Topics Happiness

Question Much of philosophy seems to be concerned with one's world view and the stemming pursuit of happiness through various means, but is there any reason to strive for happiness? Other than the fact that we all want it, just because humans want it, is that the only reason we strive for it? Because, if so, there are other things that we are built do which we should theoretically strive for, is not our desire for happiness just as valid? Is there any reason not to live in pain, other than the fact that it creates unpleasant memories? Is that not a rather weak reason for existence (simply to create pleasant memories or because that is what we have evolved to do)?

Accepted:
February 4, 2008

Comments

Some philosophers have argued that happiness is the ultimate aim of everything we seek to do, not because we are programmed in that way, but because it is only rational to aim for something if we think it is going to have some sort of result in terms of happiness. I suppose that is not a bad way of telling the difference between people who are mad and those who are not. The former often do things which we just cannot link with any conception of happiness, while the latter behave in ways we can understand. As I am writing this response I am eating an apple, and if someone were to ask me why, and I replied because I dislike eating apples, it would be difficult to know how to understand why I am then doing it. You suggest that it is rather weak to prefer something that makes you happy rather than something painful, and that the difference is to be understood in terms of a distinction in memories. But it seems to me that there is nothing "weak" about my decision now to eat an apple, given that I like apples and I am hungry, as opposed to sticking a knife in my hand, which would not only produce painful memories, but also pain itself.

I am not at all sure of your conclusion. If existence has a reason, then happiness has some role to play in it, surely. That does not mean that one has to spend one's life entirely devoted to securing personal happiness, but it does mean that this should play some part in that life. It is worth remembering that many of the experiences that make us happy are far more direct than just reflecting on memories. Similarly with pain. We don't need any additional reasons to strive for happiness, although we might need some reasons to show why what we are doing is in fact linked with our conception of happiness. You might call such reasons weak, but you would need to suggest some plausible alternatives and see if they could replace happiness in our approach to life.

The ancient Greeks are among those who are often said to claim that happiness is the "ultimate aim" of human life, but one reason scholars have insisted that this is misleading is indicated to some degree in the question here. The actual word in Greek that is usually translated as "happiness" is eudaimonia, and scholars now argue that we should understand this not as a subjective experience, but as an objective state of the person--scholars have suggested "well-being" or "human flourishing" as more accurate translations. In other words, for the Greeks, the ultimate aim is something more like being healthy than like feeling happy. Just as the experience of pain may sometimes be required for a healthy life, it may also be required for one to live a eudaimÇn life, so we should not suppose that what these philosophers endorse is the opposite of pain, or the (mere) pursuit of pleasure or subjective satisfaction. Of course, one would expect that a human being living in a way we would describe as "flourishing" would also enjoy a substantial degree of subjective satisfaction. But a drug addict given unlimited access to his favorite drug might experience equal--perhaps even greater!--levels of subjective satisfaction than people living well might experience, for full human lives also include pain, grief, and other subjective "negatives." To put it another way, to live the best possible human life, one must (at the right times and in the right ways, and to the right degrees, etc.) sometimes experience such subjective negatives. Pain felt when it is right and appropriate to feel pain is a part of the eudaimÇn life. Those who are incapable (or too stoned!) to feel grief when grief is appropriate do not lead enviable lives, and we would not wish such conditions on ourselves, our friends, or our children.

If we frame the question this way, "What is it for a human being to do well, to live a life that is the sort we would regard as choiceworthy and would wish for ourselves, our friends, or children?" then I think it will be clearer that we would not necessarily think of "happiness" as our main aim, unless we have a very enriched sense of the word in mind. Lying on a warm beach makes me happy--so does playing with kittens--but I wouldn't count such things as prividing a main aim for human life.

At any rate, I am thus sympathetic with the questioner who wants to know what's supposed to be so great about happiness. I would propose framing the question I gave above, and whatever is the answer to that question is what we may reasonably regard as our main aim.