Word
Gems
What is a
man but the sum of his thoughts?
- Mortimer Adler's
- Syntopicon
Essays
Happiness:
Editor's
1-minute essay
Though, as Pascal wrote, we are helpless to avoid seeking happiness, there is
disagreement on what it is.
Despite humankind's seemingly universal need to pursue happiness, Kant almost
despairs of arriving at a definition: "The notion of happiness is so
indefinite," he writes, "that although every man wishes to attain it, yet he
never can say definitely and consistently what it is that he really wishes."
- A general definition of happiness is "the satisfaction
of all our desires."
When a person says "I feel happy," he or she is saying "I feel
satisfied" or pleased -- that which was desired has been gained.
Kant, most eloquently, expands on this. Happiness, to offer true satisfaction,
must not only address all ("extensive") our various desires, but they
must be satisfied with sufficient intensity ("intensive") and proper duration
("protensive").
Further, speaking of individual happiness, Kant suggests that it must be
discovered by exploring personal inclinations. This kind of happiness is something that is
learned over time; that is, we find out what (and who) we like and don't like by
experience.
Other philosophers, such as Aristotle, speak of a different kind of happiness, one
based not on opinions or feelings of the moment, but on our natural desires, ones
that are common to all human beings. Because of the universality of these desires, a
science of ethics becomes possible, addressing what men and women ought to do for
the attainment of happiness.
Happiness is related to the subject of "Good and Evil" (see Editor's
essay); these topics address human desires and deal with the issue of the real
and the merely apparent. People desire many things which they believe
will bring them happiness but, in fact, take them in the opposite direction. When we
pursue the "real" good, we will be desiring that which we ought to
desire, and will be on the path to genuine happiness.
Kant offers a different twist on this old theme. There are some who pursue
happiness no matter what the cost to honor, duty, or morality (think of the villain in the
Star Trek movie, Generations, trying to reach the Nexus); others, more stoically,
emphasize "morality alone" -- neither approach, says Kant, will take one to the
"complete good." These two, dutiful action and purposeful quest for happiness,
must be united to constitute the true summum bonum, the supreme and complete
good. Even the stoic, if not now then in the future, "must be able to hope for the
possession of happiness"; for, without this hope, even the spartan-stoic, his
resources of steel-will spent, will eventually "burn out" in frustration.
But be careful how you mix these two approaches, says Kant. Though a person cannot
hope to be happy without obeying what he calls the moral law, he or she must not submit to
duty in order to gain happiness; in other words, happiness cannot be bought like
a loaf of bread, even with the currency of morality or good conduct. This kind of
humanitarian service, a morality motivated by gain -- even by the prize of happiness -- is
tainted with selfishness and, ironically, becomes an act of immorality. As such, happiness
can only be attained as by-product of something else.
It was Aristotle who gave us the term, summum bonum, the supreme and
complete good. But is this highest form of happiness a single good or a full array
of goods?
Though the person who says "I feel happy" is really saying "I
feel satisfied," that satisfaction usually doesn't last very long. There is a great
difference between "feeling happy" at a given moment and "being happy"
for a lifetime -- a difference between a "good time" and a "good
life." (However, lest anyone misunderstand, a "good life" will offer ample
opportunity for a "good time.")
Boethius, in a famous saying, expresses that happiness is "a life made
perfect by the possession, in aggregate, of all good things." Adopting this
definition, happiness becomes not a particular good but the sum of all
goods.
The summum bonum is the final and great good and, as such, is sought for
its own sake, not for the sake of something else. If we ask someone why he or she wants to
be happy, it will be difficult for them to respond with anything other than something like
"I just do"; we want to be happy as an end in itself, not just to get something
more or something else.
- True happiness is the final end of all of our
desires.
Some teachers have seen happiness as a state of spiritual peace, a coming to rest
wherein all desires are quieted. There is debate as to whether such a state of bliss is
even possible in this life. Most theologians answer negatively here with Augustine
claiming that even our earthly happiness, at its best, is merely the "solace of our
misery" compared to the joys of the next life.
As such, happiness, many teachers maintain, can never be achieved in this life
but, at best, is only in the process of being achieved.
Dr. Adler asserts:
- "On earth and in time, man does not seem able to come to
rest in any final satisfaction, with all his desires quieted at once and forever by the
vision of perfection which would deserve Faust's Stay, thou art so fair!"
|