An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right

What Is Happiness?

This is not a subject I usually write about, but it is one I often think about — and this reflection by Simon Critchley, a philosophy professor at the New School for Social Research in New York City, rang so true for me that I thought I would share it.

Here is a taste:

What is happiness? How does one get a grip on this most elusive, intractable and perhaps unanswerable of questions?

I teach philosophy for a living, so let me begin with a philosophical answer. For the philosophers of Antiquity, notably Aristotle, it was assumed that the goal of the philosophical life — the good life, moreover — was happiness and that the latter could be defined as the bios theoretikos, the solitary life of contemplation. Today, few people would seem to subscribe to this view. Our lives are filled with the endless distractions of cell phones, car alarms, commuter woes and the traffic in Bangalore. The rhythm of modern life is punctuated by beeps, bleeps and a generalized attention deficit disorder.

But is the idea of happiness as an experience of contemplation really so ridiculous? Might there not be something in it? I am reminded of the following extraordinary passage from Rousseau’s final book and his third (count them — he still beats Obama 3-to-2) autobiography, “Reveries of a Solitary Walker”:

If there is a state where the soul can find a resting-place secure enough to establish itself and concentrate its entire being there, with no need to remember the past or reach into the future, where time is nothing to it, where the present runs on indefinitely but this duration goes unnoticed, with no sign of the passing of time, and no other feeling of deprivation or enjoyment, pleasure or pain, desire or fear than the simple feeling of existence, a feeling that fills our soul entirely, as long as this state lasts, we can call ourselves happy, not with a poor, incomplete and relative happiness such as we find in the pleasures of life, but with a sufficient, complete and perfect happiness which leaves no emptiness to be filled in the soul. (emphases mine)

This is as close to a description of happiness as I can imagine. Rousseau is describing the experience of floating in a little rowing boat on the Lake of Bienne close to Neuchâtel in his native Switzerland. He particularly loved visiting the Île Saint Pierre, where he used to enjoy going for exploratory walks when the weather was fine and he could indulge in the great passion of his last years: botany. He would walk with a copy of Linneaus under his arm, happily identifying plants in areas of the deserted island that he had divided for this purpose into small squares.

On the way to the island, he would pull in the oars and just let the boat drift where it wished, for hours at a time. Rousseau would lie down in the boat and plunge into a deep reverie. How does one describe the experience of reverie: one is awake, but half asleep, thinking, but not in an instrumental, calculative or ordered way, simply letting the thoughts happen, as they will.



opinions powered by SendLove.to

3 Responses to “What Is Happiness?”

  1. Marlowecan says:

    Kathy's post is eye-catching…an informative pause amid the faux outrages of politics.

    It is easy being happy in a lovely setting, floating beneath clear skies…but what about in the real workaday world?

    Daniel Gilbert, in “Stumbling on Happiness” (Knopf 2007) has a fascinating take on this.

    To illustrate the complexity of the topic, Gilbert contrasts the lives of the late 19th century U.S. labour organizer Adolph Fischer – who was unjustly tried, convicted, and executed for his efforts to advance the cause of workers in his era – and his contemporary George Eastman who developed the revolutionary Kodak camera, became incredibly rich and famous, developed a humanistic management style that gave unprecedented benefits and advantages to his workers, and ultimately distributed among them one-third of the stock in his company.

    Fischer, moments before his unjust execution in 1887, surprised everyone by his last words: “This is the happiest moment of my life.” In contrast, the wealthy, respected humanitarian Eastman was so unhappy with his own life that he killed himself.

    Gilbert asks: ” So why did a poor man who had accomplished so little stand happily at the threshold of his own lynching while a rich man who had accomplished so much felt driven to take his own life?”

    I don't accept Gilbert's ultimate argument entirely — his approach is more cognitive psychology than philosophy — but his book illustrates how incredibly complex such a seemingly simple thing as happiness is. Neither the “pleasant life” (having material goods and leisure) nor the “good life” (using “signature strengths every day to produce authentic happiness and abundant gratification”) seems to be ultimately sufficient to ensure happiness.

    As Kathy's post suggests, happiness remains elusive…

  2. kathykattenburg says:

    Fischer, moments before his unjust execution in 1887, surprised everyone by his last words: “This is the happiest moment of my life.”

    That's like Sidney Carton in “A Tale of Two Cities.” :-)

  3. nick12321 says:

    Hi Kathy,

    I just posted a definition of happiness on my blog (which aims to be a more “scientific” definition), please check it out at http://www.spreadinghappiness.org/2009/08/what-…

    Comments are very much welcome!

© 2003-2011 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Mode Equity