character would come all sorts of characteristics that are pretty rotten: you'd probably be impulsive, cold, unforgiving, etc. But if you were to continually choose moral actions (or in a Christian context practice the spiritual discplines like prayer, meditation, study, etc., all of which are requirements for disciples of Christ), you'd develop a type of character that's noble, caring, compassionate, and in a word much closer to happiness than if you were to act otherwise.

Happiness is everything. It's what gives our use of good its meaning. As a commonly used term connoting fortunate nice feelings it's terribly inadequate, but for any ten second contemplation along Aristotelian lines it's a terrible convincing and commonsense concept.