John Stuart Mill (pictured), discussing the paradox of hedonism (or pleasure), once pointed out that happiness:
was only to be attained by not making it the direct end. Those only are happy (I thought) who have their minds fixed on some object other than their own happiness...aiming thus at something else, they find happiness along the way...ask yourself whether you are happy, and you cease to be so. The only chance is to treat, not happiness, but some end external to it, as the purpose of life. (Mill, pp. 117-118)
Mill, and many other philosophers (Sidgwick and Aristotle, arguably), have insisted that trying to be happy is counterproductive because, they assumed, it is difficult to acquire happiness directly. They advised us to focus on things other than happiness, otherwise, we would be doomed to sadness. Recent studies suggest this thesis might be wrong. Trying to be happy doesn't necessarily obstruct the experience of happiness and trying to be happy, it seems, can enhance our happiness.
Bibliography --
Mill, J. S., & Robson, J. M. (1989). Autobiography. London, England: Penguin Books.
Is there an objective measurement of happiness? Is subjective self reporting of happiness distinguishable from actual happiness?
Cliff, are there posts on the blog that tackle the issue of defining what all of these people are chasing, other than a subjective feeling of contentment/pleasure?
Posted by: Phil Wortas | October 01, 2013 at 04:25 PM
Interesting stuff! There is no way John Stuart Mill would have been cast as a lovable octogenarian in Grumpiest Old Men.
Can I ask you two things that you might not answer? OK.
1) How reliable are research subjects when reporting on their own happiness?
2) How do you know you're not unintentionally queuing folks to report greater happiness by saying "try to be happy" before asking "are you happy?"
Posted by: Rybold Loonevich | October 01, 2013 at 09:13 AM