In today’s lecture, we are going to talk about how happiness is measured, how various positive psychologists define it and relate it to well-being and positive emotions. To add to this lessons; we are also going to define and differentiate the two type of happiness, that is. Hedonic and Eudaimonic happiness, explain the relationship between well-being and each type of happiness and finally we will outline the evidence-based relationship between positive emotions and actions.(Ryff CD, 1999)
First of all, we should ask ourselves this question, what is happiness? Happiness is an emotional, or mental state of well-being describe by positive emotions ranging from satisfaction to intense pleasure. As you can see by the definition happiness and well-being can be used interchangeable. Happiness and well-being is a complicated hypothesis that is concerned with optimal experience and functioning.(Keyes CLM, 1995) Recent studies that have carried out about well-being is consequential to two general perspectives: the hedonic approach, which put emphasis on happiness and define well-being as a pleasurable realization and pain avoidance and eudaimonic approach which focuses on the meaning and self-realization and term well-being as a degree to which a person if fully function. “As you can see, class” the two types of happiness that are the hedonic happiness and eudaimonic happiness comes from hedonic approach and eudaimonic approach respectively.(Ryff CD, 1999)
“Secondly”, lets us put our emphasis on the difference between the hedonic happiness and eudaimonic happiness. We will begin by looking at the hedonic approach of happiness then proceed to eudaimonic approach. Equating and comparin...
g well-being with hedonic happiness started long ago since the 4th century. Aristippus,a Greek philosopher, said that a goal in life is 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