According to history there is a correlation between nature of happiness and good life which

Name

nInstructor

nCourse

nDate

nIntroduction

nAccording to history there is a correlation between nature of happiness and good life which attributes the idea of living well in life. Many philosophers have related happiness with good life, which comes after people have money. A Greece philosopher, Democritus suggested that a happy life is not just the result of a favorable fate or the external situations but instead of mans cast of mind, therefore, suggesting that happiness matters in an individuals life (Kesebir, Pelin & Diener, 120). Therefore, it was extremely beneficial to live pleasantly, justly and honorably in order to satisfy human desires. Christian philosophers contradicted with Greece philosophers because they believed that happiness of people in the world lay in the hands of God, therefore, it was pleasurable to devote faith and grace to God. Many people believe that happiness is a virtue or perfection (Kesebir, Pelin & Diener, 121). Happiness is not easy to define because various people have a different sense of satisfactions. These include components of subjective of human well-being that cohere in predictable ways, which include, satisfaction with valuable life domains such as ones health, marriage, and work, life satisfaction, which include judgement of ones life, positive affect such as prevalence of positive moods and emotions as well as low level of negative effects e.g. prevalence of unpleasant moods and emotions.

nMoney and happiness

nThe quest of wealth and happiness open the minds of very many peoples including Americans. More money means that people will have a good life. Happiness in the population is measured through national economic growth that indicates an increase in income and greater well-being and happier society (Esterlin, 6). This brings the questions whether the wealth people in the societies are certainly the most happiest or whether the poor are the unhappiest. According to data from scholarly article that covered 30 surveys from 19 countries in less developed nations and developed countries to fix the relationship between happiness and increase in income shows that typically people who earn more money become happier. However, when the income is increased to all people, it does not happen to increase in the enjoyment of all. The degree of pleasure does not increase because of increase in economic status only but also on social norm by which materials well-being is judged by others (Esterlin, 7). Therefore, increase in material possession in the society produces material progress thus producing a positive impact that helps the person enjoy the happiness-material relation among the individuals. When people are asked to define happiness there are different response from these people, but the most commonly mentioned in many peoples definition include, family considerations, economic matters, and health. Most people include economic matters in their definitions of happiness than the rest two. Less than 10 percent of people include the social and political conditions in their definitions of happiness. Data shows that there is a great correlation between happiness and income (Esterlin, 9). However, it does not mean that there are no happy people among the poor or no unhappy people among the rich. According to Alex Inkeles, people who are economically well, educated, whose jobs require more trainings and skills are reported to be joyous, happy, laughing, satisfied and free of sorrow in their lives. There has never been a report that states that increase in income is inversely proportional to happiness. Studies, even shows that mental health is positively associated to socio-economic status according to several measures of mental health thus there is statistical association between income and emotional well-being of an individual. Therefore, the higher the income the more the individual will enjoy happiness (Esterlin, 8). Therefore, highly paid people are likely to be productive hence they make more money. However, the lower income individuals differ with a big range from the higher income individuals because the occurrence of worries about money is more frequent. Therefore, immense happiness is a result of higher income because it reduces sources of worries in the individuals. Questions are therefore raised, whether when the incomes of the individuals in the countries are increased it would result to more people being happy (Esterlin, 9). One would also ask whether in developed counties where income are higher than less developed countries people are more happier? According to data, richer countries are not typically happier than poorer nations. For example in U.S, the level of happiness did not increase between year 1940 to 1970 although the level of allowances were increased by 60 percent. Therefore, there is no relation between national income and the level of happiness in an individual.

nHowever according to Lane research shows that there are different parts of the world where many people are very poor yet they are very happy (lane, 57). According to Larry Diamond personal satisfaction increases as a country advances economically but money does not buy happiness. This is well elaborated in developed countries because there is no substantial evidence that income leads to more happiness. There may be a possibility that high income people may be more happier than lower income individuals but the fact remains that money does not buy happiness (lane, 59).. Fredrick asserts that among the poor people, money does not buy happiness and well-being. The reason why higher income for a society does not mean more happiness is that the level of requirement, relative to which material is determined, increases with and because of money growth in the community. The needs as perceived by the society members are similar to satisfy those needs hence those with more money are not necessarily the happiest.

nIt is crucial to understand the ideal happiness and actual happiness in order to understand whether people can be happy. Ideal happiness is that kind of happiness that complete and lasting and covers the whole life of a persons life. That kind of happiness is perfect, pure as well as perpetual. Ideal happiness is also at a high standard and it may be difficult for a person to reach at it even if they have money (Kesebir, Perlin & Ed diener, 117). This kind of happiness, unlike the ideal happiness is attainable to people both the poor and the rich. Peoples lives are controlled by both optimistic ideas and pessimistic ideas in their way of thinking and predicting the future. According to Leibniz the world we are living is the best in our lives. However, Hegesias suggest that happiness was unattainable and that it was worthless living this world whether you have money or not. This psychologist was pessimist about live, human happiness depicting that human live is full of suffering, and that lack of money in this world are inevitable sources of happiness. According to Diener and Diener in their article, “most people are happy” there are enough evidence that most people are happy because they fall in the positive range of happiness scale. This range include people from disadvantaged groups such as quadriplegics as well as those with low income levels. In support of this a survey in American showing that over 85% of people are either very happy or happy. Likewise, most people reports being happy most of the time. Most negative emotions such as lack of money, fear and anger result to an individual focusing on an immediate problem or threat that he/she faces which contributes to evolutionary fitness (Kesebir, Perlin & Ed diener, 118). According to Barbara Fredericksons “broaden and build theory, positive thinking allows a person to broaden their thoughts. This makes the individual to develop intellectual, social, psychological and physical resources over a given period. According to this theory positive thinking helps the person to adaptive well to the environment and allows persons to develops new goals for personal development. Furthermore, in humanities, there is an idea that no single person is doomed for unhappy live for live either they have money or not. Each person has a specific period of happiness in his or her lives in spite of being poor or being rich. However, happiness will only lead to goose chance when pursued directly as a goal of existence because happiness comes as a product of very many things. This shows that money only cannot buy happiness in life. Individual can achieve happiness through changing their lifestyles and deliberately make a will to increase their happiness through ways such as counting their blessings as well as meditation (Kesebir, Perlin & Ed Diener, 117). Circumstances such as death of a friend and job loss affect a person temporarily and will change as soon as that person succeeds. Hedonic treadmill theory suggests that our emotional system adapts to almost everything that happens to peoples lives whether good or bad.

nConclusion

nIncome and satisfaction are not directly related, but people have increased desire for money. Sometimes money buys comfort and social esteem. Happiness is influenced by factors such as economic level, health marital status and social status of the communities. However according to lanes argument money cannot buy happiness. Most poor people living in less developed countries are actually very happy. Furthermore, the national income of a country cannot be used to determine the level of individuals in that country. Increase in income of individuals does not lead to increase in happiness for all people. Money is very useful in daily live of individuals but it is not the core factor why people are happy.

nWork cited

nEasterlin, Richard A. “Does Money Buy Happiness?” Public Interest (1973) 3-10. Print

nKesibir, Pelin and Ed Diener. “In Pursuit of Happiness: Empirical answers to philosophical questions.” Perspective on Psychological Science 3 (2008) 117-123. Print.

nLane, Robert E. “Does Money Buy Happiness?” Public Interest (1993) 56-57. Print