Happiness

[Rhiannon]

I blame CS Lewis.

[Bramble]

It might just be me but blessed and bliss have different connotations now.

This made me think of a Mary Oliver poem, probably because I've spent most of today idling in buttercup fields. Blissful and, in its way, blessed too.

I don't know exactly what a prayer is.
I do know how to pay attention, how to fall down
into the grass, how to kneel down in the grass,
how to be idle and blessed, how to stroll through the fields,
which is what I have been doing all day.
Tell me, what else should I have done?
Doesn't everything die at last, and too soon?
Tell me, what is it you plan to do
with your one wild and precious life?

[Rhiannon]

Yes, that's my kind of bliss.

I often feel I wasted too much time, but I can always console myself that there has never been a day when I haven't stopped to look at the clouds and observe the trees, get down close to look at the wild things.

[Jack Knave]

But it's the fact it means different things that makes it a good topic for discussion.

But this thread was started by a Mod who split it off from another and if you read the OP it is primarily about morality with happiness as a possible factor to this. So the thread is wrongly named.

And so, it would seem to be that morality is a social contract where happiness is probably a sub clause in it and not the main factor to its construction. 

[torridon]

For £300 she's probably quite good at it actually.

Are you able to undercut that price ?

[ekim]

Yes, that's my kind of bliss.

I often feel I wasted too much time, but I can always console myself that there has never been a day when I haven't stopped to look at the clouds and observe the trees, get down close to look at the wild things.

Just some questions then.  Are you able to continue being blissful on those occasions after closing your eyes to those stimuli?  Are you able to continue to sustain that blissfulness despite the pleasant stimuli being absent and other less pleasant have replaced them?  If so, then its source might be within you and less to do with the clouds, trees etc. and is accessible without the stimuli.

[torridon]

Maybe happiness is like a dream; something we catch glimpses of from time to time but we cannot live in it for long, for it soon becomes unhappy.  Rather, the real deal, what motivates us, what gets us out of bed in the morning, apply for that new job, is seeking after happiness. Maybe it is the journey that really counts, not the destination.

[ekim]

Or maybe it is the source which enlivens and empowers the journey and where the source and the destination, the Alpha and the Omega, are the same.

[Bramble]

Yes, that's my kind of bliss.

I often feel I wasted too much time, but I can always console myself that there has never been a day when I haven't stopped to look at the clouds and observe the trees, get down close to look at the wild things.

Then it doesn't sound to me as though you have wasted your time. As children we learn that we must measure up in some socially approved way to make our lives meaningful or successful, although those who taught us this were almost certainly themselves victims of the same fiction.

'In the landscape of spring there is neither better nor worse,
The branches grow naturally, some long, some short.'

[2Corrie]

Re Happiness:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4a5vaIsaxB8

[Rhiannon]

Just some questions then.  Are you able to continue being blissful on those occasions after closing your eyes to those stimuli?  Are you able to continue to sustain that blissfulness despite the pleasant stimuli being absent and other less pleasant have replaced them?  If so, then its source might be within you and less to do with the clouds, trees etc. and is accessible without the stimuli.

It's an interesting question. Certainly not often, I would say. But not never either.

[Rhiannon]

Then it doesn't sound to me as though you have wasted your time. As children we learn that we must measure up in some socially approved way to make our lives meaningful or successful, although those who taught us this were almost certainly themselves victims of the same fiction.

'In the landscape of spring there is neither better nor worse,
The branches grow naturally, some long, some short.'

Thank you, Bramble, although I've never much cared for social approval.

[Shaker]

Bramble's quote and the Alan Watts quote that currently forms your signature teach the same idea - look to the natural world as a guide.

[Dicky Underpants]

I blame CS Lewis.

Rhiannon

Yes, he does have a curiously idiosyncratic way of describing what he means by "joy" in his autobiography "Surprised by joy". Waffles on about a sense of "clouds and northern immensities" (not that contemplating such things is devoid of poetic charm).

As for happiness, Shaw just about hit the nail on the head:

"But a lifetime of happiness! No man* alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth.”  (Man and Superman)

*I suspect he probably thought this might apply to women too, if pressed on the point.

[Jack Knave]

Rhiannon

Yes, he does have a curiously idiosyncratic way of describing what he means by "joy" in his autobiography "Surprised by joy". Waffles on about a sense of "clouds and northern immensities" (not that contemplating such things is devoid of poetic charm).

As for happiness, Shaw just about hit the nail on the head:

"But a lifetime of happiness! No man* alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth.”  (Man and Superman)

*I suspect he probably thought this might apply to women too, if pressed on the point.

I presume a life time of happiness would be essentially death (or a lack of life as we know it) as it would preclude all meaningful forms of experience.

[Rhiannon]

Yes, this is what I think. We wouldn't know what happiness is (not that I'm sure we've pinned it down to beyond 'not unhappy') without knowing other states of being. It'd be meaningless.

And given that everything is impermanent accepting happiness also means accepting unhappiness.

[Rhiannon]

Rhiannon

Yes, he does have a curiously idiosyncratic way of describing what he means by "joy" in his autobiography "Surprised by joy". Waffles on about a sense of "clouds and northern immensities" (not that contemplating such things is devoid of poetic charm).

As for happiness, Shaw just about hit the nail on the head:

"But a lifetime of happiness! No man* alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth.”  (Man and Superman)

*I suspect he probably thought this might apply to women too, if pressed on the point.

For me it's just 'CS Lewis, urgh.'

[Rhiannon]

Bramble's quote and the Alan Watts quote that currently forms your signature teach the same idea - look to the natural world as a guide.

Yes, each one (one of anything) is unique, special and completely small and insignificant, and perfect for whatever it is.

[ekim]

Yes, this is what I think. We wouldn't know what happiness is (not that I'm sure we've pinned it down to beyond 'not unhappy') without knowing other states of being. It'd be meaningless.

And given that everything is impermanent accepting happiness also means accepting unhappiness.

The quote from Shaw could just as easily read "But a lifetime of unhappiness! No man alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth.”
Perhaps it depends upon one's personal definition of 'happiness'.  For some it might be more about sustaining a conscious harmonious balance amidst the vicissitudes of life, rather than seeing it as an attraction to happiness and avoidance of unhappiness, like surfing the waves of life.  It becomes more like a live centring process rather than finding a dead centre or chasing after extremes.

[Enki]

Don't know about anybody else, but I consider happiness as applying to a state of mind, often activated as a result of extraneous factors. Hence I can achieve a certain feeling of happiness by succeeding in something in particular that I have done, or that others close to me have done, or by a combination of factors which might give me a sense of well being, or a combination of factors which might involve absence of worry or anxiety. I find it to be rather an ephemeral state which can change according to all sorts of circumstances. Although generally I would consider myself a moderately happy person, I'm not sure that some exact state of happiness actually exists.

It seems to me that the mind is in a constant state of flux and we use the word happiness as describing a relative state of mind at a particular time in comparison to the relative state of unhappiness that we may feel at other times. Also I think that it is quite possible that what can make us feel happy at one particular time may not necessarily do so on another occasion.

Having said that, it does seem to me that happiness is something that is more likely to be experienced the more that one is at ease with oneself and others.

Just some musings: Feel free to comment or criticise.

[Jack Knave]

Don't know about anybody else, but I consider happiness as applying to a state of mind, often activated as a result of extraneous factors. Hence I can achieve a certain feeling of happiness by succeeding in something in particular that I have done, or that others close to me have done, or by a combination of factors which might give me a sense of well being, or a combination of factors which might involve absence of worry or anxiety. I find it to be rather an ephemeral state which can change according to all sorts of circumstances. Although generally I would consider myself a moderately happy person, I'm not sure that some exact state of happiness actually exists.

It seems to me that the mind is in a constant state of flux and we use the word happiness as describing a relative state of mind at a particular time in comparison to the relative state of unhappiness that we may feel at other times. Also I think that it is quite possible that what can make us feel happy at one particular time may not necessarily do so on another occasion.

Having said that, it does seem to me that happiness is something that is more likely to be experienced the more that one is at ease with oneself and others.

Just some musings: Feel free to comment or criticise.

I would designate the term joy to what you described in the first paragraph; something that is acquired by events and things etc. And my definition of happiness would be an overall appraisal of things so far, how one feels about one's life to date. This however ebbs and flows over time as the underlining psychological currents impose their influence upon one's conscious state.

[Enki]

I would designate the term joy to what you described in the first paragraph; something that is acquired by events and things etc. And my definition of happiness would be an overall appraisal of things so far, how one feels about one's life to date. This however ebbs and flows over time as the underlining psychological currents impose their influence upon one's conscious state.

Interesting ideas, Jack. Joy, to me, is an extremely positive emotion which has an attribute of exhilaration attached. I would rather say that what I described is nearer to satisfaction than joy. Perhaps, when I talk about feelings of happiness, satisfaction is part of this mix.

I agree that such feelings ebb and flow however, often according to circumstances or even according to the chemical make up of the brain at any given time.

[Rhiannon]

There's a school of thought that we are responsible for our own happiness. Whilst there will be things that will always be a huge challenge to that, there are people who live happy lives in the most difficult circumstances. Here I'm reminded yet again of Frankl's experiences in the concentration camps. Maybe that is what happiness is - finding meaning in life whatever the external circumstances are that we find ourselves.

It bothers me that happiness should be seen as a reactive state to circumstances and events.

[Bramble]

It bothers me that happiness should be seen as a reactive state to circumstances and events.

This is at the heart of much Buddhist teaching, because any kind of well-being that is contingent on external factors is necessarily transient and unreliable. So we have the idea that some sort of inner state is achievable that will put an end to all unsatisfactory states of mind. Ultimately, this has to mean something along the lines of Krishnamurti's 'secret' ('I don't mind what happens'), which is a state of no preferences ('The perfect way is easy except it avoids preferences' as one Zen poem has it). It's not difficult to see the problem here, that it would be very difficult to care about anything if we genuinely didn't mind what happens. Stones might not care but living things have interests. Perhaps some sort of compromise is possible, a state of relative equanimity that enables one to ride the ups and downs of life with less stress, but it seems to be in human nature to insist on unachievable goals. Whatever we mean by happiness, for most mortals it must depend on both internal and external factors.

[Rhiannon]

Yes, in order to care for something one has to be prepared to accept its loss, for nothing is permanent. And to do something one cares about involves being prepared to fail. That is the heart of it for me - the happiness comes from living fully even with its inevitable losses and failures. I regret far more the things I didn't try because of fear of it not happening and that to me is a terrible waste. So it's not so much that I don't care what the outcome is, but that not giving life my best shot hurts more.