HOW TO BE HAPPY
03 July 2008
We all think about how we can be happier and what
constitutes a good life, right? It is certainly a topic
that has kept the philosophers busy. Let’s look
at what the great thinkers over time have written on
how to be happy.
Pleasure
Some say that what makes people happy is subjective
and differ from person to person. Life has no objective
meaning in itself. You have to figure out what makes
you happy and you have the freedom to live your life in
a way that pleases you.
The writer of Ecclesiastes sums it up well in saying
that there is nothing better for a person than that he
should eat and drink and find enjoyment in his work
(Ecc 2:24).
You will encounter situations where the world around
you and your desires do not match. This can be overcome
by optimising your world to serve your purposes (a very
popular approach in the West today); or by accepting
that you can not control the hostile world and should
rather reduce your wants, desires and wishes so that
they can be fulfilled (more popular in the East).
Ironically, this hedonistic philosophy that set out to
promote the pursuit of pleasure ended up by advocating
the end of all pursuits. So many students committed
suicide after hearing Hegesias’ lectures at
Alexandria, that King Ptolemy stopped him from
teaching. Hegesias taught that the purpose of life is
the end of all suffering and sorrow and that death is a
happy, pain-free alternative to life.
Self-actualisation
The classic humanistic view is that you should develop
your innate potential, your ‘self’.
Abraham Maslow developed a
generalised hierarchy of people’s needs, starting
with the most basic and ending with self-actualisation.
It is important to realise, however, that the things we
can potentially excel in differ from person to person,
which also means that what is a happy life will not be
the same for all of us.
Some suggest that you should develop your potential by
focusing on the one or two things that you have talent
for (as illustrated in the 80/20 principle), while
others prefer to focus on a wide range of skills to
become a ‘complete’ person.
A radical Christian humanistic view that focuses not
only on one or two aspects, but on actualisation of the
entire person, is the ‘imitation of
Christ’. The aim is an objective view of the good
life: being Christlike.
Fellowship
This model states that it is only in and through
relationships that we can be fully human – being
human is being in relation. The idea that a solitary
person is an incomplete human being can already be
found with the ancient Greeks. It was taught that Zeus
divided people into two parts and since then every
person is incomplete and goes through life passionately
seeking to be reunited with his or her other half.
In Christianity the goal of life is often seen as
communion with God and other believers. Augustine
wrote: ‘our hearts are restless until they rest
in You.’ The New Testament teaches that all the
members of the church, each with his or her unique
talents, together form the body of Christ on earth.
Conclusion
In developing a life strategy for a happy or good life,
we can take something from all of these approaches. We
do have some basic needs that have to be met, we do
have potential that must be developed in order to feel
good about ourselves, we do need good relationships
with God and a few like-minded people.
Let’s get one thing clear, however. We have to
accept that complete happiness or perfection is just
not going to happen in this life. No matter how many
inspirational self-help books you read on how to be
thinner, more successful, love God more, or how many
hours you spend in prayer, there is a limit on what the
natural man can achieve and endless constraining
factors outside of your control. Accept it. You will
never be perfect or perfectly content in this life.
Reference: Sarot M & Stoker W, (Editors) 2004. Religion
and the good life. Assen: Royal Van Gorcum.
Comment: