What if Nietzsche were a teacher. Just think about it:

To those human beings who are of any concern to me I wish suffering, desolation, sickness, ill-treatment, indignities - I wish that they should not remain unfamiliar with profound self-contempt, the torture of self-mistrust, the wretchedness of the vanquished: I have no pity for them, because I wish them the only thing that can prove today whether one is worth anything or not - that one endures. — Nietzsche

That would be awesome?

I'd rather call it foundational. — Banno

Since happiness is correlated with awesomeness, then you do agree that education should promote happiness?

Pretty circular. Whatever floats your boat then.

That's not how it goes. Rather, happiness will be one result of education if you are doing it right. — Banno

So, how does that happen, then if you care to elaborate?

If it were, it would be an attitude towards something. — Banno

No, it can be narcissistically directed at one's self. And, this does sound right because it happens every time we want to Instagram or tweet what we are/ate/did/said because we are so special and everyone needs to know how special we are. Obviously, none of this takes place in reality. More like some fantasy world that we construe.

There's another side to this thread that hasn't been touched on. If happiness is the goal of education, as it should be, then we ought to learn about unhappiness also.

It's only through caring and compassion that we can learn to share the sadness of others and the world, to paradoxically increase our own happiness. This subject is almost a taboo in colleges, due to the Puritan nature of Western society in my mind. But, learning about the suffering of blacks or other groups of people happens, fortunately, in college settings and even high school settings.

Which, brings me to guilt. It seems that this is an important emotion that can serve as an impetus to strive for a better society. Without guilt, we would not want to increase happiness for ourselves and others.

Being awesome is unpredictable, different. It's also outgoing, growing, exploding. — Banno

Isn't it an attitude? If so, then it's possible to encourage, no?

I want to bring up the self-esteem movement that has grasped American high schools and other educational settings.

What's the deal with that movement? Everyone should get a reward for just being in school or what? Is this what trying to encourage happiness as a goal has resulted in? It's an utter failure in my mind.

Hm. happiness and subjective well-being are a side effect of living with the awesome. — Banno

I'm in agreement. I just have the implementation in mind, as to how to promote happiness through education. Obviously, not everyone generically goes through that process.

@Banno

I think there are domains of happiness and subjective well-being that education is able to encourage or promote. I don't think the strawman has any support from me to define happiness as a unitary entity that can be possessed.

Going off on a tangent. It seems to me that education, nowadays, produces more unhappiness than happiness in individuals. Given my short stint in college, I can't say I was actually happy. Though, I kept on telling myself that I should be happy.

On another note. Given that education has been reduced to a performative function of utility maximization through intellectual ability, then competitiveness is defined by how high an IQ you have. I'm not saying this happens everywhere, but, if you want to do well in some ivy league college, then IQ matters quite a deal.

Why must education have a teleology? — Banno

I wonder about this too. It started with Plato, then Aristotle, and now we continue in their footsteps. Is that a bad thing? I don't entirely know myself. It seems like on the whole of it education is beneficial to society rather than detrimental.

So both of you figure that education shouldn't be for any purpose? How decadent. — All sight

See my previous comment.

Whatever your personal answer happens to be, it demonstrates that there’s a lot more to life than constantly feeling oneself to be on cloud nine. — javra

This is the modern day conception of happiness. To be 'high' all the time. I'm advocating for contentment and satisfaction through education. As to how to attain or implement that is the performative function of this thread.

I don't think that is true. Aristotle thought that education was for "exercising the mind" or our capacity for reason (he also thought that you should exercise the body, and then the mind), which played directly into his ideas of eudaimonia, and the development of character, which doesn't lead to "happiness" like a feeling one has, but one's manifest well being, and prosperity. Health, and wealth. Not a feeling. — All sight

So, under this understanding education only serves a utility-function? How crass.

Surely you're playing devil's advocate. There is a difference between child-rearing in a jungle and no education compared to a child brought up in a society.

By whom? — Banno

By the common folk, I suppose. You can find it in those ivory towers also. The whole idea of 'competitiveness' hinges on this fact.

Somewhat illusory; I suppose.

Just a side question.

Aristotle implied that education should provide happiness based on a hierarchy of importance. To him, mathematics stood above politics or writing. Is this view still embraced to this day, as treating happiness by the intellectual rigor of the field of study?

This is the more nuanced view of education presented by Aristotle. Eudaimonia is the second more popular view promoted by him. However, I can't get the Platonic elitist view out of my head, which Aristotle rehashed with treating happiness as an intellectual activity. This same line of reasoning is presented by utilitarianism and Mill, even Bertrand Russell held this view of education.

Do you mean like satisfaction? Like they're happy with the education they got, rather than feeling displeased? Or do you mean reaching a place where one just feels good feelings all the time, and never bad ones? The first seems rudimentary, and the second terribly nightmarish. — All sight

Well, yes to the first; but, the intricate problem is that these aren't issues that can be addressed through education, or can they?

We need to talk about aims because aims provide criteria by which we judge our choices of goals, objectives, and subject content. Aims-talk can also be directed at the larger society and its policies. Both functions are important.

Then how does one attain happiness in educational settings? Happiness is not easy to attain. There are different senses of happiness. Like one where 'highs' are pursued instead of contentment. Therefore contentment should be the aim of education to some degree.

You mean like reality is capitalistic, or society? I don't think that the university was originally for employment, but for the already wealthy, to get cultured and refined. — All sight

I meant that society is capitalistic where capitalism prevails. And universities were inherently democratic in most capitalist societies.

I figure that starving, lack of gainful employment, lack of respect and a sense of belonging, and being a social tool without a use is likely far worse for someone's well being than feeling like a "cog in a wheel". — All sight

That's true; but, then it's a no win situation. With that in mind then the goal should be the development of happy workers or happy individuals in society.

So, what are your thoughts about individualization and socialization with respect to education? That's a question that's kind of bugging me.

I'd like to thank you for this wonderful post. I think the first step in education is to understand our wants and needs first. How would you go about understanding your wants?

First, aid the individual in discovering what his native traits are -- the who and what I am. — Bitter Crank

How would one go about this issue? Psychometric testing like IQ tests, and personality tests?

Second, to apprehend the nature of 'the world' in its physical and social manifestations. — Bitter Crank

So, how does one go about doing this? Are you talking about the sciences or humanities?

Third, to aid the individual in finding a congruent path between his nature and social expectations. — Bitter Crank

This is the process of individualization or socialization?

Fourth, to discover what is for him good work, and acquire the necessary skills. — Bitter Crank

Yup, no comments here. Just some ambiguity about how to implement such a thing.

Children need to be free to be who they are becoming. ('becoming' can be a very messy process; clean-up crews on hand?) — Bitter Crank

So, again individualization taking place is paramount. How does one encourage the becoming aspect of a child? Can it be accomplished through education?

I know you addressed these questions; but, I'm just asking from my POV about their use.

We're capitalists. Institutionally it is to get jobs, or fill particular occupations, isn't it? — All sight

No, I don't believe so. It seems to me that we're brought into a world that is capitalistic rather than being a capitalist.

Learning a martial art could be for confidence, health, carrying on a tradition, self-defense, the instillation of discipline. The teacher's intentions could range from total philanthropy to narcissistic egotism. — All sight

What do you mean by that? I don't understand what you mean by 'The teacher's intentions could range from total philanthropy to narcissistic egotism'.

As for the education system though, I think that it is mainly to situate you for particular occupations and employment. — All sight

That's detrimental to the wellbeing of an individual, to think of themselves as a cog in a machine, or some such matter.

And, how would one go about doing that?

I edited the post. But, what's your take on the matter? Should happiness be the main aim we should be striving for in educating the youth?

Since Plato, we talk about the aim of education.

Have we come along in answering that question? Should happiness be the aim of education? And, if so, how do we achieve it?

Surely even you wouldn't tell a kid that life is pointless and futile...

Whatever floats your boat as they say.

But, what are your thoughts about our current education system?

What the hell DO I want? — Bitter Crank

It seems to me that the question is self-defeating. One never really knows what they want because there's always more that one can ask for. Hence, I'm inclined to believe that limiting one's passions or desires is a useful idea to instill in youth. This is antithetical to our current society (at least here in the US), of believing the sky is the limit. Perhaps, instilling a sense of satisfaction or contentment would be pertinent. But, nothing gets done in society by such people, I suppose can be the main counterargument.

Again, individualization vs socialization comes to mind.

Well, I am saying there is no need to procreate more people. Any scheme is bad for the person who is born in the first place. — schopenhauer1

But, people will procreate anyway. So, the question is still pertinent about what aims should we cultivate.

Just don't have people that need to be socialized. What's the point? It is self-refuting to try to devise a mechanism/scheme for happiness for more new people, just because that's somehow desirable for the people making the mechanism/scheme. — schopenhauer1

So, according to what you're saying we should promote individualization and not socialization at all? I tend to agree with this due to the fact that individualization is an activity rather than the passive aspect of socialization that one just picks up as they go by living.

Hence Meillassoux's assertion is invalid since epistemic closure cannot come about?

Yes.

I don't really know what you're trying to say. — schopenhauer1

I have in mind the distinction between appearances and reality. Think about the title in your car's rear view mirror, saying that objects in the mirror are closer than they appear, as an example.

I characterize it more as rebellion rather than mere acceptance. — schopenhauer1

A rebellion against what? The fact that life seems unfair? Everyone experiences that more or less; but, they cope with it differently than a PP would.

I don't know if I really prescribe to that recommendation. Rather, understanding the restlessness, discussing it with others, and finding consolation is about as good as we can do. — schopenhauer1

But, that's not coping. That's wallowing in one's misery and asking others to hold hands with you.

There may be a sense of consolation in pessimism. — schopenhauer1

What's great about it? Keep in mind that I live a very pessimistic life myself. Isn't pessimism self-indulging? One lives in a made up world of one's own making and wallows contently in it. I don't complain about the world; but, my own world of my own making, not the other way around...

Psychological wellbeing has to be defined. — schopenhauer1

Normatively we have some idea of what "normal" people do or behave or feel like, since we can emulate them. I think, that's why we watch so much TV. Not only is it entertaining; but, we're emulating them as we watch them. You know that feeling that you get in your head of what the person is going to say or do? I guess that's anticipation?

But using the idea of eudaimonia, it is an idea that is almost besides the point for the aesthetics of PP. — schopenhauer1

How so?

Rather, projects, relationships, and such are the products of a metaphysical lack and then coping with this lack. — schopenhauer1

But, coping is an active practice. Nothing about wanting things is a conscious or active practice.

Baden actually made a point once about PP which was prescient. He said that PP's idea of a most ideal state would be one akin to death or sleep with no dreams. — schopenhauer1

What's wrong with sleep with dreams? At least pleasant dreams?

It is dissatisfaction that brings about the desire for eudaimonia. — schopenhauer1

So, let me just recount. We are imperfect, due to the nature of the world or ourselves in relation to it. Do we cope with this deficit by trying to achieve eudaimonia? But, coping is an activity.

It is a method to cope with the world, but that we have to cope and deal with the world is what the PP is after. — schopenhauer1

But, PP encourages passivity and inaction or withdrawal from the world, no? I mean, since the world is such a mean place then why expose yourself to criticism, complaints, toil, struggle? It would simply be inconsistent to state otherwise. So, is this how you cope with a situation? I don't think anyone would define that a winning strategy or effective coping.

Again, you make the error of looking for some sort of results. This is the very intraworldly affairs that a PP would most likely not consider to be in the same category as that of the aesthetic view of life itself. — schopenhauer1

So, a PP does derive joy or pleasure or happiness from the aesthetic view of humankind. Is that what a true PP would say?

This is equivalent to asking a painter to quantify his artistic values with a bottom line of profits. — schopenhauer1

Not so. I equate psychological wellbeing or eudaimonia with "results" here.

I hope that is an indication that the offending digit is soon to be removed from the place of little sunshine. — Marcus de Brun

Here's me hoping. Maybe the black dog will find some bone to chew on.

But, in all seriousness, I don't feel depressed; but, I know I am. What a strange predicament.

Sorry but its not going to come from me.

I am neither your jailer nor your judge. :)

You have posted it in a conversation with me on this topic. You can find it there if you have no luck with introspection.

M — Marcus de Brun

:ok: