Does everyone deserve to be happy?

[Roger]

So, are we talking about sustained "happiness" or moments in which we are "happy"?

Bold line is the question of this thread.
Happiness are momentary and we can create them. So we are trying to discuss about this.

Hope, now you will share your opinions....

 

[That Girl]

Thanks Roger.

Okay, if the case is that momentary happiness that is fleeting and sweet then yes, I think everyone deserves to have them. From the highest saint to lowest sinner. To wish eternal misery on an individual is something I am not inclined to do nor do I believe I have the authority to do it. I am not the person to judge whether or not someone deserves happiness. It's those moments that let us rest and just be, you grow from all the hard times. It's important to rest and reflect on who you have become in the happy times.

 

[LadyINFJ]

What do you think, does everyone deserve to be happy & fulfilled, or only those who do good things/the right things?

Everybody. As long as it doesn't cost somebody else's happiness.

 

[TinyBubbles]

Everybody. As long as it doesn't cost somebody else's happiness.

but that's just it isn't it? many things that give you enjoyment are at the cost of somebody else's happiness, such as if you get a new job - someone else had to miss out. if you get a book published, someone else is not getting their's published. enjoying a laugh with a friend - that friend could've spent their time amusing someone else who needed the laugh more than you but isn't.

i'm not proposing we be completely altruistic because that is impossible, but for certain things.. how do you not feel guilt over taking away from others? if someone gives you a present, that's a present they don't have, that's something they can't use, that's something that might (or might not!) make you happy but will definitely deprive them...

 

[randomsomeone]

but that's just it isn't it?

No, I think the logic there is a tangent. Many, many kinds of happiness (the ones that really matter) take nothing from anyone an can be, in fact, a source of happiness to others, too.

 

[LadyINFJ]

but that's just it isn't it? many things that give you enjoyment are at the cost of somebody else's happiness, such as if you get a new job - someone else had to miss out. if you get a book published, someone else is not getting their's published. enjoying a laugh with a friend - that friend could've spent their time amusing someone else who needed the laugh more than you but isn't.

i'm not proposing we be completely altruistic because that is impossible, but for certain things.. how do you not feel guilt over taking away from others? if someone gives you a present, that's a present they don't have, that's something they can't use, that's something that might (or might not!) make you happy but will definitely deprive them...

If I get a job, it will be because somebody else left and took another job. If I get a book published, somebody else will get his/her book published somewhere else. What the statement you quoted meant was that:
I should not make sure somebody gets fired for me to get hired. I should not steal other's possessions because it will make somebody sad. I should not cheat and mislead people to earn something at the expense of their loss, etc.
In other words, we must not create our happiness by actively and consciously creating other people's sadness.

 

[RecklessDreamer]

I think everyone deserves a fair amount of happiness in life, but those people who don't do what they can to make others happy shouldn't have others make them happy. Sometimes people need a little dose of unhappiness to put things into perspective. Still, no one should have to live and not know joy.

 

[the]

no. i dont see why they would deserve anything at all

 

[waterbaby]

We seldom understand happiness to start with.....ultimately we can only find it within. It can take a long time to come to grips with this.

I think that *true* happiness wouldn't create suffering for others, and that anything else must be a skewed perception of what the word "happiness" means. So, following that logic, yes, everyone has a right to be happy. I know... idealistic, much?

 

[TinyBubbles]

No, I think the logic there is a tangent. Many, many kinds of happiness (the ones that really matter) take nothing from anyone an can be, in fact, a source of happiness to others, too.

such as?

 

[TinyBubbles]

If I get a job, it will be because somebody else left and took another job.

not necessarily.

If I get a book published, somebody else will get his/her book published somewhere else.

plenty of manuscripts never get published.

What the statement you quoted meant was that:
I should not make sure somebody gets fired for me to get hired. I should not steal other's possessions because it will make somebody sad. I should not cheat and mislead people to earn something at the expense of their loss, etc.
In other words, we must not create our happiness by actively and consciously creating other people's sadness.

i agree with you but what i'm trying to say here is, regardless of intent, regardless of conscious choice, if you do something to make yourself happy and in the process inadvertently make someone else sad, then how can that not be wrong? yes, you're not setting out to upset them - only to please yourself - but the effect is the same.

 

[That Girl]

i agree with you but what i'm trying to say here is, regardless of intent, regardless of conscious choice, if you do something to make yourself happy and in the process inadvertently make someone else sad, then how can that not be wrong? yes, you're not setting out to upset them - only to please yourself - but the effect was the same.

I don't think it's wrong. No one is going to be happy all the time or have everything work out for them. It's important to acknowledge this for yourself as well as others. Besides, you aren't taking away from someone when they never had it in the first place. If you take the example that someone didn't get a job because you did then you'd also have to take responsibility for situations such as a person being late for work because you weren't paying attention and they had to wait through another light cycle. Is it really your fault that they didn't give themselves enough time to get to work? Is it your fault that the other person wasn't as qualified as you?

 

[TinyBubbles]

I don't think it's wrong. No one is going to be happy all the time or have everything work out for them. It's important to acknowledge this for yourself as well as others. Besides, you aren't taking away from someone when they never had it in the first place. If you take the example that someone didn't get a job because you did then you'd also have to take responsibility for situations such as a person being late for work because you weren't paying attention and they had to wait through another light cycle. Is it really your fault that they didn't give themselves enough time to get to work? Is it your fault that the other person wasn't as qualified as you?

it wouldn't exactly be your fault, but you wouldn't be completely absolved of responsibility either. if you knew that person needed to get to work and you had the opportunity to help them get there on time, and you didn't do what you could, then you've in a way created their problem - or at least made it worser than it had to be. is a good person simply one that doesn't do bad - or one that ensures good?

 

[That Girl]

it wouldn't exactly be your fault, but you wouldn't be completely absolved of responsibility either. if you knew that person needed to get to work and you had the opportunity to help them get there on time, and you didn't do what you could, then you've in a way created their problem - or at least made it worser than it had to be. is a good person simply one that doesn't do bad - or one that ensures good?

I swear I don't mean this as a smartalec remark but:

Is a bad person one who intentionally does wrong or one that doesn't ensure good?

It seems to me that you're arguing everyone has a responsibility to be hyper-conscious of everyone else at all times. Life has a butterfly effect, regardless of what you do it will eventually trickle down to where it affects someone negatively. You could make someone happy enough to hold the door for someone, who helps the little old lady cross the street, who buys the girl scout's cookies, who gets so excited on the way home she runs over someone's foot with her wagon. Are you really responsible for that person's foot?

 

[under skies]

Is happiness always situational? In every example of happiness, is it always directly because of something physically happening or changing for the advantage of one and the disadvantage of another?

I'm not arguing a point one way or another, but it just seems like that's the way this discussion is going. (And if it's going in that direction, this discussion is about to get very sci-fi. As That Girl pointed out, you do have a butterfly effect. Every tiny change somehow affects the state of things for every individual in different ways.)

 

[TinyBubbles]

I swear I don't mean this as a smartalec remark but:

Is a bad person one who intentionally does wrong or one that doesn't ensure good?

It seems to me that you're arguing everyone has a responsibility to be hyper-conscious of everyone else at all times. Life has a butterfly effect, regardless of what you do it will eventually trickle down to where it affects someone negatively. You could make someone happy enough to hold the door for someone, who helps the little old lady cross the street, who buys the girl scout's cookies, who gets so excited on the way home she runs over someone's foot with her wagon. Are you really responsible for that person's foot?

lol you have a good point, i guess it doesn't make sense to think in such a way... still, fine line you know? between justifying something you know is wrong because you don't want to feel responsible for its consequences, and dismissing it because of the impracticality of taking responsbility for events ten steps in the future - or credit for them either, if you want to look at the other side of the coin.

i don't know why but i'm kind of obsessed with figuring out the ethical thing to do (someone want to psychoanalyze me? lol). it's partly why i'm here on these forums - and i know for a fact i ain't always a good person, i look at my hypocritical actions with disdain, and i can't stand it- i look at my life and the things i'm responsible for and i feel so guilty sometimes, because i'm not giving it my all, i'm not trying hard enough, i'm not doing the right thing. but then i think about, you know, what's the right thing? is there a good or bad? should i stop worrying about it? i feel a lot of shame for not living up to my own damn standards, and i think it's partly why i keep posting these ridiculous threads.

wow, don't know where that came from :/ derail over, back to your regularly scheduled program now -.-

 

[That Girl]

Is happiness always situational? In every example of happiness, is it always directly because of something physically happening or changing for the advantage of one and the disadvantage of another?

I believe that happiness has situational reactivity but, depending on the individual, can endure despite this.
Something needs to happen for the spark of happiness to be created. I don't think anyone can think of an instance where, truly, nothing has happened and a person is happy. However, there may have residual happiness from an even that has occurred before so it is perceived that nothing has happened to make said individual happy. Therefor, happiness is both trait-like and state-like.

 

[arbygil]

lol you have a good point, i guess it doesn't make sense to think in such a way... still, fine line you know? between justifying something you know is wrong because you don't want to feel responsible for its consequences, and dismissing it because of the impracticality of taking responsbility for events ten steps in the future - or credit for them either, if you want to look at the other side of the coin.

i don't know why but i'm kind of obsessed with figuring out the ethical thing to do (someone want to psychoanalyze me? lol). it's partly why i'm here on these forums - and i know for a fact i ain't always a good person, i look at my hypocritical actions with disdain, and i can't stand it- i look at my life and the things i'm responsible for and i feel so guilty sometimes, because i'm not giving it my all, i'm not trying hard enough, i'm not doing the right thing. but then i think about, you know, what's the right thing? is there a good or bad? should i stop worrying about it? i feel a lot of shame for not living up to my own damn standards, and i think it's partly why i keep posting these ridiculous threads.

wow, don't know where that came from :/ derail over, back to your regularly scheduled program now -.-

You may (heh, unintentional pun) have many "Fi" tendencies, that conflict. It's important to keep your values and when your values conflict with reality, you feel guilt.

Happiness is a choice, really, and we can only be responsible for our own. We can try and make life better for others but if others have expectations on us to provide their happiness, then we become co-dependent and no one is truly "happy."

"Good" is also a matter of perspective. Who are you comparing yourself to? No one is truly good, no one is truly altruistic. So the question becomes, who are we? What are we doing all of this for, and for what reasons? For whom?

Perhaps the answers you need are more spiritual than humanistic?

 

[TinyBubbles]

You may (heh, unintentional pun) have many "Fi" tendencies, that conflict. It's important to keep your values and when your values conflict with reality, you feel guilt.

you could be onto something. values are important to me; i think defining exactly what they are takes up a lot of my time, because i don't want to be caught doing something that goes against them, especially unintentionally.

Happiness is a choice, really, and we can only be responsible for our own. We can try and make life better for others but if others have expectations on us to provide their happiness, then we become co-dependent and no one is truly "happy."

happiness is a choice? i'd argue with that... it's at least strongly influenced by what's happening to you. as for being responsible for other people's happiness, like i implied earlier, it's contextually-dependent. if i could do something to alleviate someone's eventual pain but didn't, i'd consider that wrong. but like That Girl pointed out, taken too far this ideology becomes nonsense.

"Good" is also a matter of perspective. Who are you comparing yourself to? No one is truly good, no one is truly altruistic. So the question becomes, who are we? What are we doing all of this for, and for what reasons? For whom?

not really comparing myself to anyone, but to a standard, to which we should all be adhering. thing is, i know you're right, good is subjective, and nobody is "truly" good (or truly bad, for that matter), which is quite frustrating because it implies anything is possible - any action is as doable and correct as any other. and i think i have trouble with that concept, because then.. how do you choose what the heck to do with your life? how do you judge whether someone is doing something good or not? how do you know how to respond? the ambiguity is distressing.

Perhaps the answers you need are more spiritual than humanistic?

perhaps. although i'm an atheist... i find myself wondering about God a lot.. a heck of a lot for someone who professes not to believe..

thanks arbygil

 

[Skoffin]

No everyone deserves happiness, those that don't deserve suffering.