Wednesday, August 15, 2007

In the pursuit of Happiness I strive....




Me: So this is what it means to be happy?

My response to me: I suppose…

Me: You suppose? Shouldn’t you know if you’re happy?

My response to me: I’ve never really stopped to think about it. Mind you I haven’t stopped to think I’m
unhappy either.

Me: so you’re suggesting that being happy is the lack of unhappy?

My response to me: That makes sense no? We all need a point of reference. Happiness is the lack of unhappiness.

Me: yeah but where does neutral fit into all that?

My response to me: hmm… you’re right… I suppose neutral would be what I just described.

Me: so you’re not happy then? You’re neutral?

My response to me: well no… not really I’d say I’m happy.

Me: how’s that? You don’t have a point of reference like you mentioned to draw a comparison against… well… unless you have a definition for happiness.

My response to me: It changes really. What I construe as happiness today isn’t really what it was yesterday.

Me: So with no static reference and a changing definition of happiness from one day to the next… essentially you could be happy today based on today’s definition but negate that statement about today tomorrow when you change your definition of happiness?

My response to me: yeah I suppose…

Me: Doesn’t that just mean you’re claiming to be happy when you’re not?

My response to me: well not really… why can’t I be happy on a day to day basis?

Me: I’ll accept you saying: based on today’s definition of happiness I am happy.
But when someone asks you if you’re happy don’t they mean in a generic overall sense?

My response to me: Yeah I suppose but being able to claim you’re generically happy would mean you’d have to keep something in the mix constant… seeing as how the circumstances of your life and mood change on a day to day basis, wouldn’t your definition of happiness by default have to assume a static role?

Me: Hmmm… not unless it’s a dynamic definition to which you add criteria as you grow.
something along the lines of :
You’re born: Happieness = Air available to breathe and cry
A few hours after being born Happiness = Air available to breathe and cry + warmth
A few hours later still Happiness = Air available to breath and cry + warmth + food available.
And it goes on and on and on… so as you grow your list of things that must be available for the condition of happiness to exist increase. The fulfillment of all the criteria then allows you to claim “I’m happy”

My response to me: Does this explain why it’s a lot harder to bring joy to an adult than it is a child?

Me: perhaps yeah… that’s a good point…

My response to me: Fair enough but then what happens if one of those criteria isn’t present?
Does that then make you unhappy? Is it an all or non situation? True or false with no middle ground?


Me: I don’t know… sounds like a flaw in the theory….it doesn’t sit well does it? cuz there are instances where you’ve been happy under one set of circumstances and not happy at a later date… hmmm

My response to me:
So we’re back to where we started then… no point of reference no static definition and the presence of a dynamic one is of no value without having a rule that says how many criteria have to be fulfilled in order for you to be happy…. So How does one claim they’re happy?

Me: NO clue… I think therefore I am!?

My response to me: Classic… that’s code for “Managed to fuck myself up and now I’m shit out of ideas”?

Me: haha…. Pretty much…

1 comment:

N said...

i left something on my blog for you :)