DAY 79 - What is a "Good Life"?

The Happiness Problem

Ask yourself whether you are happy, and you cease to be so.  John Stuart Mill

1. What makes you happy?

The "good life" is often considered one in which you are happy. But what is happiness? This is a well-researched question, with many studies worldwide trying to determine, through statistical analysis, what makes for happiness and how to compare happiness around the globe. Recent studies have linked economic and health factors to create a definition of 'happiness'. In a September 2013 study, theGlobal Happiness Index ranked Canadians as the ninth-happiest people in the world, scoring 7.6, tied with people in Guatemala and Luxembourg. Costa Ricans came first!  Of course, much hinges on how you define happiness, and telling someone that Canadians have an average happiness rating of '7.6' may be difficult to contextualize.

2. Wants and Needs

Does happiness result when our needs are met, when we get what we need or want? Needs are usually defined as those things required for you to keep living. Examples would be food, shelter, or clothing. Wants usually refer to those things that are desirable, that would make your life more pleasant, but are not necessary for you to keep living. Examples might be a cell phone, candy, or a pair of shoes. Of course, there is some disagreement on where needs end and wants begin.

The 20^th century American psychologist Abraham Maslow studied monkeys and people. He developed a theory known as the 'Hierarchy of Needs', often illustrated in pyramid form:

Manslow's Hierarchy of Needs.

The pyramid organizes what people need to be happy, from the most basic needs to more complex ones. The bottom layer of the pyramid includes items essential to survive. Once these are met, an individual will try to satisfy the next level of need: safety. Once one feels safe, an individual will move on to feeling loved, then feeling good about one's self, and then on to the ultimate stage, self-actualization.

Each level must be satisfied in succession. For example, if you are having trouble finding enough to eat, self-esteem will not be your major concern. However, once your basic survival needs are met, you will now possess the desire to move on to the next level of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

Unfortunately, meeting your lower needs does not bring 'complete' happiness, and you will be driven to want more. Only when you reach the top of the pyramid will you achieve a state where you are well-adjusted and reality-centred (this is psychologist-talk for what a philosopher would call happy). At this point, you will stop wanting. However, Maslow estimated that only 2% of people are capable of reaching this state of true happiness. Does that mean that 98% of us are doomed to varying levels of unhappiness?

Maslow's Hierarchy provides a simple ordering of needs and wants that follows a logical sequence. It seems only reasonable that people will seek to satisfy basic needs before moving on to more complex ones, and this is often what happens. For example, studies show that children who do not eat a healthy breakfast perform less effectively in school, as they are under-nourished and their hunger takes priority over self-improvement.

However, the pyramid runs counter to what often happens. There are many examples of successful, self-actualized people who could barely keep themselves fed-the cliché "starving artist", such as Vincent Van Gogh, is an example. According to Maslow's theory, starving artists should not be capable of creativity, as they should be stuck at a lower level of need. Likewise, there are cases of creative, successful people who lose their creativity once they satisfy their lower needs. Perhaps it was insecurity and lack of satisfaction that was needed to drive their determination to succeed in acquiring such high levels of creativity.

3. Materialism/Consumerism

Child steeped in money.

Is the best life to live, the "good life", like one of those hip-hop videos where singers are dressing sharp, driving sweet rides, and wallowing in attention from the opposite sex? Everyone looks good and they're having fun. Money, fame, beauty–is that what makes for a good life? Is "bling" the thing? Is happiness buyable and have-able? Getting and having things: in a modern consumer society like Canada, we are constantly barraged with messages that encourage us to buy more, to have more, and to do more, based on the idea that more is good: the more we consume, the more we spend, the happier we will be.

Certainly, a minimum level of material wealth is necessary to enjoy a comfortable life and satisfy our basic needs. It comes in handy at meeting Maslow's physiological needs. Wealth can buy many things that make life more enjoyable, such as better quality food (and more of it), freedom to do what you wish to do, and security from want. But how much is enough?

As in Maslow's model, it could be argued that once you buy something you wanted, you will no longer want it-because you now have it. You will experience a momentary happiness at achieving your desire, but you will receive no lasting satisfaction. In fact, many people feel unhappy after they purchase something they have wanted. This is particularly the case with higher-value items, such as cars, jewelry, or houses, and the phenomenon is known as buyer's remorse. Frequently, people focus on wanting, and then acquiring something, only to find it gives them little joy once they have it.

Can you identify examples of people who fit the category of "unhappy rich", from popular novels, Hollywood films and even from your own personal life experiences?

There are many opponents of consumerism. They argue that happiness cannot be purchased, and that the happiness of buying and owning is an illusion. The 20^thcentury German-American philosopher Herbert Marcuse criticized modern consumer societies from a Marxist perspective. In One Dimensional Man, he argued that modern societies create false needs, based on the choices offered by society. These restrict our true freedom by focusing our attention on acquiring and having an excessive amount of material items, based on our economic system. 

By convincingly lying to you about what you need, the people selling you these products earn tremendous profits. These false needs become an aspect of social control, and Marcuse argued that people spend too much time working and earning in order to spend and acquire, rather than doing things they really want to do. This makes people one-dimensional. If people were truly free, they would work only enough to acquire what they really needed, rather than what they were told they needed.