What's so bad about being happy?

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 11:57 am

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:05 pm

It can make others unhappy.

Carl G · Post by **Carl G** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:25 pm

It leads to unhappiness.

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:00 pm

sschaula wrote:It can make others unhappy.

If one became happy through ethical means, why would it make anyone unhappy except the mixed-up, mean grouches who want everyone to be as miserable as they are (rather than be happy also).

Carl G wrote:It leads to unhappiness.

How? Ethical happiness leads to more ethical happiness.

Haha · Post by **Haha** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 7:40 pm

Happy, happy, joy, joy!!! Who said that happiness is bad?? Even cartooncharacters know better: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxj2zfXGr4Q

Perhaps Dexter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2w0KG3kOZFU is best at showing the difference between cerebral prowess and 'in the moment-airyness'.

There's nothing bad about happiness, let nobody tell you otherwise!!

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:57 pm

What is happiness, exactly?

sue hindmarsh · Post by **sue hindmarsh** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 9:09 pm

-

What's "ethical happiness"?

-
Sue

Haha · Post by **Haha** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 9:24 pm

What is happiness, exactly?

Good question. Happiness is what is left when all distractions are gone.

What distractions, you ask? Trauma, frustration, desire, me, you, them, thought, death, life, addiction, affliction, basically everything you invent so you don't have to deal with the emptiness within.

DWBH!

Carl G · Post by **Carl G** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 9:33 pm

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
Carl G wrote:It leads to unhappiness.
How? Ethical happiness leads to more ethical happiness.

Happiness and unhappiness are the up and down of the same emotional rollercoaster. The idea is to transcend this amusement park ride.

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 11:45 pm

What is happiness, exactly?

Generally, happiness is when you put on a smile and laugh and joke around. That's what being happy is.

Actually feeling happy usually goes alongside of that. Some people smile, laugh and joke in order to stay happy and make others happy. Some do those things only when the feeling of happiness comes.

That's usually when nothing is bothering them...like stress from the various things in life..workload, wife and wampum. Also, when a person gets something which is helpful to their enjoyment of life, they can feel happy.

Some people unconsciously choose to always be glum. Some people consciously choose to always be chippy. Most fall somewhere in the middle: glumpy chums. At times sad, and at times glad.

The wise doesn't fall anywhere on there, but it can be said that he is at both extremes at the same time, all the time. Always looking at things truthfully (unlike a cheery person), yet always not being bothered by the truth of things (unlike a downer sort of person). The best way to describe the state of the sage is - "free".

Free from being confined to smiles, laughter and jokes....workload, wife and wampum...relying on external objects to be happy...

The amusement park ride.

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 11:50 pm

If one became happy through ethical means, why would it make anyone unhappy except the mixed-up, mean grouches who want everyone to be as miserable as they are (rather than be happy also).

You mean, if I donated 10 bucks to charity because I got satisfaction out of it and so did the charity...then what would be wrong with that? Nothing. That's a good way to live your life.

Does your ego not thirst for anything more, though? Something like truth and understanding? Wisdom?

I don't think anyone in their right mind would say to a budding philosopher, "Don't do things which make you happy and others happy." It's just: where does your focus lie? In this happiness game, or in figuring it all out?

Do you feel fulfilled having not fulfilled your hunger for knowledge?

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:30 am

What is happiness without sadness? What is love without hate? One can not exist without the other. If you promote one you necessarily promote the other.

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:43 am

Dan asked:

What is happiness, exactly?

It is a feeling that provides mellow energy somewhat above contentment, it provides focus, and is a state distinctly lacking in pains, despair, restlessness, dissatisfaction, or distraction.

Sue asked:

What's "ethical happiness"?

Happiness from ethical means - such as happiness from being on the correct path (working successfully to accomplish a goal that is beneficial to mankind or the environment), achieving a good goal (completing a book or having cleaned the house), or something that is personally rewarding without harming another and could possibly benefit others (making the choice to love all people).

Ethical happiness tends to motivate people to accomplish more, therefore it would seem wise to me if people used ethical happiness as a tool.

Carl wrote:

Happiness and unhappiness are the up and down of the same emotional rollercoaster.

Unethical happiness is the rollercoaster ride. It is false happiness. Examples are becoming happy by causing others to become unhappy. Cheating someone out of something or putting someone down might give a false happiness as in "Ha-ha, I won and you lose" but hollow victories like that come back as pain.

Scott wrote:

Always looking at things truthfully (unlike a cheery person), yet always not being bothered by the truth of things (unlike a downer sort of person).

Being unmoved leads to not moving (sloth). If I were totally unmoved, I would not be typing to you, I would not be doing what I need to do to pay the bills, I would not pay the bills, do upkeep on my house, shower, brush my teeth - anything. Is that the sign of a sage? To just regard Reality as it is what it is, and remain immobile until death - which would be reasonably soon unless someone found this "sage" and stuck a feeding tube in her.

Scott wrote:

where does your focus lie? In this happiness game, or in figuring it all out?

What if figuring it all out is part of the happiness game?

Scott wrote:

Does your ego not thirst for anything more, though? Something like truth and understanding? Wisdom? ...Do you feel fulfilled having not fulfilled your hunger for knowledge?

Thirsting for something more like truth, understanding, and wisdom is part of ethical happiness as long as one is on the right path. The anticipation of getting more feeds the happiness, feeding the drive to stay on the path. If one finds herself on the wrong path and having received so little truth and so much falseness that she doubts her ability to recognize truth, she lands in despair. One does not have to have fulfilled one's hunger for knowledge to feel happy, but only to be on the right path. And there is always more out there to know, and more ways to grow wiser. It is not possible for a human being to know everything or to be complete in his or her wisdom. Thinking that one has obtained all the wisdom that there is would be a delusion, and a dangerous delusion because it stops the growth of the soul.

Haha · Post by **Haha** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:50 am

Happiness and unhappiness are the up and down of the same emotional rollercoaster. The idea is to transcend this amusement park ride.

Did that happen for you? If so, how are you feeling?

relying on external objects to be happy...

I am happy without relying on external objects, and found that rather freeing. Life is good when you don't think about it!!

What is happiness without sadness? What is love without hate? One can not exist without the other. If you promote one you necessarily promote the other.

No, that is not necessarily so. Happiness is the default-state of being when there is nothing to distract you from happiness!!

DWBH!!

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:12 am

Haha wrote:I am happy without relying on external objects, and found that rather freeing. Life is good when you don't think about it!!

True happiness must come from within. Relying on external objects for happiness is false happiness and can easily lead to disappointments.

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:16 am

Elizabeth argued,

Being unmoved leads to not moving (sloth). If I were totally unmoved, I would not be typing to you, I would not be doing what I need to do to pay the bills, I would not pay the bills, do upkeep on my house, shower, brush my teeth - anything. Is that the sign of a sage? To just regard Reality as it is what it is, and remain immobile until death - which would be reasonably soon unless someone found this "sage" and stuck a feeding tube in her.

A sage may move. I didn't say "all sages sit still until they die". I don't know what sages do. But what I do know is that sages are aware of reality. What they do after becoming aware...who knows. One would think that they'd probably starve to death...

What if figuring it all out is part of the happiness game?

That's what I was saying.

Thirsting for something more like truth, understanding, and wisdom is part of ethical happiness as long as one is on the right path. The anticipation of getting more feeds the happiness, feeding the drive to stay on the path. If one finds herself on the wrong path and having received so little truth and so much falseness that she doubts her ability to recognize truth, she lands in despair. One does not have to have fulfilled one's hunger for knowledge to feel happy, but only to be on the right path. And there is always more out there to know, and more ways to grow wiser. It is not possible for a human being to know everything or to be complete in his or her wisdom. Thinking that one has obtained all the wisdom that there is would be a delusion, and a dangerous delusion because it stops the growth of the soul.

It is true that there's always more to learn...but that's knowledge. Wisdom is something else. Learning takes place in delusion, and wisdom is the knowing of delusion. When the things that people aren't capable of learning the totality of are all seen to be false, then there's nothing more for a philosopher to learn, wisdom-wise. Make sense?

If I am dreaming, there are infinite things I could do and experience and learn about in the dream...yet when I wake up and all of those things are seen as a dream, is there really actually anything to learn then?

It's a dangerous delusion to think you know it all...that's correct...but the sage's wisdom is at its full capacity. There's nothing dangerous for that soul.

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:51 am

Hey, Ha-Ha, Here's the right link for Happy-Happy, Joy-Joy (I used to really enjoy watching Ren & Stimpy)

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:59 am

sschaula wrote:When the things that people aren't capable of learning the totality of are all seen to be false, then there's nothing more for a philosopher to learn, wisdom-wise. Make sense?

No. It is impossible to know that all of what one can not learn the totality of is false unless one learns the totality of it all, which I believe you agreed was impossible for a mortal to do.

Haha · Post by **Haha** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:58 am

Thank you Elizabeth, that was hilarious!!

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:56 am

Elizabeth,

Instead of saying no, as if you knew everything, open your mind to the possibilities of what I said. You could learn something.

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:01 am

Let me rephrase...

Scott wrote:

Make sense?

My answer:
No, it doesn't make sense to me. (reason why it doesn't make sense to me was given).

If you can clarify your position to me, please do.

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:21 am

I'll restate it.

When the things that people aren't capable of learning the totality of are all seen to be false, then there's nothing more for a philosopher to learn, wisdom-wise. Make sense?

You can learn about calligraphy and cars...those types of things...and there will always be more to learn. That's knowledge. The type of stuff you learned in school...factoids etc. Stuff that makes you intelligent. Stuff you can talk about. "Did you know the square root of blah blah blah is blah blah blah!?"

Wisdom has nothing to do with that stuff. It transcends those things. If those things were the clock, wisdom would be taking it apart to examine what makes it tick. Then you don't fall for the illusion of time.

A poor example but whatever. If you don't understand what I'm saying now, perhaps you need to work some more on your intelligence before moving onto such things as wisdom.

My point? Don't say things like "you can never stop learning, it's impossible" when you haven't stopped learning yourself.

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:26 pm

The little areas - clocks, calligraphy and cars as examples, are not even wise to learn all of. Information overload of useless information and a waste of time. The broader things, logical progression, critical thinking, these are skills that can be mastered. Telling the difference between truth and falseness - how to do that is a skill that can be learned but application in all areas requires knowing everything about all of the little areas, at least as they come up. Knowing what is the most important thing in life for each individual - to know what is best one must select from all of the options. One may have the best option available without knowing all of the options, but one can not know that is the best without knowing all of the options.

What if the most important thing for all people is something that has not been discovered yet? The one who has already decided that he knows everything he needs to know will never know the most important thing.

What if he decides he knows everything he needs to know, but some of what he "knows" is wrong? What if the knowlege he has, he gained on a skewed sample? What if he does not recognize the effect he has had on the quality of the input he received?

Scott, I get it that wisdom is what is behind all things. like a common thread. Another bad example, but it's like federal law as opposed to state law or corporate policy.

you wrote:

My point? Don't say things like "you can never stop learning, it's impossible" when you haven't stopped learning yourself.

shortly after writing:

Instead of saying no, as if you knew everything, open your mind to the possibilities of what I said. You could learn something.

Don't you see the contradiction that you even participated in stating?

NLPRN · Post by **NLPRN** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:35 pm

Scott,
Generally, happiness is when you put on a smile and laugh and joke around. That's what being happy is.

I admit this made me chuckle. It may have made me....:)

It appears there are several different (though related) issues here. I believe, being happy is a momentary, generally empirically observable emotional state or existence and happiness (used in the general context), understood as a concept to help define the former. I find nothing inherently wrong in being happy. The problem arises however in that to be happy, one must accept the other faces of such an emotion (pun unintended), such as "being not-happy", "unhappy", "depressed" etc.

If I lived in a magical world soley under my control and could choose being happy eternally, I would without hesitation choose it. In the empirical world, however, I find that to be happy is a taken risk with an inevitible downside. There may be available a better analogy, but similar to jumping out of a plane without a parachute one must eventually come back down. The emotional fall may not happen at this moment. It may not happen for some time, maybe years but for the majority it is inevitable. For the emotionally unprepared, the landing may be exceedingly rough. For the unfortunate, they may continue to land repeatedly from a single jump.

To summarize, the former cannot be attained without eventually accepting the latter and its siblings (frequently the so-called emotional baggage). I can find no fault in being happy, just as I find no fault in the jump from the plane. The landing is the concern. Would I unequivocally accept being happy/happiness if guaranteed zero deviation? Certainly.

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:15 pm

NLPRN wrote:I find that to be happy is a taken risk with an inevitible downside.

For me, the downside is inevitable if I do not intentionally put happiness into my life like it is nutrition. Allowing myself to stop applying the gas of happiness and allowing myself to stay in neutral too long rolls me right down to the bottom of the hill, off the road, and into the ravine.

Everyone is made a little differently. I now see that perhaps for some, indulging in happiness has a price. For others, happiness is a requirement for survival.

LPRN wrote:

The problem arises however in that to be happy, one must accept the other faces of such an emotion (pun unintended), such as "being not-happy", "unhappy", "depressed" etc.

Being not-happy, unhappy, or depressed can occur without the benefit of happiness. Disposing of happiness does not dispose of depression for everyone. In fact I suspect for many, disposing of happiness only unleashes a truly evil beast.