So here's what I mean (I'm afraid I'm kind of stealing Aristotle's idea, but it makes a lot of sense to me.) Everything we choose to do, no matter how small, has a motivation. I'm sure anyone would agree to that. Even if you decide to have lunch, you are motivated by something. And to be motivated means to desire something. Now, I'm pretty sure (at least for normal people) we'd all agree that we desire what we perceive to be good on some level, and we desire that good because we think it will make us happy--maybe not completely happy, but that it will bring some degree of happiness. We eat candy because it tastes good. We eat food we don't like because we know we need to eat to live (and we consider living a good thing). We go to the doctor because we want to be healthy. We visit a friend because we want to relate. We even punish a child because we want them to learn to live a better life.
So clearly our whole existence is defined by a constant search for happiness on some level--be it superficial or not. And most of us would also agree that some types of "happiness" really aren't worth much at all--like that we get from getting drunk, or from going to bed with whatever man takes our fancy or even eating dessert. We might not all agree that those "happinesses" are bad, but I doubt anyone would place very much value on them. So clearly we have some sort of a standard within us, some inner inclination to find happiness that we consider "worth something".
Usually those things we value more are also more lasting--once again, things less dependent on chance and change and a passing whim. We seek the "happinesses" that touch on who and what we are, our inner being. Things like treasured friends and, for many, acts of faith; things that involve caring for other people or working toward a skill that will last our lifetime; things that involve understanding--defining why we are living, what our purpose is, who we are, what is or isn't true.
So, clearly we're all intrinsically motivated to be happy, and the more substantial and lasting that happiness is, the more we value it. That is, we seek happiness that fulfills us--the more it touches on our essence, the more it permanently relates to us, the more we value it. And I doubt anyone would deny that, deep down, everyone desires to be completely happy and at peace, entirely fulfilled. I really think that most people would even agree that everything they do--that matters--in some way is connected to that desire: to be ultimately fulfilled, to be truly and deeply happy with no more longing. In some way or another, we all seek that, I think. We may not really think about it all the time, but I'm pretty sure that is what every person would want more than anything else, if they could have it. So if that's what matters most to us, why aren't we actively seeking it?
So here is the question. Is there an ultimate good--or an ultimate set of goods--that could fulfill us? Or else is it possible to at least get as close to that fulfillment in this life as possible? Many would deny that there is any such perfection, but all would agree that there are some goods that are better than others, that come closer to filling that need than others. So it would make sense that, if we were to attain fulfillment, we would pursue those goods more than the ones which are really useless to any lasting happiness. That is, if we try to make something valueless sustain us, we'll come up pretty unsatisfied and even starving. So, for instance, is a man more likely to find well-being in getting slammed every weekend or in putting effort into a lasting relationship? Is he more likely to find it watching sitcoms or seeking answers to his most pressing questions? I think the answer is obvious in each case. And I think we would at least agree that the key to certain unhappiness is to put stock in enjoyments that mean nothing.
So. I guess that would also mean that to follow your instinctual desires does not guarantee happiness--certainly not in the sense I've been using it. Because it's very possible that 1) those desires go against something you actually value more (so you're choosing them over something better) and 2) that pretty much any instinctual desire, in and of itself, isn't really all that different than any other animal's and is mainly based on the enjoyment of the moment. Which means that a life based purely on desire without reason to correct it is empty. All it cares about is a pleasure for right now, regardless of whether it will last and regardless of whether it is harmful. And I doubt anyone would say that those desires come even close to to touching their very essence--we would all protest that there is more to us than that.
Exactly.
SO, if there's more to us than that, and we ultimately desire a happiness that has something to do with that deeper essence within us, why are we still wasting our time chasing the wind? If we've established it doesn't really give us much of anything and might even hurt us, why are we putting so much stock in it? If it takes a little restraint and sacrifice of empty enjoyment to attain something more real, shouldn't it be a no-brainer? Why would we fight to keep something we're going to lose anyway when giving it up could give us so much more?
I want to finish the argument at some point in the near future. But for now I leave you with something to chew on.
If you're going to sacrifice something, wouldn't you rather sacrifice something that never gave you anything, than the very thing that would fulfill your being?
You say you long for happiness. So what are you going to do about it?
No comments:
Post a Comment