The two aspects of happiness: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Social Sciences » The two aspects of happiness » The two aspects of happiness

The two aspects of happiness

Page: 1 2

The two aspects of happiness

nosos
skeptical

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Jul 24, 2004
Location: Coventry, UK
Total Topics: 145
Total Posts: 2290

Posted 01/31/06 - 06:04 AM: Subject: The two aspects of happiness	#1
Waterman (1993) says there are two aspects to happiness. One is "personal expression" and the other is "hedonic enjoyment." Personal expression is self-actualization, i.e. using your talents, taking on meaningful and challenging projects, working hard and guided by your values, and feeling confident and satisfied. Hedonic enjoyment is having fun, i.e. satisfying your needs, feeling relaxed, excited, happy, content, etc., and being able to forget your personal problems. What is very surprising and perhaps quite important was Waterman's finding that the two types of happiness are highly correlated, i.e. happy people tend to achieve and have fun while unhappy people get neither. Vigorous, productive self-actualizing doesn't eliminate fun, it seems to enhance it. Just came across this on a website I was looking at & I found it quite an interesting little paragraph. Anyone got any thoughts on it?
"The men of the future will yet fight their way to many a liberty that we do not even miss? - Max Stirner "The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." - JS Mill "I'd rather be a crying little pussy than a faggy Goth kid." - Butters

Floyd
Cool

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Dec 16, 2003
Total Topics: 31
Total Posts: 1964

Last Blog: Womenâ€™s Pay Key to Child Poverty

1 of 1 people found this post helpful Posted 01/31/06 - 08:56 AM:	#2
This happiness of "personal expression" reminds me of what Nietzsche called the will to power. And also, what Theodore Kaczynski called the power process. I think we all know "hedonic pleasure". Nobody can deny the simple pleasures of life. Like eating cake. However, few would philsophically define happiness as merely this. -Floyd
Short and to the point. \| Online Philosophy Club \| Book & Reading Forums \| My Philosophy Articles "Only the descent into the hell of self-knowledge can pave the way to godliness." ~Immanuel Kant

Pyrite
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Location: Suburbs of NYC
Total Topics: 23
Total Posts: 280

Posted 01/31/06 - 10:11 AM:	#3
Perhaps happiness is not merely hedonic pleasure, but I'd hardly go so far as to make a distinction as to there being two different kinds of happiness. I can hardly see the difference between realizing a personal goal, and eating a piece of cake when I look at it in this manner; both were desires that were satisfied and led to the emotional pleasure of the individual. Why go beyond that? Certainly there can be different degrees of happiness, but I'm uncertain of different types.
Jesus has a plan for me, a life of sin and infamy!

AppleCider
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 30, 2005
Location: Chicago
Total Topics: 4
Total Posts: 18

1 of 1 people found this post helpful Posted 01/31/06 - 09:22 PM:	#4
This kinda reminds me of Plato's Ethics, which calls for a harmony of the mind, body, and soul. You feed the mind with knowledge, the body with food and physical pleasures, and the soul with spiritual experience.
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - I think that I think, therefore I think that I am. -Ambrose Bierce

Floyd
Cool

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Dec 16, 2003
Total Topics: 31
Total Posts: 1964

Last Blog: Womenâ€™s Pay Key to Child Poverty

1 of 1 people found this post helpful Posted 02/01/06 - 11:16 AM:	#5
Pyrite, I think the difference is between the fundamental influence the "feeling" has on the person. While the hedonic pleasure is short-lived, the "personal expression" effects the person's state of contentedness (or discontentedness). The contentedness one receives through "personal expression" can last through many hedonic-influenced moods. For example, while one may have a continual contentedness, they may find many superficial pleasures and displeasures that change their temporary mood. While it could be argued that they are just two ends of the same emotional spectrum, the fact that I think tey can ac independently makes me believe they are separate. I'd also like to note that it appears to me that hedonic pleasures are always compensated by equal superficial displeasures. I think most people agree that (hedonic) happiness only feel as good as they are compared to displeasures, and vice-versa. For example, sitting down lazily on the couch after work tends to feel as good as the long day at work felt bad. In other light, we often notice that if one wins the lottery and “gets everything they want”, that, after it balances out, they end up no more hedonically happy then before. In contrast, one's contentedness doesn't have such a compensative relationship with felling of discontent. -Floyd
Short and to the point. \| Online Philosophy Club \| Book & Reading Forums \| My Philosophy Articles "Only the descent into the hell of self-knowledge can pave the way to godliness." ~Immanuel Kant

Pyrite
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Location: Suburbs of NYC
Total Topics: 23
Total Posts: 280

Posted 02/02/06 - 11:27 AM:	#6
Perhaps, although I've found some hedonic pleasures make me feel extremely happy not for accomplishing anything, but for simply having experienced the hedonic pleasure in and of itself. I'm simply not certain that there can be a distinction between the two activities. For example, going to a concert and indulging oneself in dance and music is (in my opinion) a hedonic pleasure, that oftentimes makes me happy about it for a very long time. This is no goal of mine, and it does not come with the alternative discontent. So therefore, why should it bring me a great deal of happiness? Alternatively, I've found happiness in writing my own music thus accomplishing a personal goal not related to hedonism. The pleasure I experience from one, while different in it's relation to me, does not effect the mood that I experience. Both moods are simply euphoric happiness, they just came about in different manners. I fail to see a distinct line with which to categorize the happiness experienced.
Jesus has a plan for me, a life of sin and infamy!

Floyd
Cool

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Dec 16, 2003
Total Topics: 31
Total Posts: 1964

Last Blog: Womenâ€™s Pay Key to Child Poverty

1 of 1 people found this post helpful Posted 02/02/06 - 12:36 PM:	#7
Well one idea I just thought of now, it is possible that what I'm thinking of as "personal expression happiness" or "contentedness" is actually a cause of happiness and not a form of happiness in itself. In other words, personally expressing ourselves causes (a lot of continuous) hedonic happiness. Thus it would cause happiness that's the same as any other happiness, just the manifestations of this unique cause would appear as though there was a difference. -Floyd
Short and to the point. \| Online Philosophy Club \| Book & Reading Forums \| My Philosophy Articles "Only the descent into the hell of self-knowledge can pave the way to godliness." ~Immanuel Kant

Pyrite
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Location: Suburbs of NYC
Total Topics: 23
Total Posts: 280

Posted 02/03/06 - 12:13 PM:	#8
That makes a lot of sense. And also, a goal that's personal seems to last longer then hedonic happiness, possibly solely because of the anticipation leading up to it's completion, and the greater gravity attached to the situation.
Jesus has a plan for me, a life of sin and infamy!

ecspose
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 11, 2005
Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 102

Posted 02/05/06 - 01:44 AM:	#9
"Personal expression" seems to me as "being appreciated", and "hedonic enjoyment" seems to me as "appreciating other". One comes from within you and your own impact, the painting of your colours upon the world. And the other comes from the workings of someone or something else, that you allow yourself to revel in without actually being a creative part of. It would seem to me that proper psychological nourishment would require a good mix of both.

wuliheron
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Location: Newport News, Va
Total Topics: 10
Total Posts: 3157

Posted 03/03/06 - 08:34 PM:	#10
To love is to be happy with. To be accepting and nonjudgemental with at least an undercurrent of calm and surrenity. Waterman's second kind of happiness I would not call happiness at all. It is a form of excitement.

Page: 1 2

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.