[Show all top banners]

oldmaven
Replies to this thread:

More by oldmaven
What people are reading
Subscribers
:: Subscribe
Back to: Kurakani General Refresh page to view new replies
 Happiness - how would you measure it?
[VIEWED 1692 TIMES]
SAVE! for ease of future access.
Posted on 01-01-07 7:13 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

.

Got an insight into the FRONT PAGE of 'the economist'. i am NOT a regular , but just happened to encounter!!! And a question that i'd like to get viewpoints on.


How would you measure "Happiness" ? What is it ? When will you call yourself "HAPPY" or is it JUST SO ! :)


i know , all of us are happy at one GREAT time in a day. Thats for sure. When? On what thoughts , or, why ?? am i proving myself pathetic to start a thread here , hmm.. certainly not ! Let this thread be something that you could write-upon when you're BORED! :P or to make someone else HAPPY! i dont know.



PS: To those who read the article from the magazine , i am not at all concerned with the idea incorporated in that! The write-up is related to affluence. I relate this to general things in life . how a HUMAN BEING measures happiness , not an ECONOMIST !
 
Posted on 01-01-07 8:50 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

sounds cliched but:

1) you have trillions of dollars in your pocket
2) your gf/wife is ms universe
3) you are a CEO of one of the measure revolutionary firms in the world
4) you are a celebrity and a hulk.

doesn't matter - YOU CAN STILL BE UNHAPPY!

happiness is something which comes by realization of good things that life has bestowed upon you and more often that realization comes by small things that you've got. life itself is built upon small things.

you may want to watch this movie-one of the most inspiring and motivational ones that i have watched in recent years.




LooTe
 
Posted on 01-01-07 9:25 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Happiness is just a state of your mind tht induces positive energy flow in your body....i wud suggest measuring happiness in these three words.

Happy, happier and happiest respectively being the last one the most intense...:D
 
Posted on 01-01-07 9:50 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Yes, happiness is a state of mind like pacifier said. It is a relative term ... so we measure happiness in comparision. We won't know the state of happiness unless we know the state of sadness. These ara two sides of a coin - we cannot separate them.
 
Posted on 01-01-07 10:02 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation
Jeremy Bentham
Chapter 1
Of the Principle of Utility
I. Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do. On the one hand the standard of right and wrong, on the other the chain of causes and effects, are fastened to their throne. They govern us in all we do, in all we say, in all we think: every effort we can make to throw off our subjection, will serve but to demonstrate and confirm it. In words a man may pretend to abjure their empire: but in reality he will remain. subject to it all the while. The principle of utility recognizes this subjection, and assumes it for the foundation of that system, the object of which is to rear the fabric of felicity by the hands of reason and of law. Systems which attempt to question it, deal in sounds instead of sense, in caprice instead of reason, in darkness instead of light.

But enough of metaphor and declamation: it is not by such means that moral science is to be improved.

II. The principle of utility is the foundation of the present work: it will be proper therefore at the outset to give an explicit and determinate account of what is meant by it. By the principle of utility is meant that principle which approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever. according to the tendency it appears to have to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question: or, what is the same thing in other words to promote or to oppose that happiness. I say of every action whatsoever, and therefore not only of every action of a private individual, but of every measure of government.

III. By utility is meant that property in any object, whereby it tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness, (all this in the present case comes to the same thing) or (what comes again to the same thing) to prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil, or unhappiness to the party whose interest is considered: if that party be the community in general, then the happiness of the community: if a particular individual, then the happiness of that individual.

IV. The interest of the community is one of the most general expressions that can occur in the phraseology of morals: no wonder that the meaning of it is often lost. When it has a meaning, it is this. The community is a fictitious body, composed of the individual persons who are considered as constituting as it were its members. The interest of the community then is, what is it?—the sum of the interests of the several members who compose it.

V. It is in vain to talk of the interest of the community, without understanding what is the interest of the individual. A thing is said to promote the interest, or to be for the interest, of an individual, when it tends to add to the sum total of his pleasures: or, what comes to the same thing, to diminish the sum total of his pains.

VI. An action then may be said to be conformable to then principle of utility, or, for shortness sake, to utility, (meaning with respect to the community at large) when the tendency it has to augment the happiness of the community is greater than any it has to diminish it.

VII. A measure of government (which is but a particular kind of action, performed by a particular person or persons) may be said to be conformable to or dictated by the principle of utility, when in like manner the tendency which it has to augment the happiness of the community is greater than any which it has to diminish it.

VIII. When an action, or in particular a measure of government, is supposed by a man to be conformable to the principle of utility, it may be convenient, for the purposes of discourse, to imagine a kind of law or dictate, called a law or dictate of utility: and to speak of the action in question, as being conformable to such law or dictate.

IX. A man may be said to be a partizan of the principle of utility, when the approbation or disapprobation he annexes to any action, or to any measure, is determined by and proportioned to the tendency which he conceives it to have to augment or to diminish the happiness of the community: or in other words, to its conformity or unconformity to the laws or dictates of utility.

X. Of an action that is conformable to the principle of utility one may always say either that it is one that ought to be done, or at least that it is not one that ought not to be done. One may say also, that it is right it should be done; at least that it is not wrong it should be done: that it is a right action; at least that it is not a wrong action. When thus interpreted, the words ought, and right and wrong and others of that stamp, have a meaning: when otherwise, they have none.

XI. Has the rectitude of this principle been ever formally contested? It should seem that it had, by those who have not known what they have been meaning. Is it susceptible of any direct proof? it should seem not: for that which is used to prove every thing else, cannot itself be proved: a chain of proofs must have their commencement somewhere. To give such proof is as impossible as it is needless.

XII. Not that there is or ever has been that human creature at breathing, however stupid or perverse, who has not on many, perhaps on most occasions of his life, deferred to it. By the natural constitution of the human frame, on most occasions of their lives men in general embrace this principle, without thinking of it: if not for the ordering of their own actions, yet for the trying of their own actions, as well as of those of other men. There have been, at the same time, not many perhaps, even of the most intelligent, who have been disposed to embrace it purely and without reserve. There are even few who have not taken some occasion or other to quarrel with it, either on account of their not understanding always how to apply it, or on account of some prejudice or other which they were afraid to examine into, or could not bear to part with. For such is the stuff that man is made of: in principle and in practice, in a right track and in a wrong one, the rarest of all human qualities is consistency.

XIII. When a man attempts to combat the principle of utility, it is with reasons drawn, without his being aware of it, from that very principle itself. His arguments, if they prove any thing, prove not that the principle is wrong, but that, according to the applications he supposes to be made of it, it is misapplied. Is it possible for a man to move the earth? Yes; but he must first find out another earth to stand upon.

XIV. To disprove the propriety of it by arguments is impossible; but, from the causes that have been mentioned, or from some confused or partial view of it, a man may happen to be disposed not to relish it. Where this is the case, if he thinks the settling of his opinions on such a subject worth the trouble, let him take the following steps, and at length, perhaps, he may come to reconcile himself to it.

Let him settle with himself, whether he would wish to discard this principle altogether; if so, let him consider what it is that all his reasonings (in matters of politics especially) can amount to?
If he would, let him settle with himself, whether he would judge and act without any principle, or whether there is any other he would judge an act by?
If there be, let him examine and satisfy himself whether the principle he thinks he has found is really any separate intelligible principle; or whether it be not a mere principle in words, a kind of phrase, which at bottom expresses neither more nor less than the mere averment of his own unfounded sentiments; that is, what in another person he might be apt to call caprice?
If he is inclined to think that his own approbation or disapprobation, annexed to the idea of an act, without any regard to its consequences, is a sufficient foundation for him to judge and act upon, let him ask himself whether his sentiment is to be a standard of right and wrong, with respect to every other man, or whether every man's sentiment has the same privilege of being a standard to itself?
In the first case, let him ask himself whether his principle is not despotical, and hostile to all the rest of human race?
In the second case, whether it is not anarchial, and whether at this rate there are not as many different standards of right and wrong as there are men? and whether even to the same man, the same thing, which is right to-day, may not (without the least change in its nature) be wrong to-morrow? and whether the same thing is not right and wrong in the same place at the same time? and in either case, whether all argument is not at an end? and whether, when two men have said, “I like this”, and “I don't like it”, they can (upon such a principle) have any thing more to say?
If he should have said to himself, No: for that the sentiment which he proposes as a standard must be grounded on reflection, let him say on what particulars the reflection is to turn? if on particulars having relation to the utility of the act, then let him say whether this is not deserting his own principle, and borrowing assistance from that very one in opposition to which he sets it up: or if not on those particulars, on what other particulars?
If he should be for compounding the matter, and adopting his own principle in part, and the principle of utility in part, let him say how far he will adopt it?
When he has settled with himself where he will stop, then let him ask himself how he justifies to himself the adopting it so far? and why he will not adopt it any farther?
Admitting any other principle than the principle of utility to be a right principle, a principle that it is right for a man to pursue; admitting (what is not true) that the word right can have a meaning without reference to utility, let him say whether there is any such thing as a motive that a man can have to pursue the dictates of it: if there is, let him say what that motive is, and how it is to be distinguished from those which enforce the dictates of utility: if not, then lastly let him say what it is this other principle can be good for?
Read the whole book at
http://www.la.utexas.edu/research/poltheory/bentham/ipml/ipml.toc.html
He is dead but still lives among us.

 
Posted on 01-02-07 9:00 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

.

Thanks guys for your input.

Danger, wouldnt it be better if you just posted the link? And that was an interesting read on the link. I 'bookmarked' it so that i can go through it at ease later :P

And , that movie "pursuit of happyness" is one movie i am looking forward to. There was some other movie , i saw until recently , tryin' to convey what being happy is ? hmm . not exactly , but , accepting defeat i suppose. I am refering to " Little Miss Sunshine ".

If you just search youtube / google video and many likewise with the term "happiness" you'd have a wonderful time .. i ensure you! All ppl , Happiness and their philosophies ! LOL ..

anyways. remain HAPPY ! HAPPY NEW YEAR , and a HAPPY DAY everyone ! :)
 
Posted on 01-02-07 4:46 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

.

To LooTeKuKur,

MAN .

That movie was awesome. I just saw it today... few hours before .. and it was one great movie. Will Smith n the kiddo deserves the award.

No, i dont need an answer for this thread now! :) phewwwww!
 


Please Log in! to be able to reply! If you don't have a login, please register here.

YOU CAN ALSO



IN ORDER TO POST!




Within last 60 days
Recommended Popular Threads Controvertial Threads
What are your first memories of when Nepal Television Began?
निगुरो थाहा छ ??
Basnet or Basnyat ??
Sajha has turned into MAGATs nest
NRN card pros and cons?
Will MAGA really start shooting people?
मन भित्र को पत्रै पत्र!
Top 10 Anti-vaxxers Who Got Owned by COVID
TPS Work Permit/How long your took?
काेराेना सङ्क्रमणबाट बच्न Immunity बढाउन के के खाने ?How to increase immunity against COVID - 19?
Breathe in. Breathe out.
3 most corrupt politicians in the world
चितवनको होस्टलमा १३ वर्षीया शालिन पोखरेल झुण्डिएको अवस्था - बलात्कार पछि हत्याको शंका - होस्टेलहरु असुरक्षित
शीर्षक जे पनि हुन सक्छ।
Disinformation for profit - scammers cash in on conspiracy theories
someone please tell me TPS is here to stay :(
Nepali doctors future black or white usa ?
Doctors dying suddenly or unexpectedly since the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines
BREAKING: THE LEFT HAS LOST THE SUPREME COURT!
Another Song Playing In My Mind
Nas and The Bokas: Coming to a Night Club near you
NOTE: The opinions here represent the opinions of the individual posters, and not of Sajha.com. It is not possible for sajha.com to monitor all the postings, since sajha.com merely seeks to provide a cyber location for discussing ideas and concerns related to Nepal and the Nepalis. Please send an email to admin@sajha.com using a valid email address if you want any posting to be considered for deletion. Your request will be handled on a one to one basis. Sajha.com is a service please don't abuse it. - Thanks.

Sajha.com Privacy Policy

Like us in Facebook!

↑ Back to Top
free counters