I'm not sure one chooses to be happy or unhappy- there are too many factors involved in the development of the personality and coping skills. It may be entirely inappropriate to be "happy" under certain circumstances. Humans have a wide range of responses to others and life, in general.
On Sep 2, 4:24 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > Ummm is there a duty towards happines for the individual? > > I think it is true that when we humans are not happy then it is > extreamly bad for us on an individual level. I guess then that a duty > of happiness could be argued on the grounds of good health. > > What though if one's desire is to be unhappy? Is the duty towards > living the life that one desires a stronger one than happiness? I > think so, I think that ultimatly the right to be is the strongest > right, and so rather Randian of me I guess, the duty towards the > indivdual living the life he choose s(with the obviouse cavet of > within the law of the land) takes precedent over any percived duty of > happiness, eacspecialy if you chhose to live the unhappy life. > > On 2 Sep, 00:23, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Kant admits that happiness is something very difficult to define. He > > states: "The concept of happiness is such an indeterminate concept > > that, although every human being wishes to attain this, he could still > > never say determinately and consistently with himself what he really > > wishes and wills." > > > However in the Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, Kant suggests > > that attaining happiness is not just a want but a duty. He states: "To > > assure one's own happiness is a duty (at least indirectly); for the > > discontent with one's state, in a press of cares and amidst > > unsatisfied wants, might easily become a great temptation to the > > transgression of duty." > > > I'm thinking that not recognizing this duty leaves one vulnerable to > > the dissatisfying results of false pursuits of happiness. Like Kant's > > example of a wealthy person who thinks there is happiness in wealth > > but then realizes it has no real value due to the anxiety in attaining > > and keeping it. > > > Kant indicates that all men regardless have an innate sense to find > > happiness, referred to as inclination. The dilemma being that much of > > the time one's happiness results in the unhappiness of someone else > > therefore concluding that everyone could not possibly be happy at the > > same time. Even in the Eudemonist sense there are no guarantees or > > there is a great reliability on the individual's ability to achieve > > happiness. > > > I see a direct conflict between desires, happiness and morality > > because much of the pursuit of happiness creates an abandonment of > > morality and desire fails to promote happiness, perhaps temporarily or > > at least at the achievement level. > > > Aside from morality issues the end road for me is the question of the > > duty to assure happiness. Is there individual duty to assure > > happiness and if there is would each individual happiness lead to the > > ultimate happiness of society. I've always said, "If you want to be > > happy make the people around you happy". Make the world around you > > happy and you will be living in a happy world.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
