The achievement of happiness belongs to the philosophical work.
Many modern philosophers and psychologists disagree with this point of view. They believe that the assertion of their own life, their happiness, their development., Freedom is based on the HD ability to love, i.e. on care, respect, responsibility and knowledge. If an individual is capable of fruitful love for others, then he loves himself. If he is able to love only others, then he is not able to love at all. Love is inexhaustible in its manifestations. We just touched on this topic, told how eros manifests itself in different cultures how many faces he is. Love is also a combination of two human creatures, which, however, retain their uniqueness. Paradoxically, two, merging into one and dissolving into each other, nevertheless remain individual beings. And, loving unconditionally, they do not show indifference to the entire universe, otherwise their feeling would not be love, but just attachment, a kind of egoism. Love is a feeling that is fully inherent only in man; in its various manifestations, all the originality and uniqueness of man as an earthly being is revealed. After all, each person is a whole world with his own range of feelings and passions, he fits into the period of time intended for him, emotionally and personally defining both the time itself and the essence of feelings, his all-encompassing spiritual activity. Happiness is a feeling of utmost pleasure from achieving a goal, acquiring an object. The understanding of happiness differs in other cultures as well. “What do I love and what do I hate? I love happiness and hate unhappiness, ”we read in Mo-tzu. Democritus taught: “Happiness is good location spirit, well-being, harmony, symmetry and equanimity. " "Happiness" is a moral category. As I. Kant wrote, the highest good is in happiness, it must be sought not only in what nature can provide, “but also in what constitutes the highest requirement, that is, the condition under which reason alone can recognize the right to happiness for creatures in the world, namely, in their morally law-like behavior ”1. However, happiness is difficult to achieve. It is no accident that A. Schopenhauer asked: "Is there happiness in the world?" and answered: "No" True, not because it is impossible to find happiness. Schopenhauer thought as follows: if the goal that a person sets is not achieved, if the desire is not fulfilled, then the person is unhappy. But if they are achieved, then the person is satiated, an inevitable disappointment sets in, and the question inexorably arises: what next? It is curious that 3. Freud linked the problem of happiness with the acquisition of the meaning of life. He wrote that if life had no meaning, then it would lose all value. In his opinion, a person's life goal is simply determined by happiness, a pleasure program. “That iodine is understood by happiness,” he wrote, “in the strict sense of the word, stems rather from the sudden satisfaction of a need that has reached high tension, and by its nature is possible only as an episodic phenomenon.” 47 48 Therefore, Freud concludes, we can intensely enjoy only by contrast. The possibilities for happiness are limited. It is much less difficult to experience unhappiness. Suffering threatens us with different sides... From the side of the body, the fate of which is decay and decay. From the outside world, which can bring down powerful and irresistible forces of destruction on us. On the part of other people, they are not always friendly and sympathetic. One can add to Freud's thoughts: man himself is capable of becoming a source of his own misfortune. Unlimited satisfaction of all possibilities is pictured to us as the most tempting way of life. But bitterness hides behind every moment of pleasure. Therefore, the following idea was born in philosophy: in order to protect oneself from suffering, one must neglect happiness .. This is exactly how the Buddhists reasoned, and in European philosophy A. Chopin ?, Gower. Freud believed that for some people, on the contrary, happiness is associated with. unbridled satisfaction of unbridled Human impulses. We add: happiness is ensured by the meeting of a person with the beautiful. And yet, it is very difficult to be happy ... The understanding of happiness is different in different cultures... It is not identical with material goods. When a survey was conducted among the peoples of the world, it turned out that the feeling of happiness is more common in those countries where the level of consumption is low. Conversely, the so-called developed peoples showed sadness, melancholy and dissatisfaction with their position. Everyone interprets happiness in their own way. The boy from the movie “We'll Live Until Monday” writes a single phrase in his essay: “Happiness is when you are understood.”
More on the topic of Happiness:
- SECTION VIII About what constitutes the happiness of individuals; on the basis on which the building of national happiness should be erected, consisting in the necessary way of the happiness of all individuals
Of course, you can spend all your leisure time watching TV series, but sometimes it seems that something is missing. At such moments, it is worth turning to the wisdom of the greatest thinkers: Kierkegaard, Socrates, Toro and Buddha. After all, philosophers studied happiness long before orange became the hit of the season.
"There is no path to happiness, happiness is the path" - Gautama Buddha, circa 500 BC e.
More happy than others are people who find pleasure in life itself, and not in this or that goal. Actually, there is no purpose. According to Buddha, happiness is on the way.
“Of all forms of discretion, caution in love is perhaps the most detrimental to true happiness.” - Bertrand Russell, early 19th century.
For a man like Bertrand Russell, a lover of mathematics, science and logic, immersion in happiness is not very typical.
Nevertheless, his idea that to find happiness you need to throw yourself into the pool of love with your head is correct - it is supported and modern science.
“All people want happiness because everyone wants the feeling of increased power; the greatest power is required to overcome oneself. ”- Friedrich Nietzsche, late 19th century.
For Nietzsche, the famous nihilist with a mustache, happiness is a measure of how much a person controls his environment.
The German philosopher often wrote about the influence that power (or lack of power) can have on a person. When a person resists, he takes fate into his own hands. Later, happiness can grow out of this feeling.
“The secret of happiness is not to constantly want more, but to train yourself to be content with little.” - Socrates, c. 450 BC e.
For Socrates, one of the greatest thinkers of antiquity, the source of happiness cannot be reward or someone else's praise. It is determined by an inner sense of success.
And by cutting back on needs, we can learn to appreciate simple pleasures.
"The source of happiness should be sought in oneself, and not in others" - Plato, IV century BC. e.
It is not surprising that Plato, a disciple of Socrates, defines happiness in a similar way.
Happiness, according to Plato, is satisfaction from your own achievements: to run a hundred meters faster, read more books, and so on, and not from what these achievements can bring you.
"Happiness depends on ourselves" - Aristotle, c. 300 BC e.
When Plato's disciple Aristotle got to the bottom of the problem, the idea that happiness is something we create ourselves became generally accepted.
In other words, it is not a gift from other people or things that we manage to get. We create happiness ourselves, and we ourselves are responsible for keeping it.
“I have learned that it is better to achieve happiness by limiting my desires than by trying to satisfy them.” - John Stuart Mill, 19th century.
John Stuart Mill was a titan of liberalism and perhaps one of the most significant figures in history. He spread faith in freedom with all his might.
In matters of happiness, he adhered to the wisdom of the ancients Greeks... Mill believed in utilitarianism and did not strive for material abundance.
“The more a person meditates on good thoughts, the better his world will be, and the world as a whole” - Confucius, about 500 BC. e.
The book The Power of Positive Thinking and recent research in cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) supporting the link between thoughts, feelings and behavior reinforce Confucius's point of view.
Confucianism sees happiness as a self-fulfilling prophecy - the more reasons we find for it, the stronger it is.
“All the greatest blessings of humanity are within us and within our reach. A wise person is content with his fate, whatever it may be, and does not want what he does not have ”, - Seneca, 1st century BC. e.
The Stoic philosopher and favorite of investor Nassim Taleb and marketer Rain Holiday, firmly believed in what psychologists now call "locus of control."
Some people have it outside. They feel that external forces determine their actions. For others - whom Seneca considered happy - the locus is within.
“If you are depressed, you are living in the past. If you are nervous, you live in the future. If you are calm, you live in the present. " Lao Tzu, around 600 BC e.
Kierkegaard meant that happiness consists in living in the present moment. When we stop perceiving external circumstances as problems and begin to think of them as experiences, it is easier for us to enjoy life.
“Happiness is capricious and unpredictable, like a butterfly: when you try to catch it, it eludes you, but if you distract yourself, it will fall right into your palms.” - Henry David Thoreau was born in 1817 in the USA.
Unsurprisingly, the transcendentalist and civil disobedience advocate took a passive approach to happiness.
As he detailed in his book Walden, Thoreau tried to avoid habits. He believed that a more chaotic approach to life would bring him greater happiness.
This idea is quite compatible with the thought of other philosophers that one should live in the present.
Plan
Introduction
Etymology of the word "happiness".
The problem of happiness in Russian philosophy.
What is the sense of life?
Purpose or result?
Happiness as an emotional experience.
Conditions for happiness.
Happiness in philosophy.
Conclusion
Literature
INTRODUCTION
Man has always strived for happiness. Man has always thought about happiness. The person managed to be happy. But happiness is such a deep, so intimate experience that no general schemes, no amount of reflection brings us closer to understanding this phenomenon. And therefore, for everyone who thinks about happiness, it opens in its unknown and eternal novelty as if no one had ever touched this problem. Anyone who took it up can already be called happy. It is in difficult times, in an era of anxieties and dangers, that one must and should reflect on happiness. As electricity and magnetism are inextricably linked with each other, so our state of mind is connected with the philosophy that we profess.
1. Etymology of the word "happiness".
Tracking the etymology of the word "happiness", you can see a pattern. The ancient Greek word "Eudaimonia" (= true happiness) was composed of two words - eu (good) and daimon (deity), ie literally meant that the fate of man is under the auspices of the gods.
In Rome, the word "happiness" meant the name of the goddess - Fortune. The word "Fortuna" itself had two more meanings - luck and fate. The goddess was depicted with a cornucopia, a wheel and a steering oar. That is, she personified divine grace that can only be given to the worthy. Therefore, the perception of happiness as a category in the Roman Empire was purely practical. It was prosperity, the ability to fulfill desires.
For the lower strata of society, happiness often meant ecstatic union with gods who can bestow a more dignified life. Later, this attitude towards happiness was reflected in Christian teaching.
In Russian, the word "happiness" also has several meanings:
1) fate, fate, fate, share; those. to be happy at first was understood as "being under the mercy of higher powers",
2) chance, desired surprise, success in business, i.e. to be happy can also mean that a person can be, as it were, an accomplice in his own destiny.
But there is also a third option: happiness - prosperity, well-being, peace and contentment; life without grief and worries is a more mundane option, something like "happiness for the poor."
"Luck" in the Russian language also has several meanings - this is success, a welcome chance, an unexpectedly successful outcome of the case, as well as sudden happiness, although the early meaning of this word was obedience, compliance to fate. That is, in the Russian language, the words "luck" and "happiness" over time have become synonyms and mean about the same as before - being under the auspices of some higher powers. But, as many people as there are, there are so many opinions, so several of the most common views on happiness can be identified. We will consider them further.
2. The problem of happiness in Russian philosophy.
The question of the ethical category of "happiness" belongs to the fundamental questions of human existence. For everyone strives to become happy and this problem began to be investigated a long time ago. It constitutes one of the most permanent and, at the same time, dynamic attitudes of moral consciousness. And attempts to resolve this issue accompany the entire history of mankind.
In ethical science, the problem of happiness has always occupied a very large place. Thinkers of the past (Aristotle, Epicurus, Augustine, Feuerbach) and modernity (L. Tolstoy, V. Rozanov, etc.) paid much attention to the study of this problem. Indeed, there are many treatises on happiness. But most of them are not devoted to the problem of happiness, but to ways of achieving it. In practical terms, this is the most important aspect, but theoretically it is only one of many aspects of the problem of happiness.
This interest is understandable and explainable: after all, ethics is a practical philosophy, it cannot abstract from the real aspirations, worries and needs of a person.
Despite the fact that the problem of happiness has been studied for a long time, each time new perspectives on its cognition are found. The problem of happiness has acquired particular urgency in modern Russia.
The question of the meaning of life is closely connected with the investigated problem of happiness. Does it change throughout life or does it remain unchanged? Can happiness be the meaning of life, or only a means for the realization of the latter?
It should be noted that the majority of Russian philosophers avoided the topic of happiness. But some, speaking about the meaning of life, also turned to the topic of happiness.
Vasily Rozanov is one such thinker. At the heart of his appeal to this topic is a contradiction: on the one hand, a person cannot act otherwise than in obedience to the desire for happiness; on the other hand, a person should only follow this attraction (i.e., it is recognized that sometimes people struggle with it). Then, trying to resolve this contradiction, V. Rozanov turns to the historical origin of the idea of happiness. A person always follows his attraction to happiness (often without even noticing it himself). And the requirement that everyone should be guided only by his own happiness is a denial of the necessary meaning for people of these ideas, which “only to the extent of their correlation with his happiness should be the subject of his aspirations and antipathies” (V. Rozanov). The very concept of happiness V. Rozanov defines as "a term indicating the highest guiding principle, or an ideal, looking at which we apply a given order of thinking to a given object." He also recognizes that there is no universal happiness, i.e. everyone has their own, subjective feeling. V. Rozanov writes that happiness can be understood as a state when a person has reached the peak of satisfaction, when he no longer wants to strive for something, go, seek. The only difference in people's feelings of happiness is duration and intensity. And fortunately, the longer and more quantitatively more should be given preference. If it is possible to make several people happy, and not just one, then it is desirable to do so.
According to their feelings of happiness, people cannot be divided into higher and lower ones, since they are all "equally feeling" and, therefore, are equal in the right to happiness. The feeling of happiness does not need to try to foresee, to be aware, otherwise it can disappear, since everything, passing through reflection, loses its energy. And such happiness will be less intense, and perhaps even disappear altogether.
Thus, one should think less about happiness. Here you can draw parallels with V. Frankl, who also believed that you cannot consciously strive for happiness. Both V. Rozanov and V. Frankl argued that if a person makes happiness the object of his aspirations, then he inevitably makes it the object of his attention. But by doing so he loses sight of the reasons for happiness and it slips away.
The point of view of V. Rozanov and V. Frankl can be contrasted with the opinion of L. Feuerbach, who wrote that all human desires and aspirations are aspirations for happiness and a person cannot avoid them, not think about them.
Rozanov also asserts the dependence of truth on happiness: “only to the extent of the achieved happiness can a person know the truth” (V. Rozanov). Thus, only when people are happy can they make discoveries, improve something; that is, everything that a person achieves is a product of his feeling of happiness.
One of the manifestations of happiness is benefit (utilitarian principle). But it does not express the fullness of the former. Good is good produced through institutions. With this approach, a person's life would be distorted. But there are higher needs of the spiritual nature of man (religion, philosophy, art), which cannot be expressed in terms of utilitarian doctrine. And if humanity will constantly strive for happiness, then it will die “as in a stuffy ring,” and there is no way for it to live otherwise than turning away from this happiness, which must be able to bear.
Happiness, like joy, is only a companion in a person's striving for other goals. Thus, happiness is an important part of our life, but it is not the meaning of life.
In continuation of the research, one should turn to L.N. Tolstoy. According to the time frame, he lived, he wrote before V. Rozanov.
L. Tolstoy asserted that happiness is always in our hands, that it is a consequence of a good life, and cited Angelus Silesius in confirmation of this word: "If heaven is not in you, then you will never enter it." That is, it is argued that happiness can be achieved in earthly, and not only in heavenly life. And happiness depends on the person himself, on the way of life, and not on the people around him. If a person is happy, then others will feel good about it. In earthly life, we can receive everything we desire, and if people think otherwise, this is their delusion, since in this life everything is achievable and doable. Unhappy life is denied, because it is thanks to unhappiness that a person becomes happy and realizes it. That is, through imaginary misfortunes, a person becomes happy. To achieve happiness, you need to fulfill God's law in reality, and not plead for good. That is, one must act (according to the laws of God), and not expect something. Again, here comes the idea that everyone creates his own happiness by himself, with his own life, and in order to achieve this, one must turn to oneself. The good is contained in ourselves, since God and the whole world are present in everyone, that is, there is happiness as a potential, and its realization depends on ourselves, on whether we can realize this in ourselves. The vision of the surrounding world depends on this awareness. The happier a person is, the more good he sees in the world, and the more unhappy - the more bad, and not in himself, but in others. And “the good of our spiritual self” depends only on us. (This was later confirmed by research by psychologists).
The problem of happiness is closely related to the question of the meaning of life, which, according to Tolstoy, lies in "more and more consciousness of God in oneself" (L. Tolstoy). This assumes constant self-improvement. In confirmation of this, B. Pascal's words are cited that a person who is improving spiritually cannot be dissatisfied, since what he desires is always in his power and can be realized. A person becomes happy when he surrenders himself to a good aspiration, which consists in doing the will of God. But often people turn to God with requests for help, at a time when no one but themselves can help them. Only a good life can help. And no one can do real good for others; only for himself can a person do true good, which is in life for the soul. The reward for good is the improvement of the soul. The main thesis, which L. Tolstoy develops, sounds like this: love everyone. Only love is necessary for a person to be happy. One must love all friends and enemies, good and bad. "Love without ceasing, and without ceasing you will be happy." Love is the only thing that the soul wants, and love not only for itself, but also from itself. For people to feel good, they must love each other, i.e. need love. And love is God, i.e. again the idea of coming to God is traced. By loving God and people, man does good.
Thus, happiness is not in wealth, honor, not in other people, but in each of us. Turning to himself, a person realizes this. Happiness depends on us. The only good is a life of love. And everyone can do this. Thus, happiness is the most necessary for a person, it turns out to be the easiest to achieve, since it is in the heart in which love reigns.
Happiness is not given to a particular country, time, etc. It is given to all who lead good life, and this is in the power of everyone. Nobody can take away happiness. Man himself can lose it if he desires what is beyond his power. That is, a person makes himself unhappy, as well as happy - when he desires what he can have. An unhappy person can change his position.
There are two ways:
improve your living conditions (which does not always help)
improve the state of mind (this is always in our power; achieved through the reign of love in our hearts).
You cannot be dissatisfied with life - this is the blessing given to us. And all living things want and can be happy, because it depends only on ourselves. It is possible to love (and this means to fulfill the law of God) “in any position,” in wealth or poverty, in high or low rank, etc. Moreover, happiness is not the fulfillment of one's own will, but the will of God, only when a person forgets about his will and subordinates it to a higher one - only then finds good. And the will of God will be done in any case.
No matter how bad a person is, once he understands and accepts life and its blessing in conjunction with the souls of other people and God, evil (which is only apparent) will immediately disappear; as soon as we begin to realize our life as a union of love with all living things and with God, so we will become happy.
Thus, the main idea that can be seen in L. Tolstoy is the possibility happy life, which is realized through love for all living (friends, enemies) and for God. If love reigns in the heart, then a person is happy. Happiness is achievable - love everyone and do not wish for the impossible. Therefore, everyone can be happy without even applying special efforts, because to love is easier than not to love.
This thesis is especially relevant in the modern situation, when many people feel unhappy. It is necessary to realize that one can be happy under any external conditions if peace and tranquility reign in the soul, which is achieved through love for more people and for God (for believers). After all external conditions we often cannot manage; the only thing that can always be counted on is the inner world of everyone, improving which, we achieve happiness, peace, comfort, stability, peace.
The history of the development of the problem of happiness is quite diverse. Summarizing them, in ethical science, three main directions have been identified:
hedonism,
eudemonism,
utilitarianism.
The main category in hedonism is the principle of pleasure. Only bodily pleasure is considered the ultimate good. Happiness is defined as the totality of private bodily pleasures. People strive to avoid pain and receive bodily pleasures as long as possible.
For eudemonists, the main thing is the state of mind, not just the body. Happiness is achieved through liberation from physical suffering, and the soul from anxiety. To be happy, people must look to themselves.
In the 19th century, another trend stands out - utilitarianism. Happiness is defined here as "super-useful", lasting pleasure, an aggregate of pleasure. T. Hobbes: "people strive to be happy, as it is beneficial to them."
3. What is the meaning of life? What is the purpose human being?
These questions have always been considered the most profound, but they should not be called even superficial. After all, if something has meaning, then this something is no longer just what it is, it is not identical with itself, but is a symbol. "Is everything transitory just a symbol?" - we ask the angels. For some reason, human life is considered to be something supernatural, subject to special laws. If so, then she is a symbol. But every natural natural process is exactly what it is, and has no meaning or purpose. Indeed, what is the point in the fact that the planets move this way and not otherwise; and is the moon really set out to not show us her other side? Natural processes have no purpose, there is only a direction in which they go by necessity. One cannot approach nature with the question: "Why?" Sometimes even "Why?" does not sound correct. It remains only to ask: "What and how?"
What is life? The chain of actions. But they have both a purpose and a meaning, i.e. are an expression of something else, namely the character of a person. As Schopenhauer convincingly proved, human affairs, as well as any natural phenomenon, are subject to the law of causality: every act is performed with a sufficient motive, i.e. goals. And we set goals in accordance with their value: before something becomes a goal, it must be evaluated, whether on the basis of knowledge of things or belief in their value. So, cognizing things, or taking on faith their value, we create a system of values, based on which we set ourselves goals that become the motives of our actions. And if there are no external (other people) or internal (character) obstacles to translating the motive into action, the act is done with necessity. And to the question: "Could this person have acted differently under the given circumstances?" we will answer: "I could, if I would have been different." But a happy person differs from an unhappy one, and surrounded by the same things, he evaluates them differently and sets different goals.
Happiness can also be viewed as a kind of motive for activity, in this its "hypostasis" it is primary in relation to it, programs it. As a motive, happiness exists as something self-evident, as a not always conscious background of activity, to one degree or another (depending on the personality and the circumstances of its existence) determining life strategy, in a complex way (sometimes extremely conflictingly) permeating the entire system of individual values.
As for the imperative characteristic of happiness, it is very conditional. The pursuit of happiness is a natural desire determined by human nature.
Singling out these three “images” of happiness, we must be aware that in our real, concrete being, happiness exists as a complex “alloy” of assessment, command, motivation, which is specifically expressed in the language of a person's emotional and psychological apparatus.
Happiness can be viewed as a complex relationship between the objective and the subjective, which has various forms of manifestation. Any individual idea of a happy life, no matter how peculiar it is, is not free from social influences that leave a significant imprint on the entire system of personal value orientations. It is known that different people behave differently even in similar social conditions, showing the ability (or inability) to maintain their personal autonomy and independence. (An active, strong-willed person is able to overcome even an unfavorable combination of circumstances, while a weak person, even in relatively decent conditions, finds grounds for lamenting his fate).
The answer to the question: "Can a person whose personal interests contradict public interests can be happy?" Is not as simple as it might seem at first glance. Experience shows that an egoistic orientation only to one's own interests, which seems to be the most effective for an individual, leading him to happiness, in fact leads away from him. Egocentrism is a wrongly chosen direction of life, therefore it is dangerous not only for its consequences for other people, but also causes significant harm to its "carrier". Satisfaction with life presupposes its social significance and is associated with the assertion of one's "I" in a social connection. For happiness, it is probably necessary to live "for oneself" and at the same time live "for others." This idea is well expressed by A. Tolstoy: "Happiness is the feeling of the fullness of physical and spiritual strength in their social application."
Overcoming oneself (negative features of one's "nature") is a way of self-realization of an individual, a grateful but difficult way, therefore the well-known truth for a long time (to take is to lose, to give is to gain) is not a value for all people. The orientation "towards others" should not, of course, become an end in itself, preventing the preservation of individuality and transforming a person's existence into continuous "self-restraint." The ideal variant is the harmony of the objective and the subjective, the personal and the social, however, even with such an attitude in the mind of the Individual, one can hardly expect its simple, painless approval in practice. Various variants of disharmony, which, as a rule, prevent the achievement of happiness, are determined, of course, not only by the personality traits, but also by the unfavorable social circumstances of her being. The history of ethics has left us with various guidelines for achieving happiness in a destabilized environment. Many of them are quite relevant now. It is hardly possible to fundamentally and immediately change them by individual efforts, but understanding their essence and defining one's life position in this context is an achievable task. In any case, it is very important to ask yourself the following questions: "What am I like? Am I the cause of my own unhappiness?"
5. Purpose or result?
Happiness is often associated either with the process of achieving a meaningful goal, or with its result. It is important, of course, both, but individual characteristics different people often define their "bet" on one thing. Many, for example, burn with impatience to immediately obtain the desired result, strive with all their might to speed up the process of achievement, negatively experiencing any slowdown. Others, on the contrary, try to delay the process, because (consciously or unconsciously) they are afraid of disappointment in achieving the goal. Indeed, anticipation is sometimes more pleasant than fulfillment, especially for people with a developed imagination. In addition, the joy of realizing a goal that is essential for us can be overshadowed by too many losses on a long journey to it or the absence of the next goal that can activate our vital energy. Some people do not think at all about the strategic goals of life (either because of the primitiveness of their spiritual organization, or because of the perception of life as a process in which goal setting is meaningless).
The choice of orientation in this matter is voluntary, but you need to be ready to accept the consequences of your choice, and they can be quite sad. A certain insurance against future disappointments can be a well-thought-out "target hierarchy" that allows you to create a meaningful life perspective. Nevertheless, no matter how cleverly we build our life strategy, we are not given to avoid painful experiences, grief and troubles. How do pain and pleasure relate in the context of the problem of happiness?
6. Happiness is like emotional experience.
Happiness as an emotional experience is extremely "multicolored". Based on a positive (in general) assessment of a person's life, it includes a variety of emotional states, including negative ones. The identification of happiness with continuously lasting pleasure disorientates a person, the attitude towards "continuous bliss" distorts the system of values and, as a rule, gives rise to disappointment with life.
The pursuit of pleasure, in the process of which moral relativism and even cynicism is easily instilled, leads to satiety (if the pursuit is "successful") or to an acutely felt dissatisfaction with one's existence (if there is no way to quench the thirst for pleasure). In any case, a person oriented in this way turns out to be unable to withstand unfavorable circumstances, to adequately experience the inevitable grief and suffering.
The complexity, contradictoriness, multidimensionality of human life is the basis of the diversity of its emotional perception, in which joy and sadness are intricately intertwined. It is impossible to "remove" suffering from life, therefore the pursuit of happiness presupposes, probably, a readiness for suffering, the formation of a correct attitude towards it. Since suffering has many faces, we are allowed to classify it, highlighting, for example, destructive and constructive. These names may not be entirely apt, but they pose a real problem. Indeed, destructive suffering destroys the most important values for the subject, makes it impossible (for a time or even forever) a positive assessment of his life. Conversely, what is constructive can enhance and enrich feelings of happiness. The forms of one and the other type of suffering and its measure are essentially determined by individual characteristics. Thinly sensitive, vulnerable natures, for example, deeply experience the slightest nuances in human relations, incomprehensible and inaccessible to other people, with a coarser mental organization.
Even at the dawn of the formation of ethical reflection, the sages fixed the truth derived from everyday observations: an excess of pleasure inevitably leads to suffering, but suffering from a lack of pleasure (correctly dosed, of course), abstinence makes it possible to subsequently achieve the highest degree of pleasure. The anticipation of pleasure, Epicurus noted, can alleviate our suffering and even, we may add, cause the desire for suffering.
By the way, physiological studies of states of acute pleasure show that during it two systems are involved in work: the parasympathetic, associated with positive emotions, and the sympathetic, which is one of the neural correlates of negative emotions. It is not by chance, therefore, that negative emotions (of a weak degree of intensity) can turn out to be attractive for an individual who seeks (most often unconsciously) to satisfy his "emotional hunger".
The problem of happiness, of course, is not limited to the aspects outlined here. It should be noted that happiness has certain quantitative, so to speak, parameters. At various points in his life, a person can feel either very happy, or absolutely unhappy, or be somewhere in the middle between these extreme states. Even the "first approximation" to the study of the problem of happiness allows us to see that this concept denotes an extremely complex, multifaceted experience, in which the subtlest shades of individual perception of the world are intertwined in a contradictory unity. Nevertheless, we can talk about some of the reasons for this individualized sense of life, or, in other words, about the conditions of happiness.
7. Conditions for happiness
Happiness is associated with the possibility of self-realization of a person in various spheres of his life, therefore, the range of conditions for a happy life is quite wide. The combination of these conditions, their subordination and significance are determined by both objective factors and the originality of the subject. The ethical tradition singled out as the conditions of happiness its most essential foundations, which are, as it were, timeless, "eternal" in nature. In individual value orientations the structure and content of conditions of happiness is much more mobile and more subject to the influence of time.
So, for example, a comparison of the results of the questioning of students of recent years and a decade ago allows us to record a significant shift in value orientations towards greater importance of material well-being. Previously, only a small number of students named material security as one of the conditions for happiness, but now this condition occupies one of the first places. There are, of course, more stable attitudes. This primarily concerns the importance of communication, invariably leading among the most important foundations of happiness. In addition, students rightly attribute love, creativity, health, freedom, high moral principles of behavior, stability to the conditions of happiness. social environment and much more, the general significance of which is not so obvious.
It makes sense to dwell in a little more detail on those conditions of happiness that are significant for the largest number of people.
a) Optimal satisfaction of material needs has long been considered a condition for a happy life. The presence of material well-being, a certain comfort of existence for most people is very significant and represent a prerequisite for a positive assessment of life. Poverty, hard work in obtaining daily bread, limiting spiritual needs and the possibilities of their realization, are most often perceived as determinants of unhappiness.
In the history of culture, a different attitude towards the sphere of material existence is also formed, represented by the principle of asceticism. Asceticism prescribes self-denial of external goods, suppression of sensual needs in order to achieve more important goals. The forms of asceticism and, accordingly, the higher goals of activity proposed by it are determined by socio-cultural factors and are quite diverse (initiation rite, Christian martyrdom, cynical worldview, etc.), but they are based on a single basis - the absolutization of the significance of the spiritual, the implementation of which is possible only by refusing bodily. Despite the fact that asceticism limits the full value of human existence, it expresses a very important idea of the priority of spiritual values. The same idea was quite definitely indicated by ancient ethics both in an exaggerated form ("Contempt for the body is the true freedom of man" - Seneca), and more gently ("It is more fitting for a man to pay attention to the soul than to the body, for the perfection of the soul can replace the weakness of the body "- Democritus).
Considering all this, it can be argued that the satisfaction of material needs should not become an end in itself, and as a condition for happiness, it should be considered in the context of subordination to higher-order values. The orientation on the paramount importance of spirituality, the ratio of spiritual and material wealth as goals and means of activity is a strategically correct life orientation, the distortions of which impede the achievement of happiness.
b) Happiness is associated with the self-realization of the personality, the disclosure of its internal potencies, spiritual wealth. Since "the real spiritual wealth of an individual depends entirely on the wealth of his real relationships" (K. Marx), communication is one of the main conditions for happiness. This idea was affirmed in the ethical tradition ("Friendship is the most necessary for life, because no one wants to live without friends, even if he had all the other benefits" - Aristotle), was described in other forms of spiritual culture ("There is nothing more precious in the world bonds connecting man with man "- Exupery), it is convincing enough for everyday consciousness.
But not all communication is a positive value, and not all loneliness is a negative value. In order to act as a condition for happiness, communication must have certain quantitative and qualitative parameters. Their determination is the task of a special analysis 2; in this case, only a few assumptions can be made on this issue.
Even ancient Greek thinkers noted that the satisfaction of spiritual and material needs has its own specifics: the rapid saturation of the body leads to satiety, and the soul is insatiable, eternally hungry. "All man's labors," the biblical texts confirm the same truth, "are for his mouth, but his soul is not satiated." Indeed, the range of spiritual needs is incomparably larger and "saturation" in this area is much slower. Nevertheless, a person's being is limited both in temporal relations and in terms of reserves of spiritual energy, therefore communication (which is of colossal value as a means of self-realization, as the most important factor in the moral and intellectual development of a person) should have quantitative restrictions, determined individually, by the person himself in the context of its features and capabilities.
The process of intensification of interpersonal communication, characteristic of our time, seems, on the one hand, a blessing, because expanding the circle of personal ties contributes to the introduction of a person to an increasing number of various value orientations of other people, morally and intellectually enriches, expands the possibilities of self-realization. There are, however, other aspects of this process, fraught with the danger of moral and emotional devastation, deep inner loneliness. Excessive quantitative growth of contacts reduces the quality of communication, gives it a superficial, vain character. If at the same time the content parameters of communication are perverted (and this is almost always the case with excessive connections), then it acts as a negative value.
Of the qualitative parameters of full-fledged communication, one can, first of all, pay attention to the following. The moral content of communication is distorted if it is imposed from the outside, is not the result of the free choice of the subject. Forced contacts do not give moral satisfaction, cause emotional irritation and can even cause "flight from others."
The choice of communication partners should be based on selectivity, a special preference for people who are close in spirit. Community does not imply, of course, identity; it is not so much realized as felt, being the result of mutual understanding and emotional "consonance".
An important factor that predetermines the productivity of communication is a person's orientation towards the individualization of his life. The conformist attitude, which at first glance seems more comfortable, less conflicting and, therefore, preferable, in fact programs our failures in the world of communication. The development of his individuality gives a person a sense of originality, irreplaceability, he becomes interesting for others. To qualify for full-fledged communication, we must first of all work on our soul, make it an "event in the world." This task is extremely difficult (especially considering that we are constantly faced with a vicious circle: a standardized environment gives rise to standardized individuals and vice versa), but grateful, since it opens the way for us from surrogate communication to genuine one.
The temptation to use another person as a means for one's own benefit (even if the latter is understood quite subtly) has always existed and always perverted the moral foundations of communication, the authenticity, usefulness and positive significance of which are determined by the degree of his disinterestedness. Selflessness asserts not only the moral value of our communication partner, but also our own. The realization of a disinterested relationship to a friend is possible for a morally developed personality. In general, it should be noted that the moral and moral-psychological characteristics of a person significantly affect the nature of her communication, therefore, correcting and improving ourselves, we thereby predetermine our path to happiness.
The possession of the highest moral values depends on ourselves much more than we usually imagine, being tempted to explain our misfortunes, the meaninglessness of existence, the absence of freedom only by "objective circumstances." The tragedy of human existence, determined - indeed objectively - by the inexorable death, the inevitability of suffering, the disharmony of society, cannot be eliminated, but it is possible to "enlighten", soften, spiritualize. However, no matter what models of happiness, freedom, the meaning of life we join, they can acquire an individual value value for us only under the condition of our own moral creativity. Life wisdom is associated with the ability to exercise your freedom (without breaking the moral law), create and realize your individuality (not to the detriment of others). For this main task, one should not spare either time or mental energy.
8. Happiness in philosophy.
The question of what happiness is and what it means to be happy has worried a person for a long time. "Man is created for happiness, like a bird for flight." In this well-known winged saying, folk wisdom "fixed the fact that happiness belongs to the deep sides of human existence, to its very nature. And only for this reason, the concept of happiness should express a certain section of a person's moral life." (Popov L.A.)
The understanding of the essence of the consciousness of happiness is hampered not only by the complexity of this phenomenon of a person's spiritual life, but also by the fact that the very word "happiness" is used in everyday life in various senses. The concept of happiness is individual for each person. "One seems to be goodness, to others - prudence, third - a well-known wisdom, and to others all this together or something one in combination with pleasure or not without the participation of pleasure, there are those that include in the concept of happiness and external well-being", so spoke Aristotle.
Listing the different opinions of people regarding happiness, we can say that for the majority, happiness lies in something vivid and obvious: in luck, pleasure, honor, wealth, etc. "Happiness, we say, is the same as well-being and a good life." (Aristotle). Therefore, "the question of happiness is not just a question of how to be lucky, content, or even virtuous, but, first of all, what is a good happy life and what a person should strive for in the first place." (Guseinov A.A., Apresyan R.G.).
There is also a definition of happiness as "moral consciousness", which designates a state of a person that corresponds to the greatest inner satisfaction with the conditions of his being, the completeness and meaningfulness of life, the realization of his human purpose. Like a dream, happiness is a sensory-emotional form of the ideal, but unlike it does not mean the aspiration of the individual, but the fulfillment of these aspirations. The concept of happiness not only characterizes a certain specific position or subjective state of a person, but also expresses the idea of what life should be like, what exactly is bliss for him. Depending on how the purpose and meaning are interpreted human life, the content of happiness is also understood. Therefore, this concept also has a normative value character.
The concept of "happiness" has a multidimensional content that is difficult to systematize. The Polish researcher V. Tatarkevich, who wrote the fundamental work "On Happiness", identified 4 main meanings of this concept:
1) the favor of fate, luck;
2) a state of intense joy;
3) possession of the highest benefits, a positive balance of life;
4) a sense of satisfaction with life.
Tatarkevich points out that these four meanings are the most common, but none of them individually, nor all together, exhaust the meaning of the concept of happiness. In addition, for each item, you can find a counterargument proving that happiness does not necessarily exist, for example, luck or a positive balance in life. You can give other understandings of the concept of happiness. Hedonism understands happiness as pleasure. Eudemonists assert that happiness is the possession of the highest goods. So to the question of Diotima: "What will happen to a person who has mastered the good?" Socrates replies: "He will be happy." Moralists say that happiness is in virtuous behavior. Finally, psychologically, happiness is perceived as a sense of satisfaction with life.
Apparently humanity was all the time so unhappy that it could not even figure out what happiness is. Schopenhauer, for example, considered happiness to be a negative concept, namely, happiness, according to Schopenhauer, is the absence of suffering. Many people know the saying: "Happiness, like health: when you don't notice it, then it is there."
The most famous of the walking definitions is this: "Happiness is when you are understood." The word "happiness" itself is interpreted as "complicity" (in a common cause, in common destiny). In my opinion, the word "happiness" comes from "now", i.e. it is "the present." A happy person lives here and now, joyfully experiencing this particular moment of life, no matter whether this joy is caused by the events that are taking place, or some kind of memory, or the anticipation of the future. Thus, by happiness we mean a stable emotional state (short-term joy cannot be called happiness), in which joy is the dominant emotion. Other emotions are by no means suppressed or prohibited. Happy can afford any feelings - even sadness and sadness, just like a pinch of salt is added to a sweet porridge. It is precisely for this that happiness is valuable, that any feelings, experiences, emotions are available in it.
Happiness is a sense of the fullness of being.
A person who has become happy is like a person who looked up to the sky after the rain and saw a rainbow, but saw it as Noah saw when he came out of the ark; I saw not as a set of colors of the spectrum, but as a symbol of the Divine covenant and the great hope for lasting happiness.
Conclusion.
It should be noted that other representatives of Russian philosophy also addressed this topic. But it is impossible to fully capture and convey everything that has been said about happiness in the history of philosophy. I tried to convey the characteristics of the main representatives of ethical thought who reasoned about happiness. But the main thing is to show that people were always and everywhere interested in the problem under study, but from different angles; it always contained new unexplored questions, unrevealed moments. This topic is always relevant and new, and therefore interesting for researchers. And today representatives of not only philosophical science, but also psychology and pedagogy, ethics turn to her.
Literature:
1.Weiss F. R. Moral foundations of life / per. with fr. - Minsk: Yunatstva, 1994;
2. Zhukhovitsky L. A. Happy are not born. - M .: Politizdat, 1983;
3.Zelenkova I. L. Fundamentals of ethics: Tutorial... - Minsk: TetraSystems, 1998;
4. Zelenkova I. L., Belyaeva E V. Ethics: Textbook and Workshop. - Minsk: NTOOO "TetraSystems", 1997;
5. Klimashevskaya I. V. Happiness and the meaning of life. - M .: Narodnaya asveta, 1986.
6.Tatarkevich V.On happiness and perfection of man, Moscow: Progress, 1981.
7. Schopenhauer A. "Aphorisms of worldly wisdom" / in the book. Schopenhauer A. “Freedom of will and morality”, Moscow: Republic, 1992 - 448p.
8.Sophia: Manuscript Journal of the Society of Zealots of Russian Philosophy
Issue 4, 2002
Philosophy (16)
Abstract >> PhilosophyAccording to Pyrrho, serenity (ataraxia). Philosopher strives for fortunately, but it consists in equanimity and absence ..., which is the only thing accessible to philosopher happiness... Stoicism. The Stoic doctrine existed for more ...
Philosophy ancient Greece (5)
Abstract >> PhilosophyBeing. She is sometimes called " philosophy happiness"... Another school in a crisis ... representing. one. " philosophy happiness" a) skepticism 2. " philosophy salvation "b) cynicism 3." philosophy doubts "c) epicureanism 4." philosophy negation "d) Stoicism III ...
Happiness as a concept of moral consciousness and as a way of life
Abstract >> Ethics...). 10 In the writings of modern philosophers new theories are being developed happiness, although sometimes new things are encountered ... with luck, success, unexpected gain. V philosophy happiness
Of course, you can spend all your leisure time watching TV series, but sometimes it seems that something is missing. At such moments, it is worth turning to the wisdom of the greatest thinkers: Kierkegaard, Socrates, Toro and Buddha. After all, philosophers studied happiness long before orange became the hit of the season.
"There is no path to happiness, happiness is the path" - Gautama Buddha, circa 500 BC e.
More happy than others are people who find pleasure in life itself, and not in this or that goal. Actually, there is no purpose. According to Buddha, happiness is on the way.
“Of all forms of discretion, caution in love is perhaps the most detrimental to true happiness.” - Bertrand Russell, early 19th century.
For a man like Bertrand Russell, a lover of mathematics, science and logic, immersion in happiness is not very typical.
Nevertheless, his idea that in order to find happiness you need to throw yourself headlong into the maelstrom of love is correct - it is also supported by modern science.
“All people want happiness because everyone wants the feeling of increased power; the greatest power is required to overcome oneself. ”- Friedrich Nietzsche, late 19th century.
For Nietzsche, the famous nihilist with a mustache, happiness is a measure of how much a person controls his environment.
The German philosopher often wrote about the influence that power (or lack of power) can have on a person. When a person resists, he takes fate into his own hands. Later, happiness can grow out of this feeling.
“The secret of happiness is not to constantly want more, but to train yourself to be content with little.” - Socrates, c. 450 BC e.
For Socrates, one of the greatest thinkers of antiquity, the source of happiness cannot be reward or someone else's praise. It is determined by an inner sense of success.
And by cutting back on needs, we can learn to appreciate simple pleasures.
"The source of happiness should be sought in oneself, and not in others" - Plato, IV century BC. e.
It is not surprising that Plato, a disciple of Socrates, defines happiness in a similar way.
Happiness, according to Plato, is satisfaction from your own achievements: to run a hundred meters faster, read more books, and so on, and not from what these achievements can bring you.
"Happiness depends on ourselves" - Aristotle, c. 300 BC e.
When Plato's disciple Aristotle got to the bottom of the problem, the idea that happiness is something we create ourselves became generally accepted.
In other words, it is not a gift from other people or things that we manage to get. We create happiness ourselves, and we ourselves are responsible for keeping it.
“I have learned that it is better to achieve happiness by limiting my desires than by trying to satisfy them.” - John Stuart Mill, 19th century.
John Stuart Mill was a titan of liberalism and perhaps one of the most significant figures in history. He spread faith in freedom with all his might.
In matters of happiness, he adhered to the wisdom of the ancients Greeks... Mill believed in utilitarianism and did not strive for material abundance.
“The more a person meditates on good thoughts, the better his world will be, and the world as a whole” - Confucius, about 500 BC. e.
The book The Power of Positive Thinking and recent research in cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) supporting the link between thoughts, feelings and behavior reinforce Confucius's point of view.
Confucianism sees happiness as a self-fulfilling prophecy - the more reasons we find for it, the stronger it is.
“All the greatest blessings of humanity are within us and within our reach. A wise person is content with his fate, whatever it may be, and does not want what he does not have ”, - Seneca, 1st century BC. e.
The Stoic philosopher and favorite of investor Nassim Taleb and marketer Rain Holiday, firmly believed in what psychologists now call "locus of control."
Some people have it outside. They feel that external forces determine their actions. For others - whom Seneca considered happy - the locus is within.
“If you are depressed, you are living in the past. If you are nervous, you live in the future. If you are calm, you live in the present. " Lao Tzu, around 600 BC e.
Kierkegaard meant that happiness consists in living in the present moment. When we stop perceiving external circumstances as problems and begin to think of them as experiences, it is easier for us to enjoy life.
“Happiness is capricious and unpredictable, like a butterfly: when you try to catch it, it eludes you, but if you distract yourself, it will fall right into your palms.” - Henry David Thoreau was born in 1817 in the USA.
Unsurprisingly, the transcendentalist and civil disobedience advocate took a passive approach to happiness.
As he detailed in his book Walden, Thoreau tried to avoid habits. He believed that a more chaotic approach to life would bring him greater happiness.
This idea is quite compatible with the thought of other philosophers that one should live in the present.
Wisdom surrounds us everywhere, but not everyone and not everywhere are able to discern it. In order not to sit in wild tension and not seek out philosophy in the new Voronin series, pay attention to our selection. Kierkegaard, Socrates, Nietzsche and many others will give their answers to that.
Bertrand Russell
Quite unexpectedly, to hear from a lover of exact sciences, mathematics, an expert in natural sciences and an amazing logic, words provoking love recklessness and something thoughtless.
But his words are absolutely accurate. To rely on reason for love is extremely ignorant, and in our case it is also anti-scientific. Moreover, in love as in "Tetris" - excessive caution leads to the collapse of the relationship.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Happiness is the feeling that strength increases and resistance is overcome.
Kierkegaard meant that happiness consists in living in the present moment. When we stop perceiving external circumstances as problems and begin to think of them as experiences, it is easier for us to enjoy life. As you can see, too much depends on imagination and attitude.
Henry David Thoreau
Happiness is capricious and unpredictable, like a butterfly: when you try to catch it, it eludes you, but if you get distracted, it will sink right into your palms.
Unsurprisingly, the transcendentalist and civil disobedience advocate took a passive approach to happiness. As he detailed in his book Walden, Thoreau tried to avoid habits. He believed that a more chaotic approach to life would bring him greater happiness. This idea is quite compatible with the thought of other philosophers that one should live in the present. Life by past memories is devoid of development, and therefore of meaning, for if a person froze in place, then he got out of the rhythm of life and gradually becomes stiff.