Happiness as the ultimate purpose of human life

Patulia

If you think about it, everything we do in our lives has as ultimate purpose to bring us personal happiness. This can be said of things like "eating your favorite food" or "hanging out with your best friend" but it can be valid also for things that don't benefit you directly, like "cooking a nice meal for your friends " or "giving a present to your mom for her birthday", since by seeing them happy you would be pleased as well. But can we say the same thing about something that makes us sad or causes us pain while benefiting another person? For example, parents would usually be willing to sacrifice for their kids, to do anything in their power to make them happy and to protect them from pain and suffering, since seeing a smile on their children's face would heal any emotional or physical scar they got. But doesn't that mean that they are receiving a personal reward from it? If they didn't feel pleased after having sacrificed for their children, would they still do it? If their kids are sad, they are sad as well, if their children are happy then they'll somehow smile again. It's crazy if you think about it and I'm not entirely sure if it's just me overthinking, but maybe we are animals that instead of survival instinct are pushed by the ultimate desire to be happy, and just like a mama bear would do anything in her power to protect her offspring in order to guarantee her species' survival, we eat, socialize and sacrifice so that our life doesn't become a depressed, regretful and lonely existence in which happiness is only a distant dream.

Terrapin Station

If you think about it, everything we do in our lives has as ultimate purpose to bring us personal happiness. — Patulia

That's simply one of those things where you're basically saying that you can make whatever moves would be necessary to interpret anything that way if you want to interpret it that way.

Kloptra

Actually, even if hedonism is indeed a coherent philosophy, I really doubt that for most people, "everything we do in our lives has as ultimate purpose to bring us personal happiness".

People often give more importance to some moral and ideological values than their personal happiness, even when these values will most likely not impact their personal happiness. I could give the example of veganism (for someone why adores meat), but you might say people just do it because they personnaly suffer from animal cruelty (which is absurd, because saving a cow out of billions shouldn't really change their mind...)

I have a way better example, and it is a thought experiment. Imagine some scientists offer you to put yourself in a machine, which would guarantee you happiness for the rest of your life (simply by injecting dopamine into you and food so that you don't die). They could even make you hallucinate that you're living in a (very realistic) world they're simulating especially for you, in order to maximize your personal happiness.

Would you get into the machine ? I definitely would not, and I think many people wouldn't eithier, because I value "truth" over happiness.

Patulia

I definitely would not, and I think many people wouldn't eithier, because I value "truth" over happiness. — Kloptra

I wouldn't either, because I value truth as well and I wouldn't give up truth to have happiness. If you are someone who cares about believing the most true things as possible and the least false things, than this would be your personal source of happiness. If you're not, then maybe you would try the machine.

I could give the example of veganism (for someone why adores meat), but you might say people just do it because they personnaly suffer from animal cruelty — Kloptra

Exactly, they *suffer* from animal cruelty. If they didn't suffer from a cow being butchered as much or even more than from giving up meat, they wouldn't be vegan. They are giving up a certain amount of happiness derived from eating a juicy steak to pursue the greater happiness that comes from thinking that a cow's blood is not on their hands (even though the cow was killed, anyway). They don't realize it, but that's what is happening.

JosephS

I'm skeptical with how the principle is posed:
"If you think about it, everything we do in our lives has as ultimate purpose to bring us personal happiness. "

Take the father of 7 who recently drowned trying to save his children from a riptide. His reported last words were to 'forget me, save my kids'.

Did drowning bring him personal happiness? As he struggled to survive, did he experience some sense of transcendent joy which overrode the agony of succumbing to the water? He may not even have been aware of his children's state of safety or whether his sacrifice would lead to their rescue.

Or perhaps he was a fool for his sacrifice?

If we take the principle from a grand perspective that this man, irrespective of the agony or suffering that he experienced lived his last moment to a standard which, if he could review it outside the moment, would bring him happiness, I guess it may be considered true. Requires some mental gymnastics to get there.

Personally, I find the construction rather fatuous. Closer might be 'peace' rather than 'personal happiness'. Even peace has it problems as a righteous life involves struggle. Struggle brings stress, heartache and pain. At this point, I don't find comfort with any single principle which adequately and neatly encapsulates our purpose here.

Pantagruel

"It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinions, it is because they only know their side of the question."

John Stuart Mill

Kloptra

I wouldn't either, because I value truth as well and I wouldn't give up truth to have happiness. If you are someone who cares about believing the most true things as possible and the least false things, than this would be your personal source of happiness. If you're not, then maybe you would try the machine. — Patulia

I don't think you get my point.

Yes, of course, I take some pleasure in knowing the truth and (accurate) knowledge could be considered a "personal source of happiness".

Still, I have absolutely no doubt I would be way, way happier if I got into the machine (which is devised to maximize my happiness).

But even aware of this fact, I still don't want to get into it at all, because I'm positive that happiness is not "the ultimate purpose of human life", and I'm so deeply convinced about it that I am willing to purposely trade happiness for truth.

Deleted User

↪Patulia

We need a definition of happiness. But right off the bat we do things to avoid pain, or unhappiness. And parents would die to save their children, which does not increase their happiness, since they are dead.

But I think happiness is not what many people seek. I think they seek to express themselves, for example, even if this leads to more pain and unhappiness. I know artists who suffer their art, not just suffer for their art. Now there are positive things they are seeking to experience, but I don't think the word happiness is right. I think they feel like this is the right expression of their bodies and selves, regardless of what it feels like on the scale of happiness, unhappiness. It's something else. Like animals may have their niches and habits and thrive in some way there. Perhaps they might be happier somewhere else, livng as a human child, with human parents, less fear of predators. But I think their lives would be improvrished. Just as taking a hedonistic happiness focused heuristic for me would lead to a life that is improvrished, even if happier. I am nto chasing a mood, much of the time, but myself and what I truly want to do. Not because what I truly want to do makes me happy, but becuase, there, that is me, being me. A sense of rightness.

Possibility

↪Patulia

I think that people, whether they recognise it or not, are driven to increase awareness, connection and collaboration. This is what leads to the greatest sense of purpose in our lives - regardless of our personal happiness, suffering or survival. In my opinion, it encompasses our pursuit of ‘truth’ as well as the expression of an artist, a parents’ risk to save their child, etc.

Patulia

Thanks to all of you for the interesting perspectives and pieces of information you have provided me with! I have just realized that the word "happiness" is not appropriate for this context and that I was looking at things in a way that was too superficial.

I also have one question: in what branch of phylosophy should this discussion be placed? Like, what's the place in the world of philosophy for the "Philosophy of happiness"? And finally can you suggest me any articles or books to read that you find particularly useful to understand this topic? (In particular, I would like to know more about the happiness machine experiment)

Shawn

What an impoverished life it must be to only desire happiness...

Pantagruel

Ethics is the branch of philosophy that deals with human actions. Usually inquiries like this differentiate between hedonism (pleasure), eudaimonism (happiness), and agathism (good).

Patulia

↪Pantagruel

OK thanks

ltlee1

↪Pantagruel

How about contend?
One writer had differentiated between pleasure means "I feel good. I want more."
And contend means "I fee good, I don't want more."

Happiness as the ultimate purpose of human life

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions