How Happiness Is Measured and Defined by Various Psychologists Essay Example

to experience extreme pleasure and that happiness is a totality of one’s hedonic moments. Aristippus view towards hedonism has been seconded by many other philosopher such Hobbes and DeSade. Hobbes claimed that happiness lies in the successful pursuit of one’s desires, while DeSade believed that case of pleasure and sensation are the final goal of life. Other Utilitarian philosopher called Bentham argued that it is through someone effort to try to maximum pleasure and self-interest that the good society is built. Hedonism, as a view of well-being, is said to have conveyed in many methods and its varies silently on the pleasure of body to focus on self-interest and desires.(Csikszentmihalyi, 2010)
Some psychologists who have used hedonic approach, tend to focus on a wide start of hedonism, which included the preference and desires of the mind and body. (Kubovy 1999). And so, a common opinion among hedonic psychologists is that well-being involves, if subjective happiness and concerns the experience of pleasure as opposed to displeasure widely interpreted to include all judgments about the good and bad features of life. Therefore, happiness can be (Kahneman, 1999)reduced to physical hedonism, because it can be achieved through attainment of goals. (Diener e al 1998).

“Class,” if you read the book “the existence of a new field of psychology,” Kahneman explains a hedonic psychology as the study of what makes experiences and life pleasant and unpleasant. By describing well-being in terms pain and pleasure, hedonism psychology positions for itself a clear and unmistakable target of research and intervention, that is maximizing human happiness. However,it is important tounderstand that the volume is full of evidence detailing how people calculate values, maximize the

density or the reward and also control input related to pleasure and displeasure. “Of course,” we should put at the back of our mind that there are many means to gauge the pleasure and plain ranging from human experience, a lot of research studies done of new hedonic psychology have used Subjective well-being (SWB)their assessment.(Kahneman, 1999) To my knowledge, SWB consists of consists of three components which include life satisfaction, the absence of the negative mood and the presence of positive mood, which are all shortened as happiness. Irrespective of what is said about the degree to which the measures of SWB satisfactorily describe psychological wellness ( Ryff& Singer 1998), I acknowledge that SWB has reigned as a major measure of well-being since the past decade. The most research studies the result that is reviewed see the SWB and as major outcome variable.

Notably, I would like to go through the eudaimonic view on happiness. Many philosophers, visionaries, and religious masters have degraded happiness per se as principle measure of well-being. One of those people wasAristotle, “HE”outlined hedonic to be an ill-mannered ideal, which is making humans slavish followers of desires.” He, Aristotle stated that true happiness found in the expression of virtue, which is, in doing what is worth doing. Drawing (1981) from the Aristotle View, he argued that optimal well-being (vivere bene) wants differentiating “ people who want desires that are subjectively felt and satisfaction led to momentary pleasure, those people who are rooted in the nature of human and their realization is favorable to growth of human and produces Eudaimonia that is. ‘well-being’.in summary… the difference between objectively valid needs and purely subjectively

felt needs- part of the former being harmful to harmful growth and the latter being in accordance with the requirements of human nature’’

Just to evaluate people, the term Eudaimonia is important because it discusses well-being as different from happiness per se. We are going to explain this point further, by looking at the theories involved. The Eudaimonic theories retain that not all desires – not all outcomes that a person might value – would bring well-being when achieved. I say, that even if they are producing some pleasure, some results cannot be good for some people and also would yield wellness. Looking at this factor from the Eudaimonic point of view, subjective happiness cannot be equivalent well-being (Ryff CD, 1999).
According to this person, Waterman (1993), the beginning of Eupdaimonic of well-being tell people to stay in their true self. Waterman, further suggests that Eudaimonia always happensif people life characters are most congruent, and they are holistically or total engaged. On such instances, they sincerely would feel alive because of who they are- of which Waterman termed it personal expressiveness (PE). To add to this point, Waterman showed there is a correlation between measures of hedonic satisfaction and PE, though were suggestive of distinct type of experience (Keyes CLM, 1995).

Also,“I can explain that”, whereas both hedonic measures and PE were related with a force of contentment, PE more characterized with to activities of cheap growth and development. Moreover, Hedonic enjoyment was associated with being relaxed and away from problems while PE was more related with being challenged and exercising its efforts.

Next, “I want to elaborate and explore the query of well-being in the perspective of creating

the theory of human flourishing”. Again, describing from Aristotle point of view, Ryff& Singer outlined well-being as “the striving for perfection that represent the realization of one true potential”. Ryff and another person named Keyes(1995) also talked about psychological well-being (PWB) as being different from SWB andpresented multidimensional approach to the measurement of PWB form that taps six distinct aspects of human actualization and that include self-acceptance, personal growth, mastery, autonomy, positive relatedness, life purpose.

And finally, I would like to talk about some of the evidence that is found based on positive emotions and actions. The purpose of positive psychology comprehends the factors the make individuals, communities and societies to prosper. (Seligman&Cskizenthalyi, 2000). what function does position emotions play in this context.? If you see, the answer looks simple but it not. Positive emotions act as signs of flourishing and optimal well-being. If you haven’t noticed, certain instances in people’s lives they have experienced positive emotion and actions, such as interest, love, contentment and joy. And they moment that you are taken away by negative emotions like sadness, despair, and anxiety.

Just by relying on this argument, the overall balance people between negative and positive emotions has revealed to predict the outcome of subjective well-being.(Diener, Sandvik, &Pavot, 1991). As we being this evidence, Kahneman (1999) say that “objective happiness” can be best of pathway to use as evidence of positive emotions. According is perceptions,positive emotions correctively signal flourishing but can also produce flourishing. Not to finish, positive emotions do so in the present, pleasant moment and also a long time ae well. A message for you to take home, is that positive emotions are important if

it is promoted, not only in the end stages but also a way of attainingpsychological development and improved well-being over time. “And that makes the end of our lessons.”

References

1. Csikszentmihalyi, M. F. (2010). The psychology of optimal experince. New york: Herper Perennial.
2. Kahneman, D. (1999). Objective Happiness. (D. E. Kahneman D, Ed.) New York.
3. Keyes CLM, R. C. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited.
4. Ryff CD, S. B. (1999). The role of emotion on pathways t positve health (Vols. 3-25). (G. H. Davidson RJ, Ed.) New York: oxford university Press.