The Definition of Happiness and Definition

The Elusive Definition of Happiness: A Journey Through Western Thought

The pursuit of happiness is often declared the most fundamental human endeavor, yet its precise definition remains one of philosophy's most enduring and perplexing questions. Is it a fleeting emotion, a state of profound contentment, or a life lived virtuously? This article delves into the rich tapestry of Western philosophical thought, drawing primarily from the Great Books, to explore how thinkers have grappled with defining this ultimate human good, examining its intricate connections to pleasure and pain, and the perennial concepts of good and evil. We shall see that while the answers vary, the inquiry itself illuminates much about the human condition and our place in the cosmos.

The Quest for Eudaimonia: More Than Just a Feeling

From the earliest philosophical inquiries, the concept of happiness has stood at the pinnacle of human aspiration. However, the Greek term most often translated as "happiness" is eudaimonia, which carries a far richer and more profound meaning than our contemporary understanding. It denotes human flourishing, living well, and doing well – a state of being rather than a mere emotional experience. The ancient philosophers understood this distinction, setting the stage for centuries of debate.

Key Philosophical Approaches to Happiness:

Plato's Ideal: For Plato, true happiness was inextricably linked to virtue and the pursuit of the Good. In works like The Republic, he argued that a just soul, one where reason governs spirit and appetite, is a happy soul. This happiness isn't contingent on external circumstances but springs from internal harmony and alignment with the Forms, particularly the Form of the Good. A tyrannical soul, driven by insatiable desires, could never achieve true happiness, regardless of its worldly power or possessions.
Aristotle's Telos: Perhaps the most influential ancient account comes from Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics. He posits that every human activity aims at some good, and there must be a highest good for the sake of which all other goods are pursued. This ultimate end, the telos of human life, is eudaimonia.
- Not Pleasure: Aristotle explicitly distinguishes eudaimonia from pleasure. While pleasure might accompany a happy life, it is not happiness itself. He criticizes those who identify happiness with pleasure, likening them to "cattle."
- Activity of the Soul: Happiness, for Aristotle, is "an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue." It is not a passive state but an active engagement with life, exercising our highest human capacities.
- Complete Life: Furthermore, eudaimonia requires a complete life, as "one swallow does not make a summer." It is a sustained state, not a momentary feeling, and requires a certain degree of external goods (friends, wealth, good birth) to fully flourish, though virtue remains primary.

Pleasure and Pain: Allies, Adversaries, or Indifferent?

The relationship between pleasure and pain and the definition of happiness has been a central point of contention throughout philosophical history.

The Hedonists (Epicurus): Epicurus, while often misunderstood, advanced a sophisticated form of hedonism. He argued that the ultimate good is pleasure, but not crude sensual indulgence. Instead, he defined pleasure as the absence of pain in the body (aponia) and disturbance in the soul (ataraxia). True happiness, for Epicurus, was a state of tranquil contentment, achieved through moderation, friendship, and philosophical contemplation, minimizing sources of physical and mental distress.
The Stoics: In stark contrast, the Stoics (like Seneca and Epictetus) viewed pleasure and pain as "indifferents." They argued that true happiness, or eudaimonia, comes solely from living in accordance with reason and virtue, accepting what is beyond our control with equanimity. External circumstances, including physical pleasure and pain, are irrelevant to one's inner state of virtue and therefore to happiness. A virtuous person can be happy even on the rack, while a vicious person cannot be happy even amidst luxury.

Table 1: Ancient Views on Pleasure and Happiness

Philosopher/School	Relationship to Pleasure	Definition of Happiness
Plato	Secondary, often a distraction from virtue.	A just soul, aligned with the Good; internal harmony.
Aristotle	Accompaniment to virtuous activity, but not happiness itself.	Activity of the soul in accordance with virtue over a complete life (eudaimonia).
Epicurus	The highest good, defined as the absence of pain (aponia) and mental disturbance (ataraxia).	Tranquil contentment and freedom from suffering.
Stoics	An "indifferent"; irrelevant to true happiness.	Living in accordance with reason and virtue, regardless of external circumstances.

Generated Image

Happiness, Good and Evil: The Moral Imperative

The inquiry into the definition of happiness inevitably leads us to the realms of good and evil. Can one truly be happy if one lives an evil life? Most philosophers from the Great Books tradition answer with a resounding no.

Virtue Ethics: For Plato and Aristotle, happiness is intrinsically linked to virtue. To live virtuously is to live well, and to live well is to be happy. An evil act, by definition, is contrary to virtue, and thus contrary to happiness. A person who commits evil acts, even if they gain power or wealth, is seen as deeply unhappy, their soul in disorder. The pursuit of good is not merely a moral obligation but a prerequisite for flourishing.
Consequences of Immorality: Even for Epicurus, while pleasure was the goal, it was not unbridled indulgence. He advocated for prudence and justice, recognizing that immoral actions often lead to future pain and mental disturbance, thereby hindering true happiness.
The Stoic Ideal: For the Stoics, virtue is the sole good, and vice is the sole evil. Everything else is indifferent. Therefore, happiness is solely a matter of living virtuously, aligning one's will with the rational order of the cosmos. To act in accordance with good is to be happy; to act contrary to it is to be miserable, regardless of external fortune.

The philosophical consensus from these foundational texts suggests that happiness is not merely a subjective feeling that can be achieved through any means. Rather, it is deeply intertwined with living a life of moral excellence, understanding the nature of good and evil, and striving for an objective sense of human flourishing.

The Enduring Quest

The definition of happiness remains a vibrant field of inquiry, even as modern thought grapples with psychological, sociological, and neurological perspectives. Yet, the foundational questions posed by the philosophers of the Great Books continue to resonate. They challenge us to look beyond fleeting gratifications and consider what truly constitutes a life well-lived. To define happiness is, in essence, to define what it means to be human at our best.

YouTube Video Suggestions: