Running Head: Happiness 1

Happiness

Courtney P. Stout

University of North Carolina at Charlotte

Abstract

Like people, the subject of happiness and the meaning of happiness is far more complex

than initially thought. There are various ways to interpret its meaning and there are no ways that

are necessarily right or wrong. The sources in this paper will discuss the numerous

interpretations of happiness stemming back from the Ancient Greek days, the eighteenth century,

and to the modern-day United States. Each article explains a different concept of happiness that

is still open to interpretation. Additionally, the paper includes a recent survey conducted by

myself that dives into some specifics of happiness. I surveyed fifty-one UNC Charlotte students

with varying genders, majors, etc. Due to the abundant amount of data I collected, not all the

data will be included in this paper. The data that will be in this paper is how students define

happiness, certain people, activities, or things that make them happy specifically, whether there

is egoism related to their happiness and any interests/hobbies that may correlate with their

happiness. A conclusion is then made overall to defend my argument that happiness depends

upon a case to case basis and it’s something that everyone has control of.
 3

A smile. A laugh. Tears. These are a few ways people represent their happiness. A smile

is practically a universal way of telling others that we are happy, but what is happiness exactly?

When one exclaims that they’re happy, what is the real meaning behind it? From my personal

experience, the term “happiness” seems likable enough to be used commonly in the U.S., making

it a well-known emotion like anger and sadness. However, being called a common emotion does

little to tell us what happiness is and where it comes from. Whether it’s a lifetime achievement or

it changes frequently like the Southern weather, there’s more to happiness than meets the eye.

There isn’t necessarily a right and wrong answer when it comes to the subject of happiness and

this is what this paper will discuss. Like how it’s represented, there are also several ways that can

define what happiness is. Whether it’s in one’s control, luck, or some greater power, happiness

means something different to each person. Although, there is a common theme to happiness and

that is its ambiguity.

Looking at the article “Concepts of Happiness Across Time and Cultures”, happiness is

discussed in several ways (Oishi, Graham, Kesebir, & Galinha, 2013). From an ancient

standpoint, happiness was thought to stem from fortune and good luck compared to both early

and modernized United States’ thinking. More specifically, the Greeks believed that the gods and

luck essentially controlled a person’s happiness. Perhaps that’s why the Greeks had over 20

gods. Contrary to his era’s mindset, Socrates had a slightly different belief. He believed that

happiness was moderately controllable by people, in the sense that children should learn to

appreciate the beauty of both nature and individuals, so as adults they can gain an appreciation

for wisdom and understanding so they’re able to approach happiness respectively (McMahon,

2006). What Socrates believed was that having a background in philosophy influences people’s

happiness and how they’re able to view it. Like Socrates, Greek philosopher Aristotle, agreed
 4

that happiness is based on a philosophical life (Thomson, 1953). However, Aristotle also

believed that happiness included luck and outside factors like resources, good friends, and health.

This means that Aristotle thought that people could be happy and get granted things like health,

friends, and resources, but only if they have good fortune to begin with. That view of good luck

being the key to happiness was perceived by many until the Age of Enlightenment (McMahon,

2006).

Over in America in 1776, Thomas Jefferson-among many others- wrote the Declaration

of Independence (US, 1776). In the document, Jefferson emphasized the active pursuit of

happiness compared to the earlier concepts of passive happiness which includes fortune and luck.

What scholars believe is that Jefferson meant was chasing after private happiness. Private

happiness in Jefferson’s eyes was being a good citizen and not having one’s happiness interfere

with public happiness (Oishi et al., 2013). In that time of Enlightenment, article “On public

happiness” states that public happiness also meant political freedom (Roodt, 2014). The

important key to general happiness was being liberated from any oppressive rule. This especially

counts for the numerous amounts of revolutions that occurred in the eighteenth century. When

seeing happiness from this perspective, we can agree that woman and minorities in the United

States weren’t publicly happy until the twentieth century. Fast forwarding a few hundred years

later in the United States, public happiness is now represented through the laws that bind U.S.

citizens. Public happiness doesn’t necessarily guarantee individual happiness with its citizens,

but it helps to shape personal values and forces us to value one thing over another, rather than

valuing them both equally. Looking at happiness in modernized America, it isn’t seen as a result

of deep logic or political thinking. Instead, happiness is perceived as positive feelings and

something in one’s control (Oishi et al., 2013).

When dwelling into the concept of happiness being in one’s control, article “Person-

Oriented Conception of Happiness and Some Personality Theories: Comparative Analysis”

concludes that egoism is an important factor in it (Levit, 2014). Rather than egoism being look at

in a completely negative light, it’s seen as an “obligation toward himself and happiness”. The

quote means that in order to gain happiness, we must look after ourselves and achieve our own

goals. Backing up this claim is A. Rand’s writings. In the writings, Rand stated an “individual

should attain happiness with his or her own abilities” (Rand, 2011). This is where the word

ethical egoism comes in. Ethical egoism or rational egoism is when one aims to achieve their

own goals without invading someone else’s. It’s to be believe that everyone has a prime

obligation towards their self and happiness. It’s reported by K. Muzdybaev that individuals

whose egoism scores are high are typically more positive and victorious (Muzdybaev, 2000).

This also works vice versa. If one lacks egoism, then they’re less likely to be successful and

optimistic. Although having a big ego does good for our personal happiness, Levit does believe

that the ego should be centered around more of a “rational” one than a “materialistic” one so

we’re able to connect with individuals who share interests like our own (Levit, 2009).

In the article “Explaining Happiness” happiness depends on a variety of things

(Easterlin, 2003, p.1). For one, it says that each person has a “setpoint” of happiness that’s

predetermined by personality and genetics. This is called the “setpoint theory”. Events such as

significant injuries, loss of a job, marriage, death, etc. have an influence on a person’s setpoint

happiness and whether it’s lower or increases. The theory suggests that social and economic

conditions matter heavily on a person’s happiness. It also proposes that an increase in income

makes a lasting impact on happiness. Moreover, the “setpoint theory” can be called the “more is

better” theory. Things such as accidents and serious diseases reduce an individual’s happiness
 6

greater than the long-term impact effects of disease due to the lack of adjustment individuals

may experience.

One thing that all my sources agree on is that happiness nowadays is a number of things

and it depends on individuals themselves. There’s a distinction between individuals’ happiness

and what the public as a whole perceive as happiness. Americans believe that in their eyes, the

ball is in their court when happiness is involved. None of the sources stated that happiness is

temporary or that it should be achieved at a certain point in one’s life. There was a lot of

information I found through my research that gives me a lot to think over. For example, I haven’t

thought about public happiness vs. personal happiness. Personally, I thought happiness could be

anything ranging from money to a father or mother figure. However, the sources reminded me

that happiness is very subjective, and it doesn’t just depend on where people live, but their

lifestyle, personality, and how well off are they in terms of economic status as well. I would like

to argue that happiness doesn’t just depend on money, and it also doesn't depend on only having

loved ones. I’m interested in what makes other people happy and if they know it’s not one factor

that makes them happy, but multiple factors. That’s why I decided to conduct a study of my own.

Through a survey, I collected data from fifty-one UNC Charlotte students and analyzed them

randomly. The anonymous survey pertains to happiness. I asked them various questions but

decided to analyze their definitions of what happiness is, whether being selfish is important to

them being happy, their interests, and what specific people, objects, and activities make them

happy and why do they make them happy.

When analyzing my results, I gathered that thirty-nine participants out of the fifty-one

believed that it’s important that there is some type of egoism involved with the subject of

happiness. “Sometimes,” an unnamed student wrote, “it is important to be happy yourself”. The
 7

other eleven believed that it’s important to put others’ happiness in front of their own because of

their dislike of the thought of being self-centered. What all participants had in common was the

fact that each of them had multiple factors that influenced their happiness. For the majority,

family, friends, physical activity and music are the reasons for what makes the participants happy

because of how good they feel from it and the acceptance they feel as well. Those reasons also

include why the fifty-one people’ interests were centered mainly around working out, hanging

out with friends, sports, and video games. However, there are also uncommon things that some

participants believe make them such as jewelry, baking, pets, writing, showering, etc. This

proves that the sources to happiness varies.

In conclusion, happiness is based on several factors. Not just one person or thing can

make us happy. Despite what was previously thought in the past, I believe that happiness is in

each of our control. It’s important for us to control our own happiness because happiness is a

state of mind. If someone else is controlling how we think, then how are we supposed to know

ourselves what makes us happy. From the survey data I collected, happiness is associated with

positivity and acceptance. Having something to smile about is significant in our lives because it

helps with our purpose and makes the world seem not so bad.
 8

References:

Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Hunter, J. (2014). Happiness in everyday life: The uses of experience

sampling. Flow and the Foundations of Positive Psychology, 89-101.

doi:10.1007/978-94-017-9088-8_6

Easterlin, R. A. (2003). Explaining happiness. Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences, 100(19), 11176-11183. doi:10.1073/pnas.1633144100

Levit, L. Z. (2014). Person-Oriented conception of happiness and some personality theories.

SAGE Open, 4(1), 215824401351892. doi:10.1177/2158244013518926

Levit L. Z. (2009). Schastje ot uma [Happiness of the Mind (2nd ed.)]. Minsk, Belarus:

Varaksin.

McMahon D. M. (2006). Happiness: A history. New York, NY: Atlantic Monthly Press.

Muzdybaev, K. (2000). Egoizm lichnosti [Selfishness of Personality]. Psychological Journal,

21(2), 27-39.

Oishi, S., Graham, J., Kesebir, S., & Galinha, I. C. (2013). Concepts of happiness across time

and cultures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(5), 559-577.

doi:10.1177/0146167213480042

Rand A. (2011). Dobrodetelj egoizma [The Virtue of Selfishness]. Moscow, Russia: Alpina

Publishers.

Thomson J. A. K. (1953). The ethics of aristotle: The Nicomachean ethics. London, England:

Penguin Books.