Is Happiness Really Happiness?
In his article, Life Satisfaction, Ethical Reflection, and The Science of Happiness, author Dan Haybron argues that being satisfied with one's life is necessary or rather important, but that it does not matter as much as one might think. Specifically, the argument is centered on the idea that happiness and its definition is varied depending on the individual. Moreover, another argument made is that what humans consider as happiness is in fact, satisfaction with life. This paper discusses Haybron's claims and whether there is merit in his argument.
Haybron continues by stating that most philosophical research and arguments have put forth that happiness relies significantly on a series of satisfactory occurrences (103). Yet, there is substantial reason to believe that one can be happy in their welfare (feeling) state regardless of satisfactory experiences. Happiness is essentially a totality view or rather a byproduct of a series of experiences that one has gone through.
The writer agrees with Haybron’s view that happiness is inclusive of both pleasure and pain, and not solely satisfactory experiences. This would suggest that painful or excruciating experiences do often lead to positive outcomes. Haybron’s rationale is that there is a blessing in the chaos. Essentially, that one cannot be happy without a combination of the bitter with the sweet. To this end, “it is not just having a plurality of good moments, but having a good life. We [need] to see our lives as more than just the sum of their parts. The pains suffered in boot camp, or in pursuit of some other achievement might be seen as a good thing in the context of one's life as a whole" (105). So why then has the term satisfaction been so closely linked as meaning someone is indeed happy?
The explanations for this are numerous. The common thought according to Haybron is that because one is satisfied with a particular experience or feeling, this is a contention that they are happy. This, from the perspective of the writer couldn't be further from the truth. One can be satisfied with an experience and still be unhappy. For example, an individual may believe that by obtaining a job making six figures will provide and offer them happiness. The individual may end up obtaining said job and then come to realize that while they were initially satisfied with the job, it has not made them happy.
Conversely, they come to discover that the journey to obtaining the job was much more satisfactory than actually being offered the position. This is why it has often been said that the journey offers more contentment than the destination. Haybron reasons that individuals give attention to experiences that do not necessarily suggest happiness, but rather satisfaction – and this is where much of the problem rests upon in terms of where the intertwinement and interchangeability comes from (105). It seems that society has provided a kind of norm or rule discourse that most have followed. This is why most philosophical arguments related to happiness tend to weave the concept of satisfaction and align them together.
Another argument that Haybron makes in the article is that happiness is believed to be something different to each individual. This in itself has also caused the problem with the two terms because one individual may consider themselves to be happy if they experience both positive and negative occurrences, while another may believe that they can only be happy if they indeed have positive or pristine happenings in their lives. These individuals reject the idea that pain produces happiness as well. Of course, there is validity in both arguments. The former is what Haybron contends, while the latter is what most philosophers offer as the true essence of happiness. The writer, however, questions the rationale behind only accepting the positive and subsequently, rejecting the negative because what is life without the ups and downs, valleys and mountaintops, etc.? In other words, how can one come to know what happiness is without enduring harsh and hard times? Haybron writes that happiness is essentially subjective rather than objective (105). This is why there are so many varying perspectives on both the term, happiness, and satisfaction. So in effect, while Haybron makes two claims in the article, they in fact stem from the same argument – that satisfaction and happiness are two different concepts even though they have been proverbially rolled into one and have come to be accepted as the same.
The argument that most philosophers have made regarding happiness only consisting of satisfactory experiences is a plausible one because individuals have not only come to believe that life should only include pleasure, but also because how can one be satisfied with painful experiences? What rationale or reasoning could ever suggest that pain is fruitful and satisfactory? As noted earlier, and by Haybron, happiness is the sum of an individual’s life experiences, not only solitary or series of experiences as most contexts suggest.
Conclusion
In order for those that believe satisfaction and happiness are the same to even consider Haybron’s argument, they must come to understand the purpose behind pain, which is an entirely separate argument in itself. Yet, there is merit in both Haybron’s view and the majority outlook on happiness. The writer believes that it is easier for most to reject the Haybron perspective as opposed to accepting it because then that would mean that a significant shift in their beliefs would need to take place, and change is difficult for most people.
Works Cited
Haybron, Dan. "LIFE SATISFACTION, ETHICAL REFLECTION, AND THE SCIENCE OF HAPPINESS." Journal of Happiness Studies 8 (2007): 99-138. Web. 1 May 2016. <doi: 10.1007/s10902-006-9006-5>.
