Philosophy - Pursuing Happiness

Think Outside The Box

Ever read something, heard something or had a thought enter your mind for you to disregard as too ridiculous to be true, only to find years later you are drawn to that very idea?

For thousands of years man has been evolving and thinking.  He has been passing on weird and wonderful thoughts that our personal fabric of life has us accepting, disregarding or yearning to know more about.

Being taught about the concept of reincarnation as a school-child intrigued me, but it was not a philosophy I could absorb and take into my very being.  Yet now I am happy to acknowledge previous lives and am determined, similarly like Hindus and Buddhists, to escape that very cycle of rebirth.  Within a year of my eldest daughter's birth I watched her commune with the unseen and within months of the birth of my youngest daughter I came to believe, from observing unlearned behaviour, she was an old soul.  Interestingly these two children (out of five) were unplanned.  


It may appear as though I lean towards Eastern philosophy.  In fact I  have begun to embrace both Eastern and Western thought, just as I embrace emotion and rationale (seen generally as feminine and masculine traits respectively), ego and higher self,  and physical and the metaphysical realities.  My belief takes a dualism approach (a state of two parts) which, through balance, leads to monism (a state of "oneness", of unity, of interconnectedness).  

Let us take a peek at wisdom through the ages and across the continents.  In this chapter we are looking at:

Pursuing Happiness

Many philosophers discuss the idea of hedonism, their ideas vary and consequently result in different types.  Socrates (c.469-399BC) states (through Plato c.429-347BC) that we are all hedonists: aspiring to maximise our pleasure and minimise our pain.  He saw pleasure as good and pain as bad.  In his view this is not hedonism in the sense of pleasure for one at the expense of others, or an indulgence of immediate pleasures without considering long term consequences.  In fact it is the opposite as Socrates believed that via knowledge we could be both virtuous and happy, and that bad is only committed through ignorance.  He publicly encouraged people to regularly scrutinise their lives philosophically. 


Moving on to the not-so-distant past we have Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) advocating correct moral behaviour through collective happiness.  Quoting from the above link: Bentham’s greatest happiness principle states that actions are immoral if they are not the action that appears to maximise the happiness of all the people likely to be affected.  His main slant for measuring pleasure for the individual was through the aspect of pleasure's intensity, duration and quantity.  The quality of the source of the pleasure was largely ignored due to its subjective nature, this is shown in Hayden's "You Kant Make It Up" example of Dan Brown (highly successful present day author) versus William Shakespeare (literary legend).  Bentham's student John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), however, argued for the quality aspect of pleasure.  He differentiated quality into lower and higher pleasures: lower pleasures which satisfy our basic physical needs being the animals we are (such as food and sex - and, a note from your Devi: sometimes enjoyably coupled) and higher pleasures, assumed as uniquely human, which satisfy our minds, (such as enjoyment of the opera, poetry, art, friendship and virtuousness).  This view had been brought about due to Mill suffering a period of mental illness as a young man.  He believed it was through the higher pleasure of reading poetry by William Wordsworth that lifted the depression.

For those of you interested in mental health issues, in particular depression, there are biological, psychological and social aspects of the condition.  Depression nowadays is treated (or should be) according to all these factors.  The NHS (British National Health Service) can prescribe medications and refer to talking therapies; exercise, proper nutrition and sleep hygiene are all encouraged; and, a sufferer's support networks should be looked into.  Mill would actually have benefited from a combination of his "higher and lower pleasures". As he discovered, occupying the mind is incredibly beneficial, but dependent upon the severity of the depression, this may not be an immediate possibility.

Mill was not the first philosopher to advocate higher pleasures.  Epicurus (341-270BC) placed greater value on intellectual pleasure over and above physical pleasure.  Happiness, in his view, was measured by the absence of pain (especially mental), the moderation of physical desires and the cultivation of friendships.  He took a broad look at life and recognised that some instantaneous pleasure pursuits later developed into pain (such as a heavy consumption of alcohol or food) and therefore should be avoided.  Having suffered much ill-health Epicurus rationalised that experiencing physical pain was a lesser evil than experiencing mental anguish because physical pain was of the present whereas mental anguish could revile time in the form of past hauntings, present psychological trauma and fear of the future.  


Not all hedonism emerges overtly.  Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) has suggested that benevolent acts are not as selfless as they first seem.  In fact they too can be hedonistic for they meet the desires and needs of such charitable people.  These acts are grounded in self-interest. You may like to note this can be linked to the article of co-dependence on my Bibliography page if benevolence requires reward/praise/affirmation in its hedonistic pursuit.  On the opposite side of this paradoxical coin Ayn Rand (1905-1982) described selfishness as a virtue.  She (yes finally a female voice in this male dominated area) subscribed to the egoist* view of the right to pursue one's own happiness, motivated by one's own rational interests and desires.  Ayn was not interested in desires driven by whims or emotions, but desires through the faculty of reasoning.  


When one acts according to their own interests and desires, this selfishness is only negative when it incurs the sacrifice of others to the self.  In some small way in the world of dating we can infer the negative connotation from profiles of people stating something on the lines of "I want someone to make me happy".  No person can make another happy, it has to come from within.  We have to take the responsibility of our own happiness.

*Egoism is not to be confused with egotism - the self-inflating of one's own importance.

According to Siddhartha Gautama (b.6th century BC), known as The (supreme) Buddha, nothing is permanent and as such all is transitory:  pleasure may lead to pain, success may lead to failure or dissatisfaction, and life leads to death (which then leads to rebirth). Happiness is only a fleeting state as life is suffering.  We have no control over these things but we can learn to control how our mind reacts*.  Gautama composed his Eightfold Path as the route to end all suffering (including the cycle of rebirth) with the attainment of Nirvana.  This lifestyle choice, even even two and a half millennia later, can assist the integrated development of knowledge, and moral and emotional behaviours.


*I learned many years ago that you cannot change the past but you can change how it affects your present.  A few years ago I attended several meditation sessions at my local Buddhist centre.  It is something I would happily do regularly should my work pattern ever permit it.  All faiths are welcome.  In a world which is fast-paced and often chaotic, this is a haven of tranquillity. 

So what is the message here?

I am of the opinion it is perfectly acceptable to have hedonistic beliefs, ie: to seek pleasure for ourselves with the minimum amount of pain.  Like Epicurus I would suggest you look at the bigger picture and hence consider future consequences.  A lifestyle of vice such as gluttony or promiscuity may initially be fun, but eventually could have severe health implications.  I do not believe Socrates was wrong when he declared we are all hedonists (even those amongst us who are altruistic and/or benevolent).  However,  since we are not all as virtuous as Socrates would have us believe (even after acquiring knowledge), consideration should be given to the way pleasure is sought.  My advice would be to seek pleasure for ourselves but where we may also achieve pleasure for others, at the minimum of expense to all concerned.  Although immeasurable this can magnify or prolong our pleasure; consider when you have made someone laugh or prevented them from feeling pain, did you not notice your pleasure receptors swell?


Let us put a modern twist on things: you are in a marriage where sex is but a distant memory.  Your relationship with your partner is more like a business relationship: you both deal with the financial and household chores and are even polite over breakfast, but gone are the days of bodice-ripping.  You join a dating site, one which endorses intimate encounters - you desire the pleasure of another person's body upon yours.  The instant pleasures are obvious should you successfully meet a like-minded person, but are you up for the possible long-term consequences?  Consequences such as a traumatic end to the marriage, disputes over child arrangements, and disruption of relationships with close friends and extended family.  Could you not have sought pleasure through the seduction of your own partner, seeking what once thrilled the pair of you?  If the marriage cannot be revitalised then communicate with your partner as to whether it has any value continuing.  Your partner may actually surprise you in also wanting the release from the marital bond, hence seeking numerous intimate encounters becomes an option without the burden of deceit. Quite clearly this latter action follows the premise of: seek pleasure for ourselves but where we may also achieve pleasure for others, at the minimum of expense to all concerned.