quote:

Originally posted by Jake Benson I didn't know quite understand how to answer these questions from a "personal" standpoint, because to me "personal" includes psychology & physiology (both developed through evolution).

what do you have to answer with if not your evolutionarily developed psychology and physiology?

___________________
People who own my ass: Citric Acid, Boomer187, Tribu, Sand Leaper,
Jackson, venomX, jamie, Renegade, Konjin, Akridrot, Miss Bliss.
Psy-T - Down The Rabbit Hole (400minute long acid set)

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T Bleh, you guys really aren't into ancient philosophers, are you?

Sorry to say that I know basically nothing of philosophy from earlier than the 16th century, but I guess I'll give it a try seeing as you asked me to:

quote:

Is the ultimate goal of a human (from a personal stand point, not an evolutionary one) to be as happy as he can be?

I don't think humanity has any inherent "goals", though we do have inexorable, naturalistic inclinations. Depending on how you define "happiness", I would argue that humans may be naturally inclined to seek it out, but that it may not be necessary in order to live a fulfilled life. I mean, would Edgar Allen Poe have been such a brilliant author if he wasn't a chronically depressed alcoholic? Would these attention-whores on myspace have any purpose to existence if they weren't offered the opportunity to stand on their virtual soap-boxes and whine about how difficult their angst-ridden lives are? Do you think either of these types of people would have sacrificed their raison d'etre for the feeling of what we call "happiness"? Would you, personally, sacrifice your intellect, say, to experience the happiness felt by the blissfully ignorant? If the answer is no, in any of these cases, surely we would have to accept that there are occasions where a human being is prepared to sacrifice happiness in favour of a different goal?

quote:

If so, what is happiness and how can it be attained?

Again, it depends on how you define happiness. Schopenhauer believed that happiness was negative: that is, that happiness wasn't something tangible in itself, but merely the absense of pain. Personally, I would argue that this is a pretty good definition of what we may call "contentment" rather than "happiness" and is, at least, a pretty good place to start. I would take it almost as a given to say that we cannot be happy if we are in pain, so the state of happiness would therefore be dependent on the absense of the feeling of pain.

However, when we use the word "happiness", I think there is a "euphoric" connetation there that isn't really encapsulated by mere "contentment". Happiness is generally taken to be the feeling of a certain emotion, not the absense of a sort of emotion. Put simply, I would argue that reaching "happiness" of this sort is largely out of our control: this sort of happiness is dependent on the presense of certain neurochemicals (if I have my physiology right, here) and the right sort of external stimuli. All other things being equal, I would argue that this sort of happiness is fleeting and contingent - take away the chemicals and the stimuli and the feeling will disipate. The contentment may remain, but I doubt the euphoric emotions will.

In this sense, I would argue that happiness is a transient mental process (like any other emotion, really), not an existential mode of being. It is possible to be existentially "content", I think, but never really existentially "happy". While we can always strive for "happiness", I don't think there's really any way of making it a permanent state of mind.

quote:

If you did not answer that to live a virtuous life is the way to happiness; are morals a relavant part of the equation that can affect your attainment of happiness (directly)?

They can and do. We are congenitally conditioned to feel shame and guilt when we commit moral wrongdoings and these emotions, I would argue, are an impediment to happiness. If you can come to control or ignore your conscience then it may be somewhat different, but so long as your actions are consciously at odds with the inclination of your consciencious will (what the existentialists might call "inauthenticity") then I think it would be pretty difficult to be happy.

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade I don't think humanity has any inherent "goals", though we do have inexorable, naturalistic inclinations. Depending on how you define "happiness", I would argue that humans may be naturally inclined to seek it out, but that it may not be necessary in order to live a fulfilled life.

Can't our natural inclinations to avoid pain and to seek pleasure be considered a quest for happiness? or more likely than a quest for fulfillment at the very least?

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade I mean, would Edgar Allen Poe have been such a brilliant author if he wasn't a chronically depressed alcoholic? Would these attention-whores on myspace have any purpose to existence if they weren't offered the opportunity to stand on their virtual soap-boxes and whine about how difficult their angst-ridden lives are? Do you think either of these types of people would have sacrificed their raison d'etre for the feeling of what we call "happiness"?

But, was Poe acknowledged back when it mattered to him most? Although the result of his misery was favorable to us, what was it for him? I'm doubtful that it was fulfilling, though I have no proof in mind other than my knowledge of human nature.

And as to the attention-whores, generations that perceeded them seemed to manage just as well without that "purpose", not that they themselves seem fulfilled by it as is, as evidenced by the neverending use of the magical words: "I'm bored."

As for sacrificing their raison d'etre (though quite contraversial whether what we deem as such is truly that) for the sake of happiness, i believe under most definitions (of happiness) they would.

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Would you, personally, sacrifice your intellect, say, to experience the happiness felt by the blissfully ignorant? If the answer is no, in any of these cases, surely we would have to accept that there are occasions where a human being is prepared to sacrifice happiness in favour of a different goal?

I don't believe the blissfully ignorant's happiness is the same as my own happiness, therefor, I would not.

Although on the other hand, I would sacrifice my intelligence for my happiness.

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade when we use the word "happiness", I think there is a "euphoric" connetation there that isn't really encapsulated by mere "contentment". Happiness is generally taken to be the feeling of a certain emotion, not the absense of a sort of emotion. Put simply, I would argue that reaching "happiness" of this sort is largely out of our control: this sort of happiness is dependent on the presense of certain neurochemicals (if I have my physiology right, here) and the right sort of external stimuli. All other things being equal, I would argue that this sort of happiness is fleeting and contingent - take away the chemicals and the stimuli and the feeling will disipate. The contentment may remain, but I doubt the euphoric emotions will.

Why and how will you take those chemicals and stimuli though? It's not as if we're dealing with a sterile lab where man is at his lonesome; Au contraire, we're dealing with a world full of such stimuli and a human capable of producing said chemicals in abundance (not as to be constantly euphoric, but with the right circumstances, to be constantly in some level above contentment).

___________________
People who own my ass: Citric Acid, Boomer187, Tribu, Sand Leaper,
Jackson, venomX, jamie, Renegade, Konjin, Akridrot, Miss Bliss.
Psy-T - Down The Rabbit Hole (400minute long acid set)

On to the next question: how do we measure a man's life?

...As for why we want to measure it, our ego gives us the smallest reason, and that's big enough for most

___________________
People who own my ass: Citric Acid, Boomer187, Tribu, Sand Leaper,
Jackson, venomX, jamie, Renegade, Konjin, Akridrot, Miss Bliss.
Psy-T - Down The Rabbit Hole (400minute long acid set)

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T Can't our natural inclinations to avoid pain and to seek pleasure be considered a quest for happiness? or more likely than a quest for fulfillment at the very least?

In a biological sense, these inclinations are more a quest to stay alive and reproduce, but on a higher-level I suppose that they could be seen as necessary for the attainment of "happiness", if not "fulfillment".

quote:

But, was Poe acknowledged back when it mattered to him most? Although the result of his misery was favorable to us, what was it for him? I'm doubtful that it was fulfilling, though I have no proof in mind other than my knowledge of human nature.

I'm pretty sure he was a fairly well-known author in his day, though whether or not he was as "acknowledged" back then as he is today, I'm not too sure.

Nonetheless, it does beg the question: would you rather live a happy life of mediocrity, or a miserable life of brilliance? From my own perspective, if I had a choice between being happy and being remembered as one of the best authors of my day, I'd be more inclined towards the latter to be honest. Given the choice, I think many other people would choose genius ahead of happiness as well.

quote:

And as to the attention-whores, generations that perceeded them seemed to manage just as well without that "purpose", not that they themselves seem fulfilled by it as is, as evidenced by the neverending use of the magical words: "I'm bored." As for sacrificing their raison d'etre (though quite contraversial whether what we deem as such is truly that) for the sake of happiness, i believe under most definitions (of happiness) they would.

I honestly don't think they would. I doubt that many of these emo-types are actually congentially depressed (that is, I believe their problems are mental rather than physical), so I'm sure they could become more happy if they actually put a bit of effort into it. Suffice to say, though, it's much easier to be a miserable bastard who blames all his problems on everyone else, than to actually take some initiative to solve these problems themselves. Take away their angst and their cliquey, self-reinforcing cyber-communities and what do these people have left? Do you believe that they would sacrifice everything about what they have chosen to be in exchange for what we call "happiness"? From my perspective, I would argue that they get more fulfillment from acting depressed than they ever would from being happy.

quote:

I don't believe the blissfully ignorant's happiness is the same as my own happiness, therefor, I would not. Although on the other hand, I would sacrifice my intelligence for my happiness.

Quite true, but I think you've touched on something there: there aren't many who would give up the despair of a genius for the happiness of an idiot, which again begs the question as to whether "happiness" can really be considered the ultimate goal of human beings?

quote:

Why and how will you take those chemicals and stimuli though? It's not as if we're dealing with a sterile lab where man is at his lonesome; Au contraire, we're dealing with a world full of such stimuli and a human capable of producing said chemicals in abundance (not as to be constantly euphoric, but with the right circumstances, to be constantly in some level above contentment).

I'm not sure if you've misunderstood me here, but we really don't have much say about which neurochemicals are slushing through our brain at any given moment: it's an inert physical process that occurs without us even realising it. As for external stimuli, we can choose to engage ourselves in situations that are likely to positively stimulate us, but we don't have much say in how these different stimuli affect our emotions to begin with. In otherwords, if trees make me happy then I can choose to take a walk in a forest to cheer myself up, but I can't really "choose" to make trees make me feel "happy" in the first place.

Does that make sense?

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade I'm pretty sure he was a fairly well-known author in his day, though whether or not he was as "acknowledged" back then as he is today, I'm not too sure. Nonetheless, it does beg the question: would you rather live a happy life of mediocrity, or a miserable life of brilliance? From my own perspective, if I had a choice between being happy and being remembered as one of the best authors of my day, I'd be more inclined towards the latter to be honest. Given the choice, I think many other people would choose genius ahead of happiness as well.

so you'd rather suffer while you're alive for the sake of being remembered for an undetermined period of time (the benefits of which you will not reap, since it comes after your death) over enjoying the daily grind and not being remembered among strangers?

i must disagree here, seize the moment

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade I honestly don't think they would. I doubt that many of these emo-types are actually congentially depressed (that is, I believe their problems are mental rather than physical), so I'm sure they could become more happy if they actually put a bit of effort into it. Suffice to say, though, it's much easier to be a miserable bastard who blames all his problems on everyone else, than to actually take some initiative to solve these problems themselves. Take away their angst and their cliquey, self-reinforcing cyber-communities and what do these people have left? Do you believe that they would sacrifice everything about what they have chosen to be in exchange for what we call "happiness"? From my perspective, I would argue that they get more fulfillment from acting depressed than they ever would from being happy.

yet what they moan about is lack of happiness - if you take away all obsticles in their way, will they still go back to acting depressed for the sake of fulfillment? (ignoring force of habit, etc)

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Quite true, but I think you've touched on something there: there aren't many who would give up the despair of a genius for the happiness of an idiot, which again begs the question as to whether "happiness" can really be considered the ultimate goal of human beings?

i'd argue that it is our ego that wouldnt allow us to 'sell ourselves short' so to speak; we have our own image of happiness in mind, which is often different to most other people's image, and probably very different from the idiot's image; even if it generates the same responce in us - to do this exchange would be a betrayel upon ourselves.

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade I'm not sure if you've misunderstood me here, but we really don't have much say about which neurochemicals are slushing through our brain at any given moment: it's an inert physical process that occurs without us even realising it. As for external stimuli, we can choose to engage ourselves in situations that are likely to positively stimulate us, but we don't have much say in how these different stimuli affect our emotions to begin with. In otherwords, if trees make me happy then I can choose to take a walk in a forest to cheer myself up, but I can't really "choose" to make trees make me feel "happy" in the first place. Does that make sense?

well, we can via extensive meditation (among other methods i presume) we can override inert physical processes and take control over them.

___________________
People who own my ass: Citric Acid, Boomer187, Tribu, Sand Leaper,
Jackson, venomX, jamie, Renegade, Konjin, Akridrot, Miss Bliss.
Psy-T - Down The Rabbit Hole (400minute long acid set)