what is happiness argumentative essay

What Is Happiness Essay

What is happiness? We can ask hundreds of people, and each of them would probably give different answers. One would say that happiness is to be with a loved one, the second would say that happiness is the stability, and the third, on the contrary, would say that happiness is the unpredictability. For someone, to be happy is to have a lot of money while for others – to be popular. All in all, there are plenty of different understandings of happiness.

Personally, I consider happiness as simplicity and peace when my family and friends are healthy and happy as well. I recognize that they all are dear to me and able to understand what is going on inside me. I know that they will support me in any situation doing everything that depends on them. In return, I am also ready to do much for them. What we do for others, helping them when they need our help, advice, or support and obtaining appreciation, is happiness because helping others, we are doing something very significant and necessary.

What does it mean to be happy? I think it is, primarily, a state of mind, it means to have harmony with yourself and the people around. Happiness is multi-faceted. Perhaps, the word “love” is the most appropriate one to describe my happiness as love is driven by our world. People create wonderful things concerning their job, hobby, or family. Love is life, and I am happy when I realize that I live up to the hilt.

However, some people might be unhappy even though they should be. For example, teenagers who have everything to live a happy life, including healthy family, close friends, and enough money to satisfy basic needs, ask their parents to buy the latest model of IPhone. In the case, parents could not afford it, some teenagers tend to feel unhappy. After all, one can be a successful leader and have millions as well as prestige, but do not have a loving family and emotional harmony.

In my opinion, material values are not a true measure of happiness. Happiness is the ability to be optimistic in spite of difficulties and the ability to overcome them successfully. Finally, challenges should be taken as the lessons that life presents us. Even the negative things teach something, give a new experience, or refer to the correct direction.

I believe that happiness is not a gift and not a given right as every person has its own happiness inside. Moreover, it is never too late to become happy. We can inspire and motivate ourselves and others to be happy. A stranger’s passing smile, warm rays of the sun penetrating the window, or a cup of freshly brewed coffee – happiness is in detail. Everyone chooses and prefers different sources. It is of great importance for people to enjoy moments of life, even the most insignificant ones.

We need to appreciate every moment in our lives remembering that happiness is within us. After all, time passes, and we are getting hurt by the fact that we did not appreciate the time when we had a chance. Therefore, living in peace and harmony with others, helping those who need your help, and avoiding things that you would regret about in future are paramount ways to find happiness and make others happy.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, October 29). What Is Happiness Essay. https://ivypanda.com/essays/what-is-happiness-essay/

"What Is Happiness Essay." IvyPanda , 29 Oct. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/what-is-happiness-essay/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'What Is Happiness Essay'. 29 October.

IvyPanda . 2023. "What Is Happiness Essay." October 29, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/what-is-happiness-essay/.

1. IvyPanda . "What Is Happiness Essay." October 29, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/what-is-happiness-essay/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "What Is Happiness Essay." October 29, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/what-is-happiness-essay/.

• Dagger and Its Scabbard Analysis
• I Taste a Liquor Never Brewed
• “The Yellow Wallpaper” Short Story by Gilman
• Love as a Multi-Faceted Concept
• John Updike's "A&P" Short Story Analysis
• Hobby Lobby Stores Inc.’s Mission
• The "Beowulf" Anglo-Saxony Epic Poem
• Penetrating and Blunt Trauma
• Writings About Hobby - Home Brewing Beer
• Philosophy as a Multi-Faceted Subject
• The Key to Happiness and Satisfaction with Life
• Aesthetical Beauty's Understanding
• Happiness and Its Influence on Decision-Making
• History and Psychology in Proust’s “The Cookie”
• Self-Perception and Organizational Feelings Journal

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

What Is Happiness?

Defining Happiness, and How to Become Happier

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Rachel Goldman, PhD FTOS, is a licensed psychologist, clinical assistant professor, speaker, wellness expert specializing in eating behaviors, stress management, and health behavior change.

Verywell/ Jiaqi Zhou

How to Cultivate Happiness

How to be a happier person.

Happiness is something that people seek to find, yet what defines happiness can vary from one person to the next. Typically, happiness is an emotional state characterized by feelings of joy, satisfaction, contentment, and fulfillment. While happiness has many different definitions, it is often described as involving positive emotions and life satisfaction. 

When most people talk about the true meaning of happiness, they might be talking about how they feel in the present moment or referring to a more general sense of how they feel about life overall.

Because happiness tends to be such a broadly defined term, psychologists and other social scientists typically use the term ' subjective well-being ' when they talk about this emotional state. Just as it sounds, subjective well-being tends to focus on an individual's overall personal feelings about their life in the present.  

Two key components of happiness (or subjective well-being) are:

• The balance of emotions: Everyone experiences both positive and negative emotions, feelings, and moods. Happiness is generally linked to experiencing more positive feelings than negative ones.
• Life satisfaction: This relates to how satisfied you feel with different areas of your life including your relationships, work, achievements, and other things that you consider important.

Another definition of happiness comes from the ancient philosopher Aristotle, who suggested that happiness is the one human desire, and all other human desires exist as a way to obtain happiness. He believed that there were four levels of happiness: happiness from immediate gratification, from comparison and achievement, from making positive contributions, and from achieving fulfillment. 

Happiness, Aristotle suggested, could be achieved through the golden mean, which involves finding a balance between deficiency and excess.

Signs of Happiness

While perceptions of happiness may be different from one person to the next, there are some key signs that psychologists look for when measuring and assessing happiness.

Some key signs of happiness include:

• Feeling like you are living the life you wanted
• Going with the flow and a willingness to take life as it comes
• Feeling that the conditions of your life are good
• Enjoying positive, healthy relationships with other people
• Feeling that you have accomplished (or will accomplish) what you want in life
• Feeling satisfied with your life
• Feeling positive more than negative
• Being open to new ideas and experiences
• Practicing self-care and treating yourself with kindness and compassion
• Experiencing gratitude
• Feeling that you are living life with a sense of meaning and purpose
• Wanting to share your happiness and joy with others

One important thing to remember is that happiness isn't a state of constant euphoria . Instead, happiness is an overall sense of experiencing more positive emotions than negative ones.

Happy people still feel the whole range of human emotions—anger, frustrastion, boredom, loneliness, and even sadness—from time to time. But even when faced with discomfort, they have an underlying sense of optimism that things will get better, that they can deal with what is happening, and that they will be able to feel happy again.

Types of Happiness

There are many different ways of thinking about happiness. For example, the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle made a distinction between two different kinds of happiness: hedonia and eudaimonia.

• Hedonia: Hedonic happiness is derived from pleasure. It is most often associated with doing what feels good, self-care, fulfilling desires, experiencing enjoyment, and feeling a sense of satisfaction.
• Eudaimonia: This type of happiness is derived from seeking virtue and meaning. Important components of eudaimonic well-being including feeling that your life has meaning, value, and purpose. It is associated more with fulfilling responsibilities, investing in long-term goals, concern for the welfare of other people, and living up to personal ideals.

Hedonia and eudemonia are more commonly known today in psychology as pleasure and meaning, respectively. More recently, psychologists have suggested the addition of the third component that relates to engagement . These are feelings of commitment and participation in different areas of life.

Research suggests that happy people tend to rank pretty high on eudaimonic life satisfaction and better than average on their hedonic life satisfaction.  

All of these can play an important role in the overall experience of happiness, although the relative value of each can be highly subjective. Some activities may be both pleasurable and meaningful, while others might skew more one way or the other.

For example, volunteering for a cause you believe in might be more meaningful than pleasurable. Watching your favorite tv show, on the other hand, might rank lower in meaning and higher on pleasure.

Some types of happiness that may fall under these three main categories include:

• Joy: A often relatively brief feeling that is felt in the present moment
• Excitement: A happy feeling that involves looking forward to something with positive anticipation
• Gratitude: A positive emotion that involves being thankful and appreciative
• Pride: A feeling of satisfaction in something that you have accomplished
• Optimism: This is a way of looking at life with a positive, upbeat outlook
• Contentment: This type of happiness involves a sense of satisfaction

While some people just tend to be naturally happier, there are things that you can do to cultivate your sense of happiness. 

Pursue Intrinsic Goals 

Achieving goals that you are intrinsically motivated to pursue, particularly ones that are focused on personal growth and community, can help boost happiness. Research suggests that pursuing these types of intrinsically-motivated goals can increase happiness more than pursuing extrinsic goals like gaining money or status.  

Enjoy the Moment

Studies have found that people tend to over earn—they become so focused on accumulating things that they lose track of actually enjoying what they are doing.  

So, rather than falling into the trap of mindlessly accumulating to the detriment of your own happiness, focus on practicing gratitude for the things you have and enjoying the process as you go. 

Reframe Negative Thoughts

When you find yourself stuck in a pessimistic outlook or experiencing negativity, look for ways that you can reframe your thoughts in a more positive way. 

People have a natural negativity bias , or a tendency to pay more attention to bad things than to good things. This can have an impact on everything from how you make decisions to how you form impressions of other people. Discounting the positive—a cognitive distortion where people focus on the negative and ignore the positive—can also contribute to negative thoughts.

Reframing these negative perceptions isn't about ignoring the bad. Instead, it means trying to take a more balanced, realistic look at events. It allows you to notice patterns in your thinking and then challenge negative thoughts.

Impact of Happiness

Why is happiness so important? Happiness has been shown to predict positive outcomes in many different areas of life including mental well-being, physical health, and overall longevity.

• Positive emotions increase satisfaction with life.
• Happiness helps people build stronger coping skills and emotional resources.
• Positive emotions are linked to better health and longevity. One study found that people who experienced more positive emotions than negative ones were more likely to have survived over a 13 year period.
• Positive feelings increase resilience. Resilience helps people better manage stress and bounce back better when faced with setbacks. For example, one study found that happier people tend to have lower levels of the stress hormone cortisol and that these benefits tend to persist over time.
• People who report having a positive state of well-being are more likely to engage in healthy behaviors such as eating fruits and vegetables and engaging in regular physical exercise.
• Being happy may make help you get sick less often. Happier mental states are linked to increased immunity.

Some people seem to have a naturally higher baseline for happiness—one large-scale study of more than 2,000 twins suggested that around 50% of overall life satisfaction was due to genetics, 10% to external events, and 40% to individual activities.

So while you might not be able to control what your “base level” of happiness is, there are things that you can do to make your life happier and more fulfilling. Even the happiest of individuals can feel down from time to time and happiness is something that all people need to consciously pursue.

Cultivate Strong Relationships

Social support is an essential part of well-being. Research has found that good social relationships are the strongest predictor of happiness. Having positive and supportive connections with people you care about can provide a buffer against stress, improve your health, and help you become a happier person.

In the Harvard Study of Adult Development, a longitudinal study that looked at participants over 80 years, researchers found that relationships and how happy people are in those relationships strongly impacted overall health.

So if you are trying to improve your happiness, cultivating solid social connections is a great place to start. Consider deepening your existing relationships and explore ways to make new friends. 

Get Regular Exercise

Exercise is good for both your body and mind. Physical activity is linked to a range of physical and psychological benefits including improved mood. Numerous studies have shown that regular exercise may play a role in warding off symptoms of depression, but evidence also suggests that it may also help make people happier, too.

In one analysis of past research on the connection between physical activity and happiness, researchers found a consistent positive link.  

Even a little bit of exercise produces a happiness boost—people who were physically active for as little as 10 minutes a day or who worked out only once a week had higher levels of happiness than people who never exercised.

Show Gratitude

In one study, participants were asked to engage in a writing exercise for 10 to 20 minutes each night before bed.   Some were instructed to write about daily hassles, some about neutral events, and some about things they were grateful for. The results found that people who had written about gratitude had increase positive emotions, increased subjective happiness, and improve life satisfaction.

As the authors of the study suggest, keeping a gratitude list is a relatively easy, affordable, simple, and pleasant way to boost your mood. Try setting aside a few minutes each night to write down or think about things in your life that you are grateful for.

Find a Sense of Purpose

Research has found that people who feel like they have a purpose have better well-being and feel more fulfilled.   A sense of purpose involves seeing your life as having goals, direction, and meaning. It may help improve happiness by promoting healthier behaviors. 

Some things you can do to help find a sense of purpose include:

• Explore your interests and passions
• Engage in prosocial and altruistic causes
• Work to address injustices
• Look for new things you might want to learn more about

This sense of purpose is influenced by a variety of factors, but it is also something that you can cultivate. It involves finding a goal that you care deeply about that will lead you to engage in productive, positive actions in order to work toward that goal.

Press Play for Advice On Reaching Your Dreams

Hosted by therapist Amy Morin, LCSW, this episode of The Verywell Mind Podcast , featuring best-selling author Dave Hollis, shares how to create your best life. Click below to listen now.

Follow Now : Apple Podcasts / Spotify / Google Podcasts

Challenges of Finding Happiness

While seeking happiness is important, there are times when the pursuit of life satisfaction falls short. Some challenges to watch for include:

Valuing the Wrong Things

Money may not be able to buy happiness, but there is research that spending money on things like experiences can make you happier than spending it on material possessions. 

One study, for example, found that spending money on things that buy time—such as spending money on time-saving services—can increase happiness and life satisfaction.  

Rather than overvaluing things such as money, status, or material possessions, pursuing goals that result in more free time or enjoyable experiences may have a higher happiness reward.

Not Seeking Social Support

Social support means having friends and loved ones that you can turn to for support. Research has found that perceived social support plays an important role in subjective well-being. For example, one study found that perceptions of social support were responsible for 43% of a person's level of happiness.  

It is important to remember that when it comes to social support, quality is more important than quantity. Having just a few very close and trusted friends will have a greater impact on your overall happiness than having many casual acquaintances.

Thinking of Happiness as an Endpoint

Happiness isn’t a goal that you can simply reach and be done with. It is a constant pursuit that requires continual nurturing and sustenance.

One study found that people who tend to value happiness most also tended to feel the least satisfied with their lives.   Essentially, happiness becomes such a lofty goal that it becomes virtually unattainable. 

“Valuing happiness could be self-defeating because the more people value happiness, the more likely they will feel disappointed,” suggest the authors of the study.

Perhaps the lesson is to not make something as broadly defined as “happiness” your goal. Instead, focus on building and cultivating the sort of life and relationships that bring fulfillment and satisfaction to your life. 

It is also important to consider how you personally define happiness. Happiness is a broad term that means different things to different people. Rather than looking at happiness as an endpoint, it can be more helpful to think about what happiness really means to you and then work on small things that will help you become happier. This can make achieving these goals more manageable and less overwhelming.

History of Happiness

Happiness has long been recognized as a critical part of health and well-being. The "pursuit of happiness" is even given as an inalienable right in the U.S. Declaration of Independence. Our understanding of what will bring happiness, however, has shifted over time.

Psychologists have also proposed a number of different theories to explain how people experience and pursue happiness. These theories include:

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs

The hierarchy of needs suggests that people are motivated to pursue increasingly complex needs. Once more basic needs are fulfilled, people are then motivated by more psychological and emotional needs.

At the peak of the hierarchy is the need for self-actualization, or the need to achieve one's full potential. The theory also stresses the importance of peak experiences or transcendent moments in which a person feels deep understanding, happiness, and joy. 

Positive Psychology

The pursuit of happiness is central to the field of positive psychology . Psychologists who study positive psychology are interested in learning ways to increase positivity and helping people live happier, more satisfying lives. 

Rather than focusing on mental pathologies, the field instead strives to find ways to help people, communities, and societies improve positive emotions and achieve greater happiness.

Finley K, Axner M, Vrooman K, Tse D. Ideal levels of prosocial involvement in relation to momentary affect and eudaimonia: Exploring the golden mean . Innov Aging . 2020;4(Suppl 1):614. doi:10.1093/geroni/igaa057.2083

Kringelbach ML, Berridge KC. The neuroscience of happiness and pleasure .  Soc Res (New York) . 2010;77(2):659-678.

Panel on Measuring Subjective Well-Being in a Policy-Relevant Framework; Committee on National Statistics; Division on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; National Research Council; Stone AA, Mackie C, editors. Subjective Well-Being: Measuring Happiness, Suffering, and Other Dimensions of Experience [Internet]. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US).

Lee MA, Kawachi I. The keys to happiness: Associations between personal values regarding core life domains and happiness in South Korea . PLoS One . 2019;14(1):e0209821. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0209821

Hsee CK, Zhang J, Cai CF, Zhang S. Overearning . Psychol Sci . 2013;24(6):852-9

Carstensen LL, Turan B, Scheibe S, et al. Emotional experience improves with age: evidence based on over 10 years of experience sampling . Psychol Aging . 2011;26(1):21‐33. doi:10.1037/a0021285

Steptoe A, Wardle J. Positive affect and biological function in everyday life . Neurobiol Aging . 2005;26 Suppl 1:108‐112. doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2005.08.016

Sapranaviciute-Zabazlajeva L, Luksiene D, Virviciute D, Bobak M, Tamosiunas A. L ink between healthy lifestyle and psychological well-being in Lithuanian adults aged 45-72: a cross-sectional study . BMJ Open . 2017;7(4):e014240. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014240

Costanzo ES, Lutgendorf SK, Kohut ML, et al. Mood and cytokine response to influenza virus in older adults . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2004;59(12):1328‐1333. doi:10.1093/gerona/59.12.1328

Lyubomirsky S, Sheldon KM, Schkade D. Pursuing happiness: The architecture of sustainable change . Review of General Psychology. 2005;9 (2):111–131. doi:0.1037/1089-2680.9.2.111

The Harvard Gazette. Good genes are nice, but joy is better .

Zhang Z, Chen W. A systematic review of the relationship between physical activity and happiness . J Happiness Stud 20, 1305–1322 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-018-9976-0

Cunha LF, Pellanda LC, Reppold CT. Positive psychology and gratitude interventions: a randomized clinical trial . Front Psychol . 2019;10:584. Published 2019 Mar 21. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00584

Ryff CD. Psychological well-being revisited: advances in the science and practice of eudaimonia . Psychother Psychosom . 2014;83(1):10‐28. doi:10.1159/000353263

Whillans AV, Dunn EW, Smeets P, Bekkers R, Norton MI. Buying time promotes happiness .  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A . 2017;114(32):8523‐8527. doi:10.1073/pnas.1706541114

Gulacti F. The effect of perceived social support on subjective well-being . Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences . 2010;2(2):3844-3849. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.602

Mauss IB, Tamir M, Anderson CL, Savino NS. Can seeking happiness make people unhappy? [corrected] Paradoxical effects of valuing happiness [published correction appears in Emotion. 2011 Aug;11(4):767]. Emotion . 2011;11(4):807‐815. doi:10.1037/a0022010

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Enable JavaScript and refresh the page to view the Center for Hellenic Studies website.

See how to enable JavaScript in your browser.

• Language/Literature
• Art/Archaeology
• Philosophy/Science
• Epigraphy/Papyrology
• Mythology/Religion
• Publications

The Center for Hellenic Studies

Happiness according to aristotle.

Citation with persistent identifier: Reece, Bryan C. “Happiness According to Aristotle.”  CHS Research Bulletin  7 (2019). http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:hlnc.essay:ReeceB.Happiness_According_to_Aristotle.2019

Aristotle thinks that questions about how we should live as individuals and as communities must be answered with reference to a more fundamental question: What is the happy life for a human being? This question about happiness thus holds the key for the entire Aristotelian system of moral and political philosophy. Unfortunately, while the centrality of Aristotle’s theory of happiness is uncontroversial, there is no agreement about the content of his theory. Particularly controversial are his remarks on the relationship between, and especially the relative importance of, theoretical and practical activity in the ideal human life. I here give an outline sketch of a new interpretation of Aristotle’s remarks on this relationship and its ramifications for human happiness.

How should we live? Aristotle proposes to address this fundamental philosophical question by giving interrelated answers to two further questions: What kinds of activities are the best expressions of distinctively human identity? What is the proper balance of theoretical and practical activity in the ideal human life?

Aristotle’s answers have generated abiding interest, but also lingering puzzlement. He thinks that humans are distinctively rational, having the ability to reason theoretically and practically. The best activities for them to perform, and therefore the activities that constitute their happiness (which Aristotle thinks is itself an activity), are virtuous (excellent) rational activities ( Nicomachean Ethics 1.7, 1098 a 16–17): manifestations of reliable practical dispositions like courage, justice, generosity, and self-control, which are exercises of practical wisdom, as well as of reliable theoretical dispositions such as insightfulness, understanding, and theoretical wisdom. The manifestation of theoretical wisdom ( sophia ) turns out to be especially important for Aristotle. He says that this activity, theoretical contemplation ( theôria ), is what human happiness is ( NE 10.8, 1178 b 32). This is surprising, for if human happiness simply consists in theoretical contemplation, we might well wonder what role Aristotle envisions for the practical activities to which he devotes far more space in his ethical and political works than he does to contemplation.

Interpreters have struggled with the problem of reconciling Aristotle’s assignment of preeminent status in his theory of happiness to theoretical contemplation and the natural thought, encouraged by the flow of his discussions of virtuous behavior, that practical activities are permissible and valuable features of happy human lives. [1] I call this ‘the Standard Problem of Happiness.’ But there is an even more difficult version of this interpretive problem, which I call ‘the Hard Problem of Happiness.’ That problem is to explain how Aristotle could have thought that happiness is theoretical contemplation while also affirming that a reliable pattern of virtuous practical activity is non-optional and not coherently regrettable for happy humans. I here offer a very brief outline of my way of addressing this problem. [2]

A major obstacle to solving the Hard Problem is an assumption about the relationship between theoretical wisdom, which is manifested in theoretical contemplation, and practical wisdom, which is manifested in virtuous practical activities. The standard view is that Aristotle thinks that human beings can have and reliably manifest theoretical wisdom without having and reliably manifesting practical wisdom. That view is based on a passage apparently claiming that two pre-Socratic philosophers, Anaxagoras and Thales, had theoretical but not practical wisdom ( NE 6.7, 1141 b 2–16). The evidential value of this passage fades away on closer inspection. It is a report of others’ opinions that Aristotle does not fully endorse, but the appeal of which he explains. Thus, the purported textual evidence for the standard view does not support it. In fact, Aristotle gives strong reasons for thinking that having and reliably manifesting practical wisdom is necessary for having and reliably manifesting theoretical wisdom: only the continual, reliable exercise of practical wisdom, in activities that express such virtues as self-control and justice, makes it behaviorally feasible for embodied, socially situated, choice-making beings like us to develop and exercise theoretical wisdom. This means that a life of theoretical contemplation, in Aristotle’s strict sense, cannot be successfully lived without the level of virtuous public engagement that practical wisdom dictates in each circumstance. This interpretation solves a major problem for the standard view: it is on that view, wrongly, an open question whether any particular instance of theoretical contemplation is performed in the right way, at the right time, and for the right reasons. One who is a contemplator in Aristotle’s strict sense also has practical wisdom, and practical wisdom guarantees that one reliably chooses to act in the right way, at the right time, and for the right reasons.

This interpretation requires, as any solution to the Hard Problem does, that theoretical contemplation and virtuous practical activities are included in one and the same happy life. But Aristotle appears to claim at NE 10. 7, 1178 a 2 – 10. 8, 1178 a 14 that there are two kinds of happy life: one in accordance with theoretical contemplation, the other with virtuous practical activity. This claim is notoriously problematic. Properly interpreted, though, Aristotle does not here distinguish between two kinds of happiness, but rather between two ways of being proper to human beings that apply within one and the same happy life. [3] Theoretical contemplation is proper to humans in one way, virtuous practical activity in another.

But many interpreters see a problem for the idea that theoretical contemplation is proper to human beings: Aristotle also says that divine beings contemplate ( Metaph . 12.7, 1072 b 13–30, NE 10.8, 1178 b 7–32). [4] It would initially appear, then, that Aristotle is committed both to affirming and to denying that theoretical contemplation is proper to humans. However, careful scrutiny of his descriptions of the nature of divine and human contemplation reveals them to be type-distinct activities. On his view, human contemplation, but not divine contemplation, is a manifestation of theoretical wisdom, a virtue that includes two further virtues: a particular sort of nous , the developed capacity to grasp first principles intuitively as first principles, and epistêmê , the developed capacity for scientific demonstration from first principles ( NE 6.7, 1141 a 18–20, 6.3, 1139 b 31–32). So, Aristotle’s claim that divine beings contemplate does not conflict with his view that theoretical contemplation, understood as the manifestation of theoretical wisdom, is proper to human beings.

On the account so far sketched, theoretical contemplation and virtuous practical activities are necessary parts of human happiness, and only happy human beings engage in these activities. So, theoretical contemplation and virtuous practical activities are necessary parts of human happiness and are also unique to it. In short, they are proper to human happiness. But they are not each proper to human happiness in the same way. Theoretical contemplation is necessary for and unique to happiness as what happiness is , whereas virtuous practical activities are necessary and unique parts of happiness in a different, and secondary, way. Aristotle often distinguishes between primary and secondary ways of being proper: one is the essence ( ousia ) and the other is a unique, necessary property ( idion , pl. idia ). Aristotle relies on the theory on which this distinction between two ways of being proper is based in articulating his view of happiness in the Nicomachean Ethics , for he seeks an essence-specifying definition of human happiness from which the unique, necessary parts of happiness can be deduced. Theoretical contemplation is the essence of human happiness, the activity that makes it what it is. That is why Aristotle says that happiness is theoretical contemplation. (This addresses the first half of the Hard Problem.) Virtuous activities are unique, necessary properties of human happiness. Even though they are not what happiness is, Aristotle thinks that they are non-optional and non-regrettable parts of happiness. (This addresses the second half of the Hard Problem). It would be incoherent to wish that happiness did not require engaging in virtuous practical activities, just as it would be incoherent to wish that one were another sort of being without the features that follow from the human essence ( NE 9.4, 1166 a 20–22 and 8.7, 1159 a 5–12).

This solution to the Hard Problem shows Aristotle’s account of happiness to be a distinctive answer to the question of how we ought to balance theoretical and practical activity in our pursuit of the ideal human life.

Bibliography

Annas, Julia. 1993. The Morality of Happiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Aufderheide, Joachim. 2015. “The Content of Happiness: A New Case for Theôria.” In The Highest Good in Aristotle and Kant , ed. Joachim Aufderheide and Ralf M. Bader, 36–59. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Charles, David. 2017. “Aristotle on Virtue and Happiness.” In The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Ethics , ed. Christopher Bobonich, 105–123. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cooper, John. 1975. Reason and Human Good in Aristotle. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Devereux, Daniel. 1981. “Aristotle on the Essence of Happiness.” In Studies in Aristotle , ed. Dominic J. O’Meara, 247–260. Washington: Catholic University of America Press.

Gauthier, René Antoine. 1958. La Morale d’ Aristote. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Gigon, Olof. 1975. “Phronêsis und Sophia in der Nicomachischen Ethik des Aristoteles.” In Kephalaion: Studies in Greek Philosophy and its Continuation offered to Professor C. J. de Vogel , ed. Jaap Mansfeld and L. M. de Rijk, 91–104. Assen: Van Gorcum.

Gottlieb, Paula. 1994. “Aristotle on Dividing the Soul and Uniting the Virtues.” Phronesis 39:275–290.

Irwin, Terence. 1980. “The Metaphysical and Psychological Basis of Aristotle’s Ethics.” In Essays on Aristotle’s Ethics , ed. Amélie Oksenberg Rorty, 35–53. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Kenny, Anthony. 1992. Aristotle on the Perfect Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Keyt, David. 1983. “Intellectualism in Aristotle .” In Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy , vol. 2, ed. John P. Anton and Anthony Preus, 364–387. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Kosman, Aryeh. 2000. “ Metaphysics Λ 9: Divine Thought.” In Aristotle’s Metaphysics Lambda:    Symposium Aristotelicum , ed. Michael Frede and David Charles, 307–326. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kraut, Richard. 1989. Aristotle on the Human Good. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Laks, André. 2000. “ Metaphysics Λ 7.” In Aristotle’s Metaphysics Lambda: Symposium Aristotelicum , ed. Michael Frede and David Charles, 207–243. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lear, Gabriel Richardson. 2004. Happy Lives and the Highest Good: An Essay on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics . Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Natali, Carlo. 1989. La Saggezza di Aristotele. Naples: Bibliopolis.

Nightingale, Andrea Wilson. 2004. Spectacles of Truth in Classical Greek Philosophy: Theoria in its Cultural Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Price, Anthony W. 2011. Virtue and Reason in Plato and Aristotle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Reece, Bryan C. forthcoming. “Are There Really Two Kinds of Happiness in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics ?” Classical Philology.

Scott, Dominic. 1999. “Primary and Secondary Eudaimonia.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 73:225–242.

* My research on this topic has been generously supported by The Center for Hellenic Studies. I am grateful to everyone involved with the CHS, especially to Gregory Nagy, Mark Schiefsky, Richard Martin, and the library staff: Erika Bainbridge, Sophie Boisseau, Lanah Koelle, Michael Strickland, and Temple Wright.

[1] Many have offered interpretations of Aristotle’s remarks on practical and intellectual virtue, or their relationship to each other or to happiness. I list only a few here: (Annas 1993), (Aufderheide 2015), (Charles 2017), (Cooper 1975), (Devereux 1981), (Gauthier 1958), (Gigon 1975), (Gottlieb 1994), (Irwin 1980), (Kenny 1992), (Keyt 1983), (Kraut 1989), (Lear 2004), (Natali 1989), (Nightingale 2004), (Price 2011), (Scott 1999).

[2] The paragraphs that follow summarize parts of this research project that I drafted or revised during my fellowship at The Center for Hellenic Studies. The project as a whole is under contract with Cambridge University Press as a monograph called Aristotle on Happiness, Virtue, and Wisdom .

[3] I give a detailed defense of this interpretation in (Reece forthcoming).

[4] There are many who discuss the nature of divine contemplation, including (Kosman 2000) and (Laks 2000), as well as the problem that it initially appears to pose for Aristotle’s account of human happiness, including (Charles 2017), (Keyt 1983), (Kraut 1989, 312–319), and (Lear 2004, 189–193).

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

There are roughly two philosophical literatures on “happiness,” each corresponding to a different sense of the term. One uses ‘happiness’ as a value term, roughly synonymous with well-being or flourishing. The other body of work uses the word as a purely descriptive psychological term, akin to ‘depression’ or ‘tranquility’. An important project in the philosophy of happiness is simply getting clear on what various writers are talking about: what are the important meanings of the term and how do they connect? While the “well-being” sense of happiness receives significant attention in the contemporary literature on well-being, the psychological notion is undergoing a revival as a major focus of philosophical inquiry, following on recent developments in the science of happiness. This entry focuses on the psychological sense of happiness (for the well-being notion, see the entry on well-being ). The main accounts of happiness in this sense are hedonism, the life satisfaction theory, and the emotional state theory. Leaving verbal questions behind, we find that happiness in the psychological sense has always been an important concern of philosophers. Yet the significance of happiness for a good life has been hotly disputed in recent decades. Further questions of contemporary interest concern the relation between the philosophy and science of happiness, as well as the role of happiness in social and political decision-making.

1.1 Two senses of ‘happiness’

1.2 clarifying our inquiry, 2.1 the chief candidates, 2.2 methodology: settling on a theory, 2.3 life satisfaction versus affect-based accounts, 2.4 hedonism versus emotional state, 2.5 hybrid accounts, 3.1 can happiness be measured, 3.2 empirical findings: overview, 3.3 the sources of happiness, 4.1 doubts about the value of happiness, 4.2 restoring happiness to the theory of well-being, 4.3 is happiness overrated, 5.1 normative issues, 5.2 mistakes in the pursuit of happiness, 5.3 the politics of happiness, other internet resources, related entries, 1. the meanings of ‘happiness’.

What is happiness? This question has no straightforward answer, because the meaning of the question itself is unclear. What exactly is being asked? Perhaps you want to know what the word ‘happiness’ means. In that case your inquiry is linguistic. Chances are you had something more interesting in mind: perhaps you want to know about the thing , happiness, itself. Is it pleasure, a life of prosperity, something else? Yet we can’t answer that question until we have some notion of what we mean by the word.

Philosophers who write about “happiness” typically take their subject matter to be either of two things, each corresponding to a different sense of the term:

• A state of mind
• A life that goes well for the person leading it

In the first case our concern is simply a psychological matter. Just as inquiry about pleasure or depression fundamentally concerns questions of psychology, inquiry about happiness in this sense—call it the (long-term) “psychological sense”—is fundamentally the study of certain mental states. What is this state of mind we call happiness? Typical answers to this question include life satisfaction, pleasure, or a positive emotional condition.

Having answered that question, a further question arises: how valuable is this mental state? Since ‘happiness’ in this sense is just a psychological term, you could intelligibly say that happiness isn’t valuable at all. Perhaps you are a high-achieving intellectual who thinks that only ignoramuses can be happy. On this sort of view, happy people are to be pitied, not envied. The present article will center on happiness in the psychological sense.

In the second case, our subject matter is a kind of value , namely what philosophers nowadays tend to call prudential value —or, more commonly, well-being , welfare , utility or flourishing . (For further discussion, see the entry on well-being . Whether these terms are really equivalent remains a matter of dispute, but this article will usually treat them as interchangeable.) “Happiness” in this sense concerns what benefits a person, is good for her, makes her better off, serves her interests, or is desirable for her for her sake. To be high in well-being is to be faring well, doing well, fortunate, or in an enviable condition. Ill-being, or doing badly, may call for sympathy or pity, whereas we envy or rejoice in the good fortune of others, and feel gratitude for our own. Being good for someone differs from simply being good, period: perhaps it is always good, period, for you to be honest; yet it may not always be good for you , as when it entails self-sacrifice. Not coincidentally, the word ‘happiness’ derives from the term for good fortune, or “good hap,” and indeed the terms used to translate it in other languages often have similar roots. In this sense of the term—call it the “well-being sense”—happiness refers to a life of well-being or flourishing: a life that goes well for you.

Importantly, to ascribe happiness in the well-being sense is to make a value judgment : namely, that the person has whatever it is that benefits a person. [ 1 ] If you and I and have different values, then we may well differ about which lives we consider happy. I might think Genghis Khan had a happy life, because I think what matters for well-being is getting what you want; while you deny this because you think a life of evildoing, however “successful,” is sad and impoverished.

Theories of well-being—and hence of “happiness” in the well-being sense—come in three basic flavors, according to the best-known taxonomy (Parfit 1984): hedonism, desire theories, and objective list theories. Whereas hedonists identify well-being roughly with experiences of pleasure, desire theorists equate it with the satisfaction of one’s desires— actually getting what you want, versus merely having certain experiences. Both hedonism and desire theories are in some sense subjectivist, since they ground well-being in the individual’s subjective states. Objective list theorists, by contrast, think some things benefit us independently of our attitudes or feelings: there are objective prudential goods. Aristotelians are the best-known example: they take well-being ( eudaimonia ) to consist in a life of virtuous activity—or more broadly, the fulfillment of our human capacities. A passive but contented couch potato may be getting what he wants, and he may enjoy it. But he would not, on Aristotelian and other objective list theories, count as doing well, or leading a happy life.

Now we can sharpen the initial question somewhat: when you ask what happiness is, are you asking what sort of life benefits a person? If so, then your question concerns matters of value, namely what is good for people—the sort of thing that ethical theorists are trained to address. Alternatively, perhaps you simply want to know about the nature of a certain state of mind—happiness in the psychological sense. In this case, some sort of psychological inquiry will be needed, either philosophical or scientific. (Laypersons often have neither sort of question in mind, but are really asking about the sources of happiness. Thus it might be claimed, say, that “happiness is being with good friends.” This is not a view about the nature or definition of happiness, but rather a theory about the sorts of things that tend to make us happy. It leaves unanswered, or takes for granted, the question of just what happiness is , such that friends are a good source of it.)

In short, philosophical “theories of happiness” can be about either of at least two different things: well-being, or a state of mind. [ 2 ] Accordingly, there are essentially two bodies of philosophical literature about “happiness” and two sets of debates about its nature, though writers often fail to distinguish them. Such failures have generated much confusion, sometimes yielding bogus disagreements that prove to be merely verbal. [ 3 ] For instance, some psychologists identify “happiness” with attitudes of life satisfaction while remaining neutral on questions of value, or whether Bentham, Mill, Aristotle, or any other thinker about the good life was correct. Such researchers employ the term in the psychological sense. Yet it is sometimes objected against such claims that life satisfaction cannot suffice for “happiness” because other things, like achievement or knowledge, matter for human well-being. The objectors are confused: their opponents have made no claims about well-being at all, and the two “sides,” as it were, are simply using ‘happiness’ to talk about different things. One might just as sensibly object to an economist’s tract on “banks” that it has nothing to say about rivers and streams.

Which use of ‘happiness’ corresponds to the true meaning of the term in contemporary English? Arguably, both. The well-being usage clearly dominates in the historical literature through at least the early modern era, for instance in translations of the ancient Greeks’ ‘ eudaimonia ’ or the Latin ‘ beatitudo ’, though this translation has long been a source of controversy. Jefferson’s famous reference to “the pursuit of happiness” probably employed the well-being sense. Even later writers such as Mill may have used the term in its well-being sense, though it is often difficult to tell since well-being itself is often taken to consist in mental states like pleasure. In ordinary usage, the abstract noun ‘happiness’ often invites a well-being reading. And the locution ‘happy life ’ may not naturally take a psychological interpretation, for the simple reason that lives aren’t normally regarded as psychological entities.

Contrast this with the very different meaning that seems to attach to talk of “ being happy.” Here it is much less clear that we are talking about a property of a person’s life; it seems rather to be a property of the person herself. To be happy, it seems, is just to be in a certain sort of psychological state or condition. Similarly when we say that so-and-so “is happy” (as opposed to saying that he is leading a happy life). This psychological usage, arguably, predominates in the current vernacular. Researchers engaged in the self-described “science of happiness” usually do not take themselves to be making value judgments when they proclaim individuals in their studies to be happy. Nor, when asserting that a life satisfaction study shows Utahans to be happier than New Yorkers, are they committing themselves to the tendentious claim that Utahans are better off . (If they are, then the psychology journals that are publishing this research may need to revise their peer-review protocols to include ethicists among their referees.) And the many recent popular books on happiness, as well as innumerable media accounts of research on happiness, nearly all appear to take it for granted that they are talking about nothing more than a psychological condition.

Henceforth ‘happiness’ will be used in the long-term psychological sense, unless otherwise specified. Note, however, that a number of important books and other works on “happiness” in recent decades have employed the well-being sense of the term. Books of this sort appear to include Almeder 2000, Annas 1993, 2011, Bloomfield 2014, Cahn and Vitrano 2015, Kenny and Kenny 2006, McMahon 2005, McPherson 2020, Noddings 2003, Russell 2013, White 2006, and Vitrano 2014, though again it is not always clear how a given author uses the term. For discussion of the well-being notion, see the entry on well-being . [ 4 ]

2. Theories of happiness

Philosophers have most commonly distinguished two accounts of happiness: hedonism , and the life satisfaction theory. Hedonists identify happiness with the individual’s balance of pleasant over unpleasant experience, in the same way that welfare hedonists do. [ 5 ] The difference is that the hedonist about happiness need not accept the stronger doctrine of welfare hedonism; this emerges clearly in arguments against the classical Utilitarian focus on happiness as the aim of social choice. Such arguments tend to grant the identification of happiness with pleasure, but challenge the idea that this should be our primary or sole concern, and often as well the idea that happiness is all that matters for well-being.

Life satisfaction theories identify happiness with having a favorable attitude toward one’s life as a whole. This basic schema can be filled out in a variety of ways, but typically involves some sort of global judgment: an endorsement or affirmation of one’s life as a whole. This judgment may be more or less explicit, and may involve or accompany some form of affect. It may also involve or accompany some aggregate of judgments about particular items or domains within one’s life. [ 6 ]

A third theory, the emotional state view, departs from hedonism in a different way: instead of identifying happiness with pleasant experience, it identifies happiness with an agent’s emotional condition as a whole, of what is often called “emotional well-being.” [ 7 ] This includes nonexperiential aspects of emotions and moods (or perhaps just moods), and excludes pleasures that don’t directly involve the individual’s emotional state. It might also include a person’s propensity for experiencing various moods, which can vary over time, though several authors have argued against this suggestion (e.g., Hill 2007, Klausen 2015, Rossi 2018). Happiness on such a view is more nearly the opposite of depression or anxiety—a broad psychological condition—whereas hedonistic happiness is simply opposed to unpleasantness. For example, a deeply distressed individual might distract herself enough with constant activity to maintain a mostly pleasant existence—broken only by tearful breakdowns during the odd quiet moment—thus perhaps counting as happy on a hedonistic but not emotional state view. The states involved in happiness, on an emotional state view, can range widely, far more so that the ordinary notion of mood or emotion. On one proposal, happiness involves three broad categories of affective state, including “endorsement” states like joy versus sadness, “engagement” states like flow or a sense of vitality, and “attunement” states like tranquility, emotional expansiveness versus compression, and confidence. Given the departures from commonsensical notions of being in a “good mood,” happiness is characterized in this proposal as “psychic affirmation,” or “psychic flourishing” in pronounced forms.

A fourth family of views, hybrid theories , attempts an irenic solution to our diverse intuitions about happiness: identify happiness with both life satisfaction and pleasure or emotional state, perhaps along with other states such as domain satisfactions. The most obvious candidate here is subjective well-being , which is typically defined as a compound of life satisfaction, domain satisfactions, and positive and negative affect. (Researchers often seem to identify happiness with subjective well-being, sometimes with life satisfaction, and perhaps most commonly with emotional or hedonic state.) The chief appeal of hybrid theories is their inclusiveness: all the components of subjective well-being seem important, and there is probably no component of subjective well-being that does not at times get included in “happiness” in ordinary usage.

How do we determine which theory is correct? Traditional philosophical methods of conceptual or linguistic analysis can give us some guidance, indicating that some accounts offer a better fit with the ordinary concept of happiness. Thus it has been argued that hedonism is false to the concept of happiness as we know it; the intuitions taken to support hedonism point instead to an emotional state view (Haybron 2001). And some have argued that life satisfaction is compatible with profoundly negative emotional states like depression—a suffering artist might not value emotional matters much, and wholeheartedly affirm her life (Carson 1981, Davis 1981b, Haybron 2005, Feldman 2010). Yet it might seem counterintuitive to deem such a person happy. At the same time, people do sometimes use ‘happiness’ to denote states of life satisfaction: life satisfaction theories do seem faithful to some ordinary uses of ‘happiness’. The trouble is that HAPPINESS appears to be a “mongrel concept,” as Ned Block (1995) called the concept of consciousness: the ordinary notion is something of a mess. We use the term to denote different things in different contexts, and often have no clear notion of what we are referring to. This suggests that accounts of happiness must be somewhat revisionary, and that we must assess theories on grounds other than simple fidelity to the lay concept of happiness—“descriptive adequacy,” in Sumner’s (1996) terms. One candidate is practical utility: which conception of happiness best answers to our interests in the notion? We talk about happiness because we care about it. The question is why we care about it, and which psychological states within the extension of the ordinary term make the most sense of this concern. Even if there is no simple answer to the question what happiness is, it may well turn out that our interests in happiness cluster so strongly around a particular psychological kind that happiness can best, or most profitably, be understood in terms of that type of state (Haybron 2003). Alternatively, we may choose to distinguish different varieties of happiness. It will be less important how we use the word, however, than that we be clear about the nature and significance of the phenomena that interest us.

The debate over theories of happiness falls along a couple of lines. The most interesting questions concern the choice between life satisfaction and affect-based views like hedonism and the emotional state theory. [ 8 ] Proponents of life satisfaction see two major advantages to their account. First, life satisfaction is holistic , ranging over the whole of one’s life, or the totality of one’s life over a certain period of time. It reflects not just the aggregate of moments in one’s life, but also the global quality of one’s life taken as a whole (but see Raibley 2010). And we seem to care not just about the total quantity of good in our lives, but about its distribution—a happy ending, say, counts for more than a happy middle (Slote 1982, Velleman 1991). Second, life satisfaction seems more closely linked to our priorities than affect is, as the suffering artist case illustrates. While a focus on affect makes sense insofar as we care about such matters, most people care about other things as well, and how their lives are going relative to their priorities may not be fully mirrored in their affective states. Life satisfaction theories thus seem to fit more closely with liberal ideals of individual sovereignty, on which how well my life is going for me is for me to decide. My satisfaction with my life seems to embody that judgment. Of course a theory of happiness need not capture everything that matters for well-being; the point is that a life satisfaction view might explain why we should care so much about happiness, and so enjoy substantive as well as intuitive support. [ 9 ]

But several objections have been raised against life satisfaction views. The most common complaint has already been noted, namely that a person could apparently be satisfied with her life even while leading a highly unpleasant or emotionally distressed existence, and it can seem counterintuitive to regard such a person as happy (see section 2.2). Some life satisfaction theorists deny that such cases are possible (Benditt 1978), but it could also be argued that such possibilities are part and parcel of life satisfaction’s appeal: some people may not get much pleasure out of life because they don’t care particularly about affective matters, and a life satisfaction theory allows that they can, in their own fashion, be happy.

Two other objections are more substantive, raising questions about whether life satisfaction has the right sort of importance. One concern is whether people often enough have well-grounded attitudes of life satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Evaluating one’s life as a whole can be a complicated business, and there is some question whether people typically have well-defined attitudes toward their lives that accurately reflect how well their lives measure up relative to their priorities. Some research, for instance, suggests that life satisfaction reports tend to reflect judgments made on the spot, drawing on whatever information comes readily to mind, with substantial influences by transient contextual factors like the weather, finding a dime, etc. (Schwarz and Strack 1999). Debate persists over whether this work undermines the significance of life satisfaction judgments, but it does raise a question whether life satisfaction attitudes tend to be well-enough grounded to have the kind of importance that people normally ascribe to happiness.

The third objection is somewhat intricate, so it will require some explaining. The claim is that a wide range of life satisfaction attitudes might be consistent with individuals’ perceptions of how well their lives are going relative to what they care about, raising doubts about the importance of life satisfaction (Haybron 2016). You might reasonably be satisfied when getting very little of what you want, or dissatisfied when getting most of what you want. One reason for this is that people tend to have many incommensurable values, leaving it open how to add them up. Looking at the various ups and downs of your life, it may be arbitrary whether to rate your life a four out of ten, or a seven. A second reason is that life satisfaction attitudes are not merely assessments of subjective success or personal welfare: they involve assessments of whether one’s life is good enough —satisfactory. Yet people’s values may radically underdetermine where they should set the bar for a “good enough” life, again rendering the judgment somewhat arbitrary. Given your values, you might reasonably be satisfied with a two, or require a nine to be satisfied. While it may seem important how well people see their lives going relative to what they care about, it is not obviously so important whether people see their lives going well enough that they are willing to judge them satisfactory.

If life satisfaction attitudes are substantially arbitrary relative to subjective success, then people might reasonably base those attitudes on other factors, such as ethical ideals (e.g., valuing gratitude or noncomplacency) or pragmatic concerns (e.g., comforting oneself). Shifts in perspective might also reasonably alter life satisfaction attitudes. After the funeral, you might be highly satisfied with your life, whereas the high school reunion leaves you dissatisfied; yet neither judgment need be mistaken, or less authoritative.

As a result, life satisfaction attitudes may be poor indicators of well-being, even from the individual’s own point of view. That people in a given country register high levels of life satisfaction may reflect nothing more than that they set the bar extremely low; they might be satisfied with anything short of pure agony. Another country’s citizens might be dissatisfied with their lives, but only because they set the bar much higher. Relative to what they care about, people in the dissatisfied nation could be better off than those in the satisfied nation. To take another example, a cancer patient might be more satisfied with his life than he was before the diagnosis, for he now looks at his life from a different perspective and emphasizes different virtues like fortitude and gratitude as opposed to (say) humility and non-complacency. Yet he need not think himself better off at all: he might believe himself worse off than he was when he was less satisfied. Neither judgment need seem to him or us to be mistaken: it’s just that he now looks at his life differently. Indeed, he might think he’s doing badly, even as he is satisfied with his life: he endorses it, warts and all, and is grateful just have his not-so-good life rather than some of the much worse alternatives.

For present purposes, the worry is that life satisfaction may not have the kind of significance happiness is normally thought to have. This may pose a difficulty for the identification of life satisfaction with happiness: for people frequently seem to use happiness as a proxy for well-being, a reasonably concrete and value-free stand-in that facilitates quick-and-dirty assessments of welfare. Given the discovery that someone is happy, we might infer that he is doing well; if we learn that someone is unhappy, we may conclude that she is doing poorly. Such inferences are defeasible: if we later find that the happy Ned’s wife and friends secretly hate him, we need not decide that he isn’t happy after all; we simply withdraw the conclusion that he is doing well. So long as happiness tracks well-being well enough in most cases, this sort of practice is perfectly respectable. But if we identify happiness with life satisfaction, then we may have a problem: maybe Sally is satisfied only because she values being grateful for the good things in life. This sort of case may not be merely a theoretical possibility: perhaps the very high rates of self-reported life satisfaction in the United States and many other places substantially reflects a broad acceptance of norms of gratitude and a general tendency to emphasize the positives, or perhaps a sense that not to endorse your life amounts to a lack of self-regard. It is not implausible that most people, even those enduring great hardship, can readily find grounds for satisfaction with their lives. Life may have to be pretty hard for a person to be incapable of affirming it.

Despite these concerns there is significant intuitive appeal in the idea that to be happy is to be satisfied with one’s life. Perhaps a different way of conceiving life satisfaction, for instance dispensing with the global judgment and aggregating particular satisfactions and dissatisfactions, would lessen the force of these objections. Alternatively, it is possible that idealized or qualified forms of life satisfaction would mitigate these concerns for some purposes, such as a theory of well-being. [ 10 ]

A second set of issues concerns the differences between the two affect-based views, hedonism and emotional state. The appeal of hedonism is fairly obvious: the pleasantness of our experience is plainly a matter of great significance; many have claimed it to be the only thing that matters. What, by contrast, motivates the emotional state account, which bears obvious similarities to hedonism yet excludes many pleasures from happiness? The question of motivation appears to be the chief worry facing the emotional state theory: what’s to be gained by focusing on emotional state rather than pleasure?

One argument for taking such a view is intuitive: some find it implausible to think that psychologically superficial pleasures invariably make a difference in how happy one is—the typical pleasure of eating a cracker, say, or even the intense pleasure of an orgasm that nonetheless fails to move one, as can happen with meaningless sexual activity. The intuitive distinction seems akin to distinctions made by some ancient philosophers; consider, for instance, the following passage from Epictetus’s Discourses :

‘I have a headache.’ Well, do not say ‘Alas!’ ‘I have an earache.’ Do not say ‘Alas!’ And I am not saying that it is not permissible to groan, only do not groan in the centre of your being . ( Discourses , 1.18.19, emphasis added).

The Stoics did not expect us never to feel unpleasant sensations, which would plainly be impossible; rather, the idea was not to let such things get to us , to impact our emotional conditions.

Why should anyone care to press such a distinction in characterizing happiness? For most people, the hedonic difference between happiness on an emotional state versus a hedonistic view is probably minimal. But while little will be lost, what will be gained? One possibility is that the more “central” affects involving our emotional conditions may bear a special relation to the person or the self , whereas more “peripheral” affects, like the pleasantness of eating a cracker, might pertain to the subpersonal aspects of our psychologies. Since well-being is commonly linked to ideas of self-fulfillment, this sort of distinction might signal a difference in the importance of these states. Another reason to focus on emotional condition rather than experience alone may be the greater psychological depth of the former: its impact on our mental lives, physiology, and behavior is arguably deeper and more pervasive. This enhances the explanatory and predictive significance of happiness, and more importantly its desirability: happiness on this view is not merely pleasant, but a major source of pleasure and other good outcomes (Fredrickson 2004, Lyubomirsky, King et al . 2005). Compare health on this score: while many think it matters chiefly or entirely because of its connection with pleasure, there are few skeptics about the importance of health. As well, emotional state views may capture the idea that happiness concerns the individual’s psychological orientation or disposition : to be happy, on an emotional state theory, is not just to be subjected to a certain sequence of experiences, but for one’s very being to manifest a favorable orientation toward the conditions of one’s life—a kind of psychic affirmation of one’s life. This reflects a point of similarity with life satisfaction views of happiness: contra hedonism, both views take happiness to be substantially dispositional, involving some sort of favorable orientation toward one’s life. But life satisfaction views tend to emphasize reflective or rational endorsement, whereas emotional state views emphasize the verdicts of our emotional natures.

While hedonism and emotional state theories are major contenders in the contemporary literature, all affect-based theories confront the worries, noted earlier, that motivate life satisfaction views—notably, their looser connection with people’s priorities, as well as their limited ability to reflect the quality of people’s lives taken as a whole.

Given the limitations of narrower theories of happiness, a hybrid account such as a subjective well-being theory may seem an attractive solution. This strategy has not been fully explored in the philosophical literature, though Sumner’s “life satisfaction” theory may best be classified as a hybrid (1996; see also Martin 2012). In any event, a hybrid approach draws objections of its own. If we arrive at a hybrid theory by this route, it could seem like either the marriage of two unpromising accounts, or of a promising account with an unpromising one. Such a union may not yield wholesome results. Second, people have different intuitions about what counts as happiness, so that no theory can accommodate all of them. Any theory that tries to thus risks pleasing no one. A third concern is that the various components of any hybrid are liable to matter for quite different reasons, so that happiness, thus understood, might fail to answer to any coherent set of concerns. Ascriptions of happiness could be relatively uninformative if they cast their net too widely.

3. The science of happiness

With the explosive rise of empirical research on happiness, a central question is how far, and how, happiness might be measured. [ 11 ] There seems to be no in-principle barrier to the idea of measuring, at least roughly, how happy people are. Investigators may never enjoy the precision of the “hedonimeter” once envisaged by Edgeworth to show just how happy a person is (Edgeworth 1881). Indeed, such a device might be impossible even in principle, since happiness might involve multiple dimensions that either cannot be precisely quantified or summed together. If so, it could still be feasible to develop approximate measures of happiness, or at least its various dimensions. Similarly, depression may not admit of precise quantification in a single number, yet many useful if imprecise measures of depression exist. In the case of happiness, it is plausible that even current measures provide information about how anxious, cheerful, satisfied, etc. people are, and thus tell us something about their happiness. Even the simplest self-report measures used in the literature have been found to correlate well with many intuitively relevant variables, such as friends’ reports, smiling, physiological measures, health, longevity, and so forth (Pavot 2008).

Importantly, most scientific research needs only to discern patterns across large numbers of individuals—to take an easy case, determining whether widows tend to be less happy than newlyweds—and this is compatible with substantial unreliability in assessing individual happiness. Similarly, an inaccurate thermometer might be a poor guide to the temperature, but readings from many such thermometers could correlate fairly well with actual temperatures—telling us, for instance, that Minnesota is colder than Florida.

This point reveals an important caveat: measures of happiness could correlate well with how happy people are, thus telling us which groups of people tend to be happier, while being completely wrong about absolute levels of happiness. Self-reports of happiness, for instance, might correctly indicate that unemployed people are considerably less happy than those with jobs. But every one of those reports could be wrong, say if everyone is unhappy yet claims to be happy, or vice-versa, so long as the unemployed report lower happiness than the employed. Similarly, bad thermometers may show that Minnesota is colder than Florida without giving the correct temperature.

Two morals emerge from these reflections. First, self-report measures of happiness could be reliable guides to relative happiness, though telling us little about how happy, in absolute terms, people are. We may know who is happier, that is, but not whether people are in fact happy. Second, even comparisons of relative happiness will be inaccurate if the groups being compared systematically bias their reports in different ways. This worry is particularly acute for cross-cultural comparisons of happiness, where differing norms about happiness may undermine the comparability of self-reports. The French might report lower happiness than Americans, for instance, not because their lives are less satisfying or pleasant, but because they tend to put a less positive spin on things. For this reason it may be useful to employ instruments, including narrower questions or physiological measures, that are less prone to cultural biasing. [ 12 ]

The discussion thus far has assumed that people can be wrong about how happy they are. Is this plausible? Some have argued that (sincerely) self-reported happiness cannot, even in principle, be mistaken. If you think you’re happy, goes a common sentiment, then you are happy. This claim is not plausible on a hedonistic or emotional state view of happiness, since those theories take judgments of happiness to encompass not just how one is feeling at the moment but also past states, and memories of those can obviously be spurious. Further, it has been argued that even judgments of how one feels at the present moment may often be mistaken, particularly regarding moods like anxiety. [ 13 ]

The idea that sincere self-reports of happiness are incorrigible can only be correct, it seems, given a quite specific conception of happiness—a kind of life satisfaction theory of happiness on which people count as satisfied with their lives so long as they are disposed to judge explicitly that they are satisfied with their lives on the whole. Also assumed here is that self-reports of happiness are in fact wholly grounded in life satisfaction judgments like these—that is, that people take questions about “happiness” to be questions about life satisfaction. Given these assumptions, we can plausibly conclude that self-reports of happiness are incorrigible. One question is whether happiness, thus conceived, is very important. As well, it is unlikely that respondents invariably interpret happiness questions as being about life satisfaction. At any rate, even life satisfaction theorists might balk at this variant of the account, since life satisfaction is sometimes taken to involve, not just explicit global judgments of life satisfaction, but also our responses to the particular things or domains we care about. Some will hesitate to deem satisfied people who hate many of the important things in their lives, however satisfied they claim to be with their lives as a whole.

In a similar vein, the common practice of measuring happiness simply by asking people to report explicitly on how “happy” they are is sometimes defended on the grounds that it lets people decide for themselves what happiness is. The reasoning again seems to presuppose, controversially, that self-reports of happiness employ a life satisfaction view of happiness, the idea being that whether you are satisfied (“happy”) will depend on what you care about. Alternatively, the point might be literally to leave it up to the respondent to decide whether ‘happy’ means hedonic state, emotional state, life satisfaction, or something else. Thus one respondent’s “I’m happy” might mean “my experience is generally pleasant,” while another’s might mean “I am satisfied with my life as a whole.” It is not clear, however, that asking ambiguous questions of this sort is a useful enterprise, since different respondents will in effect be answering different questions.

To measure happiness through self-reports, then, it may be wiser to employ terms other than ‘happiness’ and its cognates—terms whose meaning is relatively well-known and fixed. In other words, researchers should decide in advance what they want to measure—be it life satisfaction, hedonic state, emotional state, or something else—and then ask questions that refer unambiguously to those states. [ 14 ] This stratagem may be all the more necessary in cross-cultural work, where finding suitable translations of ‘happy’ can be daunting—particularly when the English meaning of the term remains a matter of contention (Wierzbicka 2004).

This entry focuses on subjective well-being studies, since that work is standardly deemed “happiness” research. But psychological research on well-being can take other forms, notably in the “eudaimonic”—commonly opposed to “hedonic”—literature, which assesses a broader range of indicators taken to represent objective human needs, such as meaning, personal growth, relatedness, autonomy, competence, etc. [ 15 ] (The assimilation of subjective well-being to the “hedonic” realm may be misleading, since life satisfaction seems primarily to be a non -hedonic value, as noted earlier.) Other well-being instruments may not clearly fall under either the “happiness” or eudaimonic rubrics, for instance extending subjective well-being measures by adding questions about the extent to which activities are seen as meaningful or worthwhile (White and Dolan 2009). An important question going forward is how far well-being research needs to incorporate indicators beyond subjective well-being.

The scientific literature on happiness has grown to proportions far too large for this article to do more than briefly touch on a few highlights. [ 16 ] Here is a sampling of oft-cited claims:

• Most people are happy
• People adapt to most changes, tending to return over time to their happiness “set point”
• People are prone to make serious mistakes in assessing and pursuing happiness
• Material prosperity has a surprisingly modest impact on happiness

The first claim, that most people are happy, appears to be a consensus position among subjective well-being researchers (for a seminal argument, see Diener and Diener 1996). The contention reflects three lines of evidence: most people, in most places, report being happy; most people report being satisfied with their lives; and most people experience more positive affect than negative. On any of the major theories of happiness, then, the evidence seems to show that most people are, indeed, happy. Yet this conclusion might be resisted, on a couple of grounds. First, life satisfaction theorists might question whether self-reports of life satisfaction suffice to establish that people are in fact satisfied with their lives. Perhaps self-reports can be mistaken, say if the individual believes herself satisfied yet shows many signs of dissatisfaction in her behavior, for instance complaining about or striving to change important things in her life. Second, defenders of affect-based theories—hedonistic and emotional state views—might reject the notion that a bare majority of positive affect suffices for happiness. While the traditional view among hedonists has indeed been that happiness requires no more than a >1:1 ratio of positive to negative affect, this contention has received little defense and has been disputed in the recent literature. Some investigators have claimed that “flourishing” requires greater than a 3:1 ratio of positive to negative affect, as this ratio might represent a threshold for broadly favorable psychological functioning (e.g., Larsen and Prizmic 2008). While the evidence for any specific ratio is highly controversial, if anything like this proportion were adopted as the threshold for happiness, on a hedonistic or emotional state theory, then some of the evidence taken to show that people are happy could in fact show the opposite. In any event, the empirical claim relies heavily on nontrivial philosophical views about the nature of happiness, illustrating one way in which philosophical work on happiness can inform scientific research.

The second claim, regarding adaptation and set points, reflects well-known findings that many major life events, like being disabled in an accident or winning the lottery, appear strongly to impact happiness only for a relatively brief period, after which individuals may return to a level of happiness not very different from before. [ 17 ] As well, twin studies have found that subjective well-being is substantially heritable, with .50 being a commonly accepted figure. Consequently many researchers have posited that each individual has a characteristic “set point” level of happiness, toward which he tends to gravitate over time. Such claims have caused some consternation over whether the pursuit and promotion of happiness are largely futile enterprises (Lykken and Tellegen 1996; Millgram 2000). However, the dominant view now seems to be that the early claims about extreme adaptation and set points were exaggerated: while adaptation is a very real phenomenon, many factors—including disability—can have substantial, and lasting, effects on how happy people are. [ 18 ] This point was already apparent from the literature on correlates and causes of happiness, discussed below: if things like relationships and engaging work are important for happiness, then happiness is probably not simply a matter of personality or temperament. As well, the large cross-national differences in measured happiness are unlikely to be entirely an artifact of personality variables. Note that even highly heritable traits can be strongly susceptible to improvement. Better living conditions have raised the stature of men in the Netherlands by eight inches—going from short (five foot four) to tall (over six feet)—in the last 150 years (Fogel 2005). Yet height is considered much more heritable than happiness, with typical heritability estimates ranging from .60 to over .90 (e.g., Silventoinen, Sammalisto et al . 2003). [ 19 ]

The question of mistakes will be taken up in section 5.2. But the last claim—that material prosperity has relatively modest impacts on happiness—has lately become the subject of heated debate. For some time the standard view among subjective well-being researchers was that, beyond a low threshold where basic needs are met, economic gains have only a small impact on happiness levels. According to the well-known “Easterlin Paradox,” for instance, wealthier people do tend to be happier within nations, but richer nations are little happier than less prosperous counterparts, and—most strikingly—economic growth has virtually no impact (Easterlin 1974). In the U.S., for example, measured happiness has not increased significantly since at least 1947, despite massive increases in wealth and income. In short, once you’re out of poverty, absolute levels of wealth and income make little difference in how happy people are.

Against these claims, some authors have argued that absolute income has a large impact on happiness across the income spectrum (e.g., Stevenson and Wolfers 2008). The question continues to be much debated, but in 2010 a pair of large-scale studies using Gallup data sets, including improved measures of life satisfaction and affect, suggested that both sides may be partly right (Kahneman and Deaton 2010; Diener, Ng et al . 2010). Surveying large numbers of Americans in one case, and what is claimed to be the first globally representative sample of humanity in the other, these studies found that income does indeed correlate substantially (.44 in the global sample), at all levels, with life satisfaction—strictly speaking, a “life evaluation” measure that asks respondents to rate their lives without saying whether they are satisfied. Yet the correlation of household income with the affect measures is far weaker: globally, .17 for positive affect, –.09 for negative affect; and in the United States, essentially zero above $75,000 (though quite strong at low income levels). For more recent discussions of empirical work, see Jebb et al. 2018 along with relevant chapters in Diener et al. 2018 and the annual World Happiness Reports from 2012 onward (Helliwell et al. 2012). Research on the complex money-happiness relationship resists simple characterization, but a crude summary is that the connection tends to be positive and substantial, strong at lower income levels while modest to weak or even negative at higher incomes, and stronger and less prone to satiation for life evaluation than emotional well-being metrics. But again, these are very rough generalizations that gloss over a variety of important factors and admit of many exceptions across both individuals and societies.

In short, the relationship between money and happiness may depend on which theory of happiness we accept: on a life satisfaction view, the relationship may be strong; whereas affect-based views may yield a much weaker connection, again above some modest threshold. Here, again, philosophical views about the nature and significance of happiness may play an important role in understanding empirical results and their practical upshot. Economic growth, for instance, has long been a top priority for governments, and findings about its impact on human well-being may have substantial implications for policy.

It is important to note that studies of this nature focus on generic trends, not specific cases, and there is no dispute that significant exceptions exist—notably, populations that enjoy high levels of happiness amid low levels of material prosperity. Among others, a number of Latin American countries, Maasai herders, Inughuit hunter-gatherers, and Amish communities have registered highly positive results in subjective well-being studies, sometimes higher than those in many affluent nations, and numerous informal accounts accord with the data. [ 20 ] Such “positive outliers” suggest that some societies can support high levels of happiness with extremely modest material holdings. The importance of money for happiness may depend strongly on what kind of society one inhabits. An interesting question, particularly in light of common environmental concerns, is how far the lessons of such societies can, or should, be transferred to other social forms, where material attainment and happiness are presently more tightly coupled. Perhaps some degree of decoupling of happiness and money would be desirable.

So the role of money in happiness appears, at this juncture, to be a mixed bag, depending heavily on how we conceive of happiness and what range of societies we are considering. What (else), then, does matter most for happiness? There is no definitive list of the main sources of happiness in the literature, partly because it is not clear how to divide them up. But the following items seem generally to be accepted as among the chief correlates of happiness: supportive relationships, engagement in interesting and challenging activities, material and physical security, a sense of meaning or purpose, a positive outlook, and autonomy or control. [ 21 ] Significant correlates may also include—among many others—religion, good governance, trust, helping others, values (e.g., having non-materialistic values), achieving goals, not being unemployed, and connection with the natural environment. [ 22 ]

An illustrative study of the correlates of happiness from a global perspective is the Gallup World Poll study noted earlier (Diener, Ng et al . 2010; see also Jebb et al. 2020). In that study, the life satisfaction measure was more strongly related to material prosperity, as noted above: household income, along with possession of luxury conveniences and satisfaction with standard of living. The affect measures, by contrast, correlated most strongly with what the authors call “psychosocial prosperity”: whether people reported being treated with respect in the last day, having family and friends to count on, learning something new, doing what they do best, and choosing how their time was spent.

What these results show depends partly on the reliability of the measures. One possible source of error is that this study might exaggerate the relationship between life satisfaction and material attainments through the use of a “ladder” scale for life evaluation, ladders being associated with material aspirations. Errors might also arise through salience biases whereby material concerns might be more easily recalled than other important values, such as whether one has succeeded in having children; or through differences in positivity biases across income levels (perhaps wealthier people tend to be more “positive-responding” than poorer individuals). Another question is whether the affect measures adequately track the various dimensions of people’s emotional lives. However, the results are roughly consonant with other research, so they are unlikely to be entirely an artifact of the instruments used in this study. [ 23 ] A further point of uncertainty is the causal story behind the correlations—whether the correlates, like psychosocial prosperity, cause happiness; whether happiness causes them; whether other factors cause both; or, as is likely, some combination of the three.

Such concerns duly noted, the research plausibly suggests that, on average, material progress has some tendency to help people to better get what they want in life, as found in the life satisfaction measures, while relationships and engaging activities are more important for people’s emotional lives. What this means for happiness depends on which view of happiness is correct.

4. The importance of happiness

Were you to survey public attitudes about the value of happiness, at least in liberal Western democracies, you would likely find considerable support for the proposition that happiness is all that really matters for human well-being. Many philosophers over the ages have likewise endorsed such a view, typically assuming a hedonistic account of happiness. (A few, like Almeder 2000, have identified well-being with happiness understood as life satisfaction.)

Most philosophers, however, have rejected hedonistic and other mental state accounts of well-being, and with them the idea that happiness could suffice for well-being. [ 24 ] (See the entry on well-being .) Objections to mental state theories of well-being tend to cluster around two sets of concerns. First, it is widely believed that the non-mental conditions of our lives matter for well-being: whether our families really love us, whether our putative achievements are genuine, whether the things we care about actually obtain. The most influential objection of this sort is Robert Nozick’s experience machine case, wherein we are asked to imagine a virtual reality device that can perfectly simulate any reality for its user, who will think the experience is genuine (Nozick 1974). Would you plug in to such a machine for life? Most people would not, and the case is widely taken to vitiate mental state theories of well-being. Beyond having positive mental states, it seems to matter both that our lives go well and that our state of mind is appropriately related to how things are. [ 25 ]

A second set of objections concerns various ways in which a happy person might nonetheless seem intuitively to be leading an impoverished or stunted life. The most influential of these worries involves adaptation , where individuals facing oppressive circumstances scale back their expectations and find contentment in “small mercies,” as Sen put it. [ 26 ] Even a slave might come to internalize the values of his oppressors and be happy, and this strikes most as an unenviable life indeed. Related worries involve people with diminished capacities (blindness, Down Syndrome), or choosing to lead narrow and cramped or simpleminded lives (e.g., counting blades of grass). Worries about impoverished lives are a prime motivator of Aristotelian theories of well-being, which emphasize the full and proper exercise of our human capacities.

In the face of these and other objections most commentators have concluded that neither happiness nor any other mental state can suffice for well-being. Philosophical interest in happiness has consequently flagged, since its theoretical importance becomes unclear if it does not play a starring role in our account of the good.

Even as happiness might fail to suffice for well-being, well-being itself may be only one component of a good life , and not the most important one at that. Here ‘good life’ means a life that is good all things considered, taking account of all the values that matter in life, whether they benefit the individual or not. Kant, for example, considered both morality and well-being to be important but distinct elements of a good life. Yet morality should be our first priority, never to be sacrificed for personal happiness.

In fact there is a broad consensus, or near-consensus, among ethical theorists on a doctrine we might call the priority of virtue : broadly and crudely speaking, the demands of virtue or morality trump other values in life. [ 27 ] We ought above all to act and live well, or at least not badly or wrongly. This view need not take the strong form of insisting that we must always act as virtuously as possible, or that moral reasons always take precedence. But it does mean, at least, that when being happy requires acting badly, one’s happiness must be sacrificed. If it would be wrong to leave your family, in which you are unhappy, then you must remain unhappy, or find more acceptable ways to seek happiness.

The mainstream views in all three of the major approaches to ethical theory—consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics—agree on some form of the priority of virtue. Where these views chiefly differ is not on the importance of being good, but on whether being good necessarily benefits us. Virtue ethicists tend to answer in the affirmative, the other two schools in the negative. Building virtue into well-being, as Aristotelians do, may seem to yield a more demanding ethics, and in some ways it does. Yet many deontologists and consequentialists—notably Kant—advocate sterner, more starkly moralistic visions of the good life than Aristotle would ever have dreamt of (e.g., Singer 1972).

Happiness, in short, is believed by most philosophers to be insufficient for well-being, and still less important for the good life. These points may seem to vitiate any substantial role for happiness in ethical thought. However, well-being itself is still regarded as a central concept in ethical thought, denoting one of the chief elements of a good life even if not the sole element. And there are reasons for thinking happiness important, both practically and theoretically, despite the worries noted above.

Even if happiness does not suffice for well-being—a point that not all philosophers would accept—it might still rate a privileged spot in theories of well-being. This could happen in either of two ways.

First, happiness could be a major component of a theory of well-being. Objective list theories of well-being sometimes include happiness or related mental states such as enjoyment among the fundamental constituents of well-being. A more ambitious proposal, originated by L.W. Sumner, identifies well-being with authentic happiness —happiness that is authentic in the sense of being both informed and autonomous (Sumner 1996). The root idea is that well-being involves being happy, where one’s happiness is a response of one’s own (autonomous), to a life that genuinely is one’s own (informed). The authenticity constraint is meant to address both experience machine-type worries and “happy slave” objections relating to adaptation, where happiness may be non-autonomous, depending on manipulation or the uncritical acceptance of oppressive values. Since these have been the most influential objections to mental state accounts of well-being, Sumner’s approach promises to considerably strengthen the position of happiness-centered approaches to well-being, and several philosophers have developed variants or close relations of the authentic happiness theory (Brülde 2007, Haybron 2008a, Tiberius and Plakias 2010, Višak 2015). The approach remains fairly new, however, so its long-term prospects remain unclear. [ 28 ]

A second strategy forsakes the project of giving a unitary theory of well-being, recognizing instead a family of two or more kinds of prudential value. Happiness could be central to, or even exhaustive of, one of those values. Shelly Kagan, for instance, has suggested that welfare hedonism could be correct as a theory of how well a person is doing, but not of how well a person’s life is going, which should perhaps be regarded as a distinct value (Kagan 1992, 1994). In short, we might distinguish narrow and wide well-being concepts. An experience machine user might be doing well in the narrow sense, but not the wide—she is doing well, though her life is quite sad. Happiness might, then, suffice for well-being, but only in the narrow sense. Others have made similar points, but uptake has been limited, perhaps because distinguishing multiple concepts of prudential value makes the already difficult job of giving a theory of well-being much harder, as Kagan pointedly observes. [ 29 ] An interesting possibility is that the locution ‘happy life’, and the corresponding well-being sense of happiness, actually refers to a specific variety of well-being—perhaps well-being in the wide sense just suggested, or well-being taken as an ideal state, an ultimate goal of deliberation. This might explain the continued use of ‘happiness’ for the well-being notion in the philosophical literature, rather than the more standard ‘wellbeing.’

The preceding section discussed ways that happiness might figure prominently even in non-mental state theories of well-being. The question there concerned the role of happiness in theories of well-being. This is a different question from how important happiness is for well-being itself. Even a theory of well-being that includes no mention at all of happiness can allow that happiness is nonetheless a major component or contributor to well-being, because of its relation to the things that ultimately constitute well-being. If you hold a desire theory of well-being, for instance, you will very likely allow that, for most people, happiness is a central aspect of well-being, since most people very much desire to be happy. Indeed, some desire theorists have argued that the account actually yields a form of hedonism, on the grounds that people ultimately desire nothing else but happiness or pleasure (Sidgwick 1907 [1966], Brandt 1979, 1989).

Happiness may be thought important even on theories normally believed to take a dismissive view of it. Aristotelians identify well-being with virtuous activity, yet Aristotle plainly takes this to be a highly pleasant condition, indeed the most pleasant kind of life there is (see, e.g., NE , Bk. I 8; Bk. VII 13). You cannot flourish, on Aristotelian terms, without being happy, and unhappiness is clearly incompatible with well-being. Even the Stoics, who notoriously regard all but a virtuous inner state as at best indifferent, would still assign happiness a kind of importance: at the very least, to be unhappy would be unvirtuous; and virtue itself arguably entails a kind of happiness, namely a pleasant state of tranquility. As well, happiness would likely be a preferred indifferent in most cases, to be chosen over unhappiness. To be sure, both Aristotelian and Stoic accounts are clear that happiness alone does not suffice for well-being, that its significance is not what common opinion takes it to be, and that some kinds of happiness can be worthless or even bad. But neither denies that happiness is somehow quite important for human well-being.

In fact it is questionable whether any major school of philosophical thought denies outright the importance of happiness, at least on one of the plausible accounts of the matter. Doubts about its significance probably owe to several factors. Some skeptics, for example, focus on relatively weak conceptions of happiness, such as the idea that it is little more than the simple emotion of feeling happy—an idea that few hedonists or emotional state theorists would accept. Or, alternatively, assuming that a concern for happiness has only to do with positive states. Yet ‘happiness’ also serves as a blanket term for a domain of concern that involves both positive and negative states, namely the kinds of mental states involved in being happy or unhappy. Just as “health” care tends to focus mainly on ill health, so might happiness researchers choose to focus much of their effort on the study and alleviation of unhappiness—depression, suffering, anxiety, and other conditions whose importance is uncontroversial. The study of happiness need be no more concerned with smiles than with frowns.

5. The pursuit and promotion of happiness

The last set of questions we will examine centers on the pursuit of happiness, both individual and collective. Most of the popular literature on happiness discusses how to make oneself happier, with little attention given to whether this is an appropriate goal, or how various means of pursuing happiness measure up from an ethical standpoint. More broadly, how if at all should one pursue happiness as part of a good life?

We saw earlier that most philosophers regard happiness as secondary to morality in a good life. The individual pursuit of happiness may be subject to nonmoral norms as well, prudence being the most obvious among them. Prudential norms need not be as plain as “don’t shoot yourself in the foot.” On Sumner’s authentic happiness view of well-being, for instance, we stand to gain little by pursuing happiness in inauthentic ways, for instance through self-deception or powerful drugs like Huxley’s soma , which guarantees happiness come what may (Huxley 1932 [2005]). The view raises interesting questions about the benefits of less extreme pharmaceuticals, such as the therapeutic use of antidepressants; such medications can make life more pleasant, but many people worry whether they pose a threat to authenticity, perhaps undercutting their benefits. It is possible that such drugs involve prudential tradeoffs, promoting well-being in some ways while undermining it in others; whether the tradeoffs are worth it will depend on how, in a given case, the balance is struck. Another possibility is that such drugs sometimes promote authenticity, if for instance a depressive disorder prevents a person from being “himself.”

Looking to more broadly ethical, but not yet moral, norms, it may be possible to act badly without acting either immorally or imprudently. While Aristotle himself regarded acting badly as inherently imprudent, his catalogue of virtues is instructive, as many of them (wit, friendliness, etc.) are not what we normally regard as moral virtues. Some morally permissible methods of pursuing happiness may nonetheless be inappropriate because they conflict with such “ethical” virtues. They might, for instance, be undignified or imbecilic.

Outwardly virtuous conduct undertaken in the name of personal happiness might, if wrongly motivated, be incompatible with genuine virtue. One might, for instance, engage in philanthropy solely to make oneself happier, and indeed work hard at fine-tuning one’s assistance to maximize the hedonic payoff. This sort of conduct would not obviously instantiate the virtue of compassion or kindness, and indeed might be reasonably deemed contemptible. Similarly, it might be admirable, morally or otherwise, to be grateful for the good things in one’s life. Yet the virtue of gratitude might be undermined by certain kinds of gratitude intervention, whereby one tries to become happier by focusing on the things one is grateful for. If expressions of gratitude become phony or purely instrumental, the sole reason for giving thanks being to become happy—and not that one actually has something to be thankful for—then the “gratitude” might cease to be admirable, and may indeed be unvirtuous. [ 30 ]

A different question is what means of pursuing happiness are most effective . This is fundamentally an empirical question, but there are some in-principle issues that philosophical reflection might inform. One oft-heard claim, commonly called the “paradox of hedonism,” is that the pursuit of happiness is self-defeating; to be happy, don’t pursue happiness. It is not clear how to interpret this dictum, however, so that it is both interesting and true. It is plainly imprudent to make happiness one’s focus at every moment, but doubtful that this has often been denied. Yet never considering happiness also seems an improbable strategy for becoming happier. If you are choosing among several equally worthwhile occupations, and have good evidence that some of them will make you miserable, while one of them is likely to be highly fulfilling, it would not seem imprudent to take that information into account. Yet to do so just is to pursue happiness. The so-called paradox of hedonism is perhaps best seen as a vague caution against focusing too much on making oneself happy, not a blanket dismissal of the prospects for expressly seeking happiness—and for this modest point there is good empirical evidence (Schooler, Ariely et al . 2003, Lyubomirsky 2007).

That happiness is sometimes worth seeking does not mean we will always do a good job of it (Haybron 2008b). In recent decades a massive body of empirical evidence has gathered on various ways in which people seem systematically prone to make mistakes in the pursuit of their interests, including happiness. Such tendencies have been suggested in several domains relating to the pursuit of happiness, including (with recent surveys cited):

• Assessing how happy we are, or were in the past (Haybron 2007)
• Predicting (“forecasting”) what will make us happy (Gilbert 2006)
• Choosing rationally (Kahneman and Tversky 2000, Gilovitch, Griffin et al . 2002, Hsee and Hastie 2006)

A related body of literature explores the costs and benefits of (ostensibly) making it easier to pursue happiness by increasing people’s options; it turns out that having more choices might often make people less happy, for instance by increasing the burdens of deliberation or the likelihood of regret (Schwartz 2004). Less discussed in this context, but highly relevant, is the large body of research indicating that human psychology and behavior are remarkably prone to unconscious social and other situational influences, most infamously reported in the Milgram obedience experiments (Doris 2002, 2015, Haybron 2014). Human functioning, and the pursuit of happiness, may be more profoundly social than many commentators have assumed. [ 31 ]

Taken together, this research bears heavily on two central questions in the philosophical literature: first, the broad character of human nature (e.g., in what sense are we rational animals? How should we conceive of human autonomy?); second, the philosophical ideals of the good society and good government.

Just a decade ago the idea of happiness policy was something of a novelty. While it remains on the fringes in some locales, notably the United States, in much of the world there has been a surge of interest in making happiness an explicit target of policy consideration. Attention has largely shifted, however, to a broader focus on well-being to reflect not just happiness but also other welfare concerns of citizens, and dozens of governments now incorporate well-being metrics in their national statistics. [ 32 ]

Let’s consider the rationale for policies aimed at promoting well-being. In political thought, the modern liberal tradition has tended to assume an optimistic view of human nature and the individual’s capacities for prudent choice. Partly for this reason, the preservation and expansion of individual freedoms, including people’s options, is widely taken to be a central goal, if not the goal, of legitimate governments. People should be freed to seek the good life as they see it, and beyond that the state should, by and large, stay out of the well-being-promotion business.

This vision of the good society rests on empirical assumptions that have been the subject of considerable debate. If it turns out that people systematically and predictably err in the pursuit of their interests, then it may be possible for governments to devise policies that correct for such mistakes. [ 33 ] Of course, government intervention can introduce other sorts of mistakes, and there is some debate about whether such measures are likely to do more harm than good (e.g., Glaeser 2006).

But even if governments cannot effectively counteract human imprudence, it may still be that people fare better in social forms that influence or even constrain choices in ways that make serious mistakes less likely. (Food culture and its impact on health may be an instructive example here.) The idea that people tend to fare best when their lives are substantially constrained or guided by their social and physical context has recently been dubbed contextualism ; the contrary view, that people do best when their lives are, as much as possible, determined by the individuals themselves, is individualism (Haybron 2008b). Recent contextualists include communitarians and many perfectionists, though contextualism is not a political doctrine and is compatible with liberalism and even libertarian political morality. Contextualism about the promotion of well-being is related to recent work in moral psychology that emphasizes the social character of human agency, such as situationism and social intuitionism. [ 34 ]

Quite apart from matters of efficacy, there are moral questions about the state promotion of happiness, which has been a major subject of debate, both because of the literature on mistakes and research suggesting that the traditional focus of state efforts to promote well-being, economic growth, has a surprisingly modest impact on happiness. One concern is paternalism : does happiness-based policy infringe too much on personal liberty? Some fear a politics that may too closely approximate Huxley’s Brave New World, where the state ensures a drug-induced happiness for all (Huxley 1932 [2005]). Extant policy suggestions, however, have been more modest. Efforts to steer choice, for instance in favor of retirement savings, may be paternalistic, but advocates argue that such policies can be sufficiently light-handed that no one should object to them, in some cases even going so far as to deem it “libertarian paternalism” (Thaler and Sunstein 2008). [ 35 ] The idea is that gentle “nudges,” like setting default options on hiring forms to setting aside money for retirement, interfere only trivially with choice, imposing little or no cost for those who wish to choose differently, and would very likely be welcomed by most of those targeted.

Also relatively light-handed, and perhaps not paternalistic at all, are state efforts to promote happiness directly through social policy, for instance by prioritizing unemployment over economic growth on the grounds that the former has a larger impact on happiness. Other policies might include trying to reduce commute times, or making walkable neighborhoods and green space a priority in urban planning, again on happiness grounds. Some may deem such measures paternalistic insofar as they trade freedom (in the form of economic prosperity) for a substantive good, happiness, that people value unevenly, though it has also been argued that refusing to take citizens’ values like happiness into consideration in policy deliberation on their behalf can amount to paternalism (Haybron and Alexandrova 2013).

A related sort of objection to happiness-based policy argues that happiness, or even well-being, is simply the wrong object of policy, which ought instead to focus on the promotion of resources or capabilities (Rawls 1971, Nussbaum 2000, Quong 2011, Sen 2009). Several reasons have been cited for this sort of view, one being that policies aimed at promoting happiness or well-being violate commonly accepted requirements of “liberal neutrality,” according to which policy must be neutral among conceptions of the good. According to this constraint, governments must not promote any view of the good life, and happiness-based policy might be argued to flout it. Worries about paternalism also surface here, the idea being that states should only focus on affording people the option to be happy or whatever, leaving the actual achievement of well-being up to the autonomous individual. As we just saw, however, it is not clear how far happiness policy initiatives actually infringe on personal liberty or autonomy. A further worry is that, happiness isn’t really, or primarily, what matters for human well-being (Nussbaum 2008).

But a major motivation for thinking happiness the wrong object of policy is that neither happiness nor well-being are the appropriate focus of a theory of justice . What justice requires of society, on this view, is not that it make us happy; we do not have a right to be happy. Rather, justice demands only that each has sufficient opportunity (in the form of resources or capabilities, say) to achieve a good life, or that each gets a fair share of the benefits of social cooperation. However plausible such points may be, it is not clear how far they apply to many proposals for happiness-based policy, save the strongest claims that happiness should be the sole aim of policy: many policy decisions are not primarily concerned with questions of social justice, nor with constitutional fundamentals, the focus of some theories of justice. Happiness could be a poor candidate for the “currency” of justice, yet still remain a major policy concern. Indeed, the chief target of happiness policy advocates has been, not theories of justice, but governments’ overwhelming emphasis on promoting GDP and other indices of economic growth. This is not, in the main, a debate about justice, and as of yet the philosophical literature has not extensively engaged with it.

However, the push for happiness-based policy is a recent development. In coming years, such questions will likely receive considerably more attention in the philosophical literature.

• Adler, Matthew D., 2019, Measuring Social Welfare: An Introduction , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Adler, M. D., and M. Fleurbaey (eds.), 2015, The Oxford Handbook of Well-Being and Public Policy , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Ahuvia, A., et al., 2015, “Happiness: An Interactionist Perspective,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 5(1): 1–18.
• Alexandrova, A., 2005, “Subjective Well-Being and Kahneman’s ‘Objective Happiness’,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 6: 301–324.
• –––, 2008, “First-Person Reports and the Measurement of Happiness,” Philosophical Psychology , 21(5): 571–583.
• –––, 2017, A Philosophy for the Science of Well-Being , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Alexandrova, A. and D. M. Haybron, 2012, “High Fidelity Economics,” in The Elgar Companion to Recent Economic Methodology , W. Hands and J. Davis (eds.). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
• –––, 2016, “Is Construct Validation Valid?,” Philosophy of Science , 83(5): 1098–1109.
• Almeder, R., 2000, Human Happiness and Morality , Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Press.
• Andreou, C., 2010, “A Shallow Route to Environmentally Friendly Happiness: Why Evidence That We Are Shallow Materialists Need Not Be Bad News for the Environment(Alist),” Ethics, Place & Environment , 13(1): 1–10.
• Ang, J. M. S., 2019, “Can Existentialists Be Happy? Authentic Life, Authentic Happiness,” Science, Religion and Culture , 6(1): 122–129.
• Angier, T., 2015, “Happiness: Overcoming the Skill Model,” International Philosophical Quarterly , 55(1): 5–23.
• Angner, E., 2009, “The Politics of Happiness,” Philosophy and Happiness , L. Bortolotti (ed.), New York: Palgrave, 1–26.
• –––, 2010, “Are subjective measures of well-being ‘direct’?” Australasian Journal of Philosophy , 89(1): 115–130.
• –––, 2011, “The Evolution of Eupathics: The Historical Roots of Subjective Measures of Well-Being,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 1(1): 4–41.
• –––, 2013a, “Is it possible to measure happiness?,” European Journal for Philosophy of Science , 3(2): 221–240.
• –––, 2013b, “Is Empirical Research Relevant to Philosophical Conclusions?,” Res Philosophica , 90(3): 365–85.
• –––, 2016, A Course in Behavioral Economics , second edition, London: Palgrave.
• Annas, J., 1993, The Morality of Happiness , New York: Oxford.
• –––, 2011, Intelligent Virtue , New York: Oxford.
• Argyle, M., 1999, “Causes and Correlates of Happiness,” Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology , D. Kahneman, E. Diener and N. Schwarz (eds.). New York: Russell Sage Foundation: 3–25.
• –––, 2002, The Psychology of Happiness , New York: Routledge.
• Austin, A., 2015, “On Well-Being and Public Policy: Are We Capable of Questioning the Hegemony of Happiness?,” Social Indicators Research , 127(1): 1–16.
• Badhwar, N., 2008, “Is Realism Really Bad for You? A Realistic Response,” The Journal of Philosophy , 105(2): 85–107.
• –––, 2014, Well-Being: Happiness in a Worthwhile Life , New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2015, “Happiness,” in The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Well-Being , ed. G. Fletcher, New York: Routledge, 323–35.
• Bagaric, M., and J. McConvill, 2005, “Goodbye Justice, Hello Happiness: Welcoming Positive Psychology to the Law,” Deakin Law Review , 10(1): 1–26.
• Barrow, R., 1980, Happiness and Schooling , New York: St. Martin’s Press.
• –––, 1991, Utilitarianism: A Contemporary Statement , Brookfield, VT: Edward Elgar.
• Beck, B., and B. Stroop, 2015, “A Biomedical Shortcut to (Fraudulent) Happiness? An Analysis of the Notions of Well-Being and Authenticity Underlying Objections to Mood Enhancement,” Well-Being in Contemporary Society , J. H. Søraker, et al. (eds.), Berlin: Springer, 115–34.
• Becker, L. C., 2012, Habilitation, Health, and Agency , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Belliotti, R. A., 2004, Happiness Is Overrated , New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
• –––, 2013, “The Seductions of Happiness,” The Oxford Handbook of Happiness , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Benditt, T. M., 1974, “Happiness,” Philosophical Studies , 25: 1–20.
• –––, 1978, “Happiness and Satisfaction – A Rejoinder to Carson,” The Personalist , 59: 108–9.
• Besser, L. L., 2014, Eudaimonic Ethics , New York: Routledge.
• Besser-Jones, L., 2013, “The Pursuit and Nature of Happiness,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 103–21.
• Billon, A., 2016, “Irrationality and Happiness: A (Neo-) Shopenhauerian Argument for Rational Pessimism,” Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy , 11(1): 1–27.
• Bishop, M., 2012, “The Network Theory of Well-Being: An Introduction,” The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication , 7: 1–29.
• –––, 2015, The Good Life , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Biswas-Diener, R., 2018, “The Subjective Well-Being of Small Societies,” Handbook of Well-Being , E. Diener, S. Oishi, and L. Tay (eds.), Salt Lake City: DEF Publishers.
• Biswas-Diener, R., J. Vittersø and E. Diener, 2005, “Most People are Pretty Happy, but There is Cultural Variation: The Inughuit, The Amish, and The Maasai,” The Journal of Happiness Studies , 6(3): 205–226.
• Blackson, T., 2009, “On Feldman’s Theory of Happiness,” Utilitas , 21(3): 393–400.
• Block, N., 1995, “On a Confusion About A Function of Consciousness,” Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 18: 227–247.
• Bloomfield, P., 2014, The Virtues of Happiness , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Bognar, G., 2010, “Authentic Happiness,” Utilitas , 22(3): 272–284.
• Bok, D., 2010a, The Politics of Happiness: What Government Can Learn from the New Research on Well-Being , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Bok, S., 2010b, Exploring Happiness: From Aristotle to Brain Science , New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Bortolotti, L. (ed.), 2009, Philosophy and Happiness , New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Bosch, M. van den, and W. Bird, 2018, Oxford Textbook of Nature and Public Health: The Role of Nature in Improving the Health of a Population , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Bramble, B., 2016, “The Experience Machine,” Philosophy Compass , 11(3): 136–45.
• Brandt, R. B., 1959, Ethical Theory , Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• –––, 1979, A Theory of the Good and the Right , New York: Oxford.
• –––, 1989, “Fairness to Happiness,” Social Theory & Practice , 15: 33–58.
• –––, 1992, Morality, Utilitarianism, and Rights , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Brülde, B., 2007, “Happiness theories of the good life,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 8(1): 15–49.
• –––, 2015, “Well-Being, Happiness and Sustainability,” Well-Being in Contemporary Society , Happiness Studies Book Series, J. H. Søraker, et al. (eds.), Berlin: Springer, 157–76.
• Brannmark, J., 2003, “Leading lives: On happiness and narrative meaning,” Philosophical Papers , 32(3): 321–343.
• Bruni, L., F. Comim, and M. Pugno (eds.), 2008, Capabilities and Happiness , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Buss, S., 2004, “The Irrationality of Unhappiness and the Paradox of Despair,” Journal of Philosophy , CI(4): 171–200.
• Cahn, S. M. and C. Vitrano (eds.), 2008, Happiness: Classical and Contemporary Readings in Philosophy , New York: Oxford.
• –––, 2015, Happiness and Goodness: Philosophical Reflections on Living Well , New York: Columbia University Press.
• Campbell, R., 1973, “The Pursuit Of Happiness,” Personalist , 54: 325–337.
• Capaldi, C. A. et al., 2015, “Flourishing in Nature: A Review of the Benefits of Connecting with Nature and Its Application as a Wellbeing Intervention,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 5(4): 1–16.
• Capuccino, C., 2013, “Happiness and Aristotle’s Definition of Eudaimonia,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 1–26.
• Carson, T. L., 1978a, “Happiness and Contentment: A Reply to Benditt,” The Personalist , 59: 101–7.
• –––, 1978b, “Happiness and the Good Life,” Southwestern Journal of Philosophy , 9: 73–88.
• –––, 1979, “Happiness and the Good Life: a Rejoinder to Mele,” Southwestern Journal of Philosophy , 10: 189–192.
• –––, 1981, “Happiness, Contentment, and the Good Life,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly , 62: 378–92.
• Cashen, M, 2012, “Happiness, Eudaimonia, and The Principle of Descriptive Adequacy,” Metaphilosophy , 43(5): 619–35.
• Cavallaro, M., and G. Heffernan, 2019, “From Happiness to Blessedness: Husserl on Eudaimonia, Virtue, and the Best Life,” HORIZON. Studies in Phenomenology , 8(2): 353–388.
• Chappell, T., 2013, “Eudaimonia, Happiness, and the Redemption of Unhappiness,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 27–52.
• Charry, E. T., 2010, God and the Art of Happiness , Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company.
• Chekola, M., 2007, “Happiness, Rationality, Autonomy and the Good Life,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 8(1): 51–78.
• Christakis, N., J. Fowler, Simon, i. Schuster, P. D. Audio and L. Findaway World, 2009, Connected: The surprising power of our social networks and how they shape our lives , New York: Little, Brown and Co.
• Clark, A., et al., 2018, The Origins of Happiness: The Science of Well-Being over the Life Course , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Cohen Kaminitz, S., forthcoming, “Looking Good or Feeling Well? Understanding the Combinations of Well-Being Indicators Using Insights from the Philosophy of Well-Being,” Social Indicators Research , online first 12 February 2020. doi:10.1007/s11205-020-02289-9
• David, S., Boniwell, I., and A. Ayers (eds.), 2013, The Oxford Handbook of Happiness , New York: Oxford.
• Davis, W., 1981a, “Pleasure and Happiness,” Philosophical Studies , 39: 305–318.
• –––, 1981b, “A Theory of Happiness,” American Philosophical Quarterly , 18: 111–20.
• de Boer, J., 2014, “Scaling Happiness,” Philosophical Psychology , 27(5): 703–18.
• De Brigard, F., 2010, “If You like It, Does It Matter If It’s Real?,” Philosophical Psychology , 23(1): 43–57.
• de Lazari-Radek, K., and Singer, P., 2014, The Point of View of the Universe: Sidgwick and Contemporary Ethics , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Den Uyl, D. and T. R. Machan, 1983, “Recent Work on the Concept of Happiness,” American Philosophical Quarterly , 20: 115–34.
• Diener, E., 2008, “Myths in the Science of Happiness, and Directions for Future Research,” The Science of Subjective Well-Being , M. Eid and R. J. Larsen (eds.), New York: Guilford Press: 493–514.
• Diener, E. and R. Biswas-Diener, 2008, Happiness: unlocking the mysteries of psychological wealth , Malden, MA: Blackwell.
• Diener, E. and C. Diener, 1996, “Most People Are Happy,” Psychological Science , 7(3): 181–185.
• Diener, E., R. E. Lucas, U. Schimmack and J. F. Helliwell, 2009, Well-Being for Public Policy , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Diener, E., R. E. Lucas and C. N. Scollon, 2006, “Beyond the Hedonic Treadmill: Revising the Adaptation Theory of Well-Being,” American Psychologist , 61(4): 305–314.
• Diener, E., W. Ng, J. Harter and R. Arora, 2010, “Wealth and happiness across the world: Material prosperity predicts life evaluation, whereas psychosocial prosperity predicts positive feeling,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 99(1): 52–61.
• Diener, E. and M. Seligman, 2004, “Beyond Money: Toward an economy of well-being,” Psychological Science in the Public Interest , 5(1): 1–31.
• Diener, E. and E. M. Suh (eds.), 2000, Culture and Subjective Well-Being , Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press.
• Diener, E., E. M. Suh, R. E. Lucas and H. L. Smith, 1999, “Subjective Well-Being: Three Decades of Progress,” Psychological Bulletin , 125(2): 276–302.
• Dolan, P., and L. Kudrna, 2016, “Sentimental Hedonism: Pleasure, Purpose, and Public Policy,” Handbook of Eudaimonic Well-Being , J. Vittersø (ed.), Berlin: Springer, 437–52.
• Dolan, P. and M. P. White, 2007, “How can measures of subjective well-being be used to inform public policy?” Perspectives on Psychological Science , 2(1): 71–85.
• Doris, J. M., 2002, Lack of Character , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• –––, 2009, “Skepticism about persons,” Philosophical Issues , 19(1): 57–91.
• –––, 2015, Talking to Our Selves , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Easterlin, R. A., 1974, “Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot?” Nations and Households in Economic Growth: Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz , P. A. David and M. W. Reder (eds.), New York: Academic Press.
• –––, 2003, “Explaining Happiness,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 100(19): 11176–11183.
• –––, 2005, “Building a Better Theory of Well-Being,” Economics and Happiness , L. Bruni and P. L. Porta (eds.), New York: Oxford, 29–65.
• Ebenstein, A. O., 1991, The Greatest Happiness Principle: An Examination of Utilitarianism , New York: Garland.
• Edgeworth, F. Y., 1881, Mathematical Psychics: an Essay on the Application of Mathematics to the Moral Sciences , London: Kegan Paul.
• Eid, M. and R. J. Larsen (eds.), 2008, The Science of Subjective Well-Being , New York: Guilford.
• Elster, J., 1983, Sour Grapes , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Epictetus, The Discourses as Reported by Arrian, The Manual, and Fragments , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1925.
• Euler, S. S., 2019, “Psychological Universals in the Study of Happiness: From Social Psychology to Epicurean Philosophy,” Science, Religion and Culture , 6(1): 130–37.
• Everett, D. L., 2009, Don’t sleep, there are snakes: Life and language in the Amazonian jungle , New York: Random House.
• Feldman, F., 2004, Pleasure and the Good Life , New York: Oxford.
• –––, 2010, What Is This Thing Called Happiness? , New York: Oxford.
• –––, 2019, “An Improved Whole Life Satisfaction Theory of Happiness?,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 9(2):1–7.
• Flanagan, O., 2007, The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in a Material World , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Flanagan, O., M. Letourneau, and W. Zhao, 2019, “Particulars of Well-Being,” Science, Religion and Culture , 6(1): 1–5.
• Fletcher, G., 2013, “A Fresh Start for the Objective-List Theory of Well-Being,” Utilitas , 25(2): 206–20.
• Fleurbaey, M., and D. Blanchet, 2013, Beyond GDP: Measuring Welfare and Assessing Sustainability , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Fogel, R. W., 2005, “Changes in the disparities in chronic diseases during the course of the 20th century,” Perspectives in biology and medicine , 48(1 Supplement): S150-S165.
• Fraser, C., 2013, “Happiness in Classical Confucianism: Xúnzǐ,” E. Minar (ed.), Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 53–79.
• Frederick, S. and G. Loewenstein, 1999, “Hedonic Adaptation,” Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology , D. Kahneman, E. Diener and N. Schwarz (eds.), New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press: 302–29.
• Fredrickson, B. L., 2004, “The Broaden-and-Build Theory of Positive Emotions,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences , 359(1449): 1367–1377
• Fredrickson, B. L. and D. Kahneman, 1993, “Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 65(1): 45–55.
• Fredrickson, B. L. and M. F. Losada, 2005, “Positive Affect and the Complex Dynamics of Human Flourishing,” American Psychologist , 60(7): 678–686.
• Frey, B. S., 2008, Happiness: A Revolution in Economics , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Frumkin, H., 2001, “Beyond toxicity: Human health and the natural environment,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , 20(3): 234–240.
• Gilbert, D., 2006, Stumbling on Happiness , New York: Knopf.
• Gilovitch, T., D. Griffin and D. Kahneman (eds.), 2002, Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Glaeser, E. L., 2006, “Paternalism and Psychology,” University of Chicago Law Review , 73(1): 133–156.
• Goldman, A. H., 2016, “Happiness is an Emotion,” The Journal of Ethics , 21(1): 1–16.
• –––, 2019, Life’s Values: Pleasure, Happiness, Well-Being, and Meaning , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Goldstein, I., 1973, “Happiness: The Role of Non-Hedonic Criteria in Its Evaluation,” International Philosophical Quarterly , 13: 523–34.
• –––, 1981, “Cognitive Pleasure and Distress,” Philosophical Studies , 39: 15–23.
• –––, 1989, “Pleasure and Pain: Unconditional, Intrinsic Values,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 50(2): 255–276.
• Goldstein, I., 2002, “Are emotions feelings? A further look at hedonic theories of emotions,” Consciousness and Emotion , 3(1): 21–33.
• Graham, C., 2009, Happiness around the world: The paradox of happy peasants and miserable millionaires , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Graham, M., 2017, “A Fate Worse Than Death? The Well-Being of Patients Diagnosed as Vegetative With Covert Awareness,” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice , 20(5): 1–16.
• Griffin, J., 1979, “Is Unhappiness Morally More Important Than Happiness?” Philosophical Quarterly , 29: 47–55.
• –––, 1986, Well-Being: Its Meaning, Measurement, and Moral Importance , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• –––, 2000, “Replies,” Well-Being and Morality , R. Crisp and B. Hooker (eds.), New York: Oxford: 281–313.
• –––, 2007, “What Do Happiness Studies Study?” Journal of Happiness Studies , 8(1): 139–148.
• Griswold, C., 1996, “Happiness, Tranquillity, and Philosophy,” Critical Review , 10(1): 1–32.
• Haidt, J., 2001, “The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment,” Psychological Review , 108(4): 814–834.
• Hare, R. M., 1963, Freedom and Reason , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hausman, D. M., 2010, “Hedonism and Welfare Economics,” Economics and Philosophy , 26(3): 321–44.
• –––, 2011, Preferences, Value, Choice, and Welfare , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Hausman, D. M. and B. Welch, 2009, “Debate: To Nudge or Not to Nudge,” Journal of Political Philosophy , 18(1): 123–136.
• Hawkins, J., 2008, “Well-Being, Autonomy, and the Horizon Problem,” Utilitas , 20(2): 1–27.
• –––, 2014a, “Well-Being, Time, and Dementia,” Ethics , 124(3): 507–542.
• –––, 2014b, “Well-Being: What Matters Beyond the Mental?,” in Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics (Volume 4), M. Timmons (ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2016, “The Experience Machine and the Experience Requirement,” The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Well-Being , G. Fletcher (ed.), New York: Routledge.
• –––, 2019, “Well-Being, The Self, and Radical Change,” Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics, Vol 9 , M. Timmons (ed.), New York: Oxford University Press, 251.
• Haybron, D. M., 2001, “Happiness and Pleasure,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 62(3): 501–528.
• –––, 2003, “What Do We Want from a Theory of Happiness?” Metaphilosophy , 34(3): 305–329.
• –––, 2005, “On Being Happy or Unhappy,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 71(2): 287–317.
• –––, 2007, “Do We Know How Happy We Are?” Nous , 41(3): 394–428.
• –––, 2008a, “Happiness, the Self, and Human Flourishing,” Utilitas , 20(1): 21–49.
• –––, 2008b, The Pursuit of Unhappiness: The Elusive Psychology of Well-Being , New York, Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2011, “Central Park: Nature, Context, and Human Wellbeing,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 1(2): 235–254.
• –––, 2013a, Happiness: A Very Short Introduction , New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2013b, “The Proper Pursuit of Happiness,” Res Philosophica , 90(3): 387–411.
• –––, 2014, “Adventures in Assisted Living: Well-Being and Situationist Psychology,” The Philosophy and Psychology of Character and Happiness , N. E. Snow and F. V. Trivigno (eds.), New York: Routledge, 1–25.
• –––, 2016, “Mental State Approaches to Well-Being,” The Oxford Handbook of Well-Being and Public Policy , M. D. Adler & M. Fleurbaey (eds.), New York: Oxford, 347–378.
• Haybron, D. M., and A. Alexandrova, 2013, “Paternalism in Economics,” Paternalism: Theory and Practice , C. Coons and M. Weber (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 157–77.
• Haybron, D. M., and V. Tiberius, 2015, “Well-Being Policy: What Standard of Well-Being?,” Journal of the American Philosophical Association , 1(4): 712–33.
• Headey, B., 2007, The Set-Point Theory of Well-Being Needs Replacing: On the Brink of a Scientific Revolution? , DIW Berlin: German Institute for Economic Research.
• –––, 2008, “The Set-Point Theory of Well-Being: Negative Results and Consequent Revisions,” Social Indicators Research , 85(3): 389–403.
• Hersch, G., 2015, “Can an Evidential Account Justify Relying on Preferences for Well-Being Policy?,” Journal of Economic Methodology , 22(3): 1–13.
• –––, 2017, “Ignoring Easterlin: Why Easterlin’s Correlation Findings Need Not Matter to Public Policy,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 19(8): 2225–2241.
• –––, 2020, “No Theory-Free Lunches in Well-Being Policy,” The Philosophical Quarterly , 70(278): 43–64.
• Hill, S., 2007, “Haybron on Mood Propensity and Happiness,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 10(2): 215–28.
• Hindriks, F., & Douven, I., 2018, “Nozick’s experience machine: An empirical study,” Philosophical Psychology , 31(2): 1–21.
• Ho, S. M., W. Duan, and S. C. Tang, 2014, “The Psychology of Virtue and Happiness in Western and Asian Thought,” The Philosophy and Psychology of Character and Happiness , N. E. Snow and F. V. Trivigno (eds.), New York: Routledge, 223–46.
• Houlden, V., et al., 2018, “The Relationship between Greenspace and the Mental Wellbeing of Adults: A Systematic Review,” PLOS ONE , 13(9): 1–35.
• Hsee, C. K. and R. Hastie, 2006, “Decision and experience: Why don’t we choose what makes us happy?” Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 10(1): 31–37.
• Hurka, T., 2010, The Best Things in Life: A Guide to What Really Matters , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Huxley, A., 1932 [2005], Brave New World and Brave New World Revisited , New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics.
• Inglehart, R., R. Foa, C. Peterson and C. Welzel, 2008, “Development, freedom, and rising happiness: A global perspective, 1981–2007” Perspectives on Psychological Science , 3(4): 264–285.
• Inglehart, R. and H.-D. Klingemann, 2000, “Genes, Culture, Democracy, and Happiness,” Culture and Subjective Well-Being , E. Diener and E. M. Suh (eds.), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press: 165–183.
• Intelisano, S., Krasko, J., & Luhmann, M., 2019, “Integrating Philosophical and Psychological Accounts of Happiness and Well-Being,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 8: 1–40.
• Jebb, A. T., L. Tay, E. Diener, and S. Oishi, 2018, “Happiness, Income Satiation and Turning Points around the World,” Nature Human Behaviour , 2(1): 33–38.
• Joshanloo, M., 2013, “A Comparison of Western and Islamic Conceptions of Happiness,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 14(6): 1857–74.
• –––, 2014, “Eastern Conceptualizations of Happiness: Fundamental Differences with Western Views,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 15(2): 475–93.
• Joshanloo, M., and D. Weijers, 2019, “A Two-Dimensional Conceptual Framework for Understanding Mental Well-Being,” PLoS ONE , 14(3): e0214045.
• Kagan, S., 1992, “The Limits of Well-Being,” Social Philosophy and Policy , 9(2): 169–89.
• –––, 1994, “Me and My Life,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society , 94: 309–324.
• Kahane, Guy, 2011, “Reasons to Feel, Reasons to Take Pills,” Enhancing Human Capacities , J. Savulescu, R. Ter Meulen, and G. Kahane (eds.), Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, 166–78.
• Kahneman, D., 1999, “Objective Happiness,” Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology , D. Kahneman, E. Diener and N. Schwarz (eds.), New York: Russell Sage Foundation: 3–25.
• Kahneman, D. and A. Deaton, 2010, “High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 107(38): 16489–16493.
• Kahneman, D., E. Diener and N. Schwarz (eds.), 1999, Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology , New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press.
• Kahneman, D., B. L. Fredrickson, C. A. Schreiber and D. A. Redelmeier, 1993, “When More Pain Is Preferred to Less: Adding a Better End,” Psychological Science , 4(6): 401–405.
• Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky (eds.), 2000, Choices, Values, and Frames , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Kauppinen, A., 2013, “Meaning and Happiness,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 161–185.
• Kazez, J., 2007, The Weight of Things: Philosophy and the Good Life , Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Kekes, J., 1982, “Happiness,” Mind , 91: 358–76.
• –––, 1988, The Examined Life , Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press.
• –––, 1992, “Happiness,” Encyclopedia of Ethics , L. C. Becker and C. B. Becker (eds.), New York: Garland: 430–435.
• Kellert, S. R. and E. O. Wilson (eds.), 1995, The Biophilia Hypothesis , Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
• Kelman, M., 2005, “Hedonic Psychology and the Ambiguities of ‘Welfare’,” Philosophy & Public Affairs , 33(4): 391–412.
• Kenny, A. and C. Kenny, 2006, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Utility , Charlottesville, VA: Imprint Academic.
• Keyes, C. L., 2002, “The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life,” Journal of Health and Social Behavior , 43(2): 207–222.
• Kim, R., 2020, Confucianism and the Philosophy of Well-Being , New York: Routledge.
• Klausen, S. H., 2015, “Happiness, Dispositions and the Self,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 17(3): 777–780.
• –––, 2019, “Understanding Older Adults’ Wellbeing from a Philosophical Perspective,” Journal of Happiness Studies , online first.
• Kraut, R., 1979, “Two Conceptions of Happiness,” The Philosophical Review , 138: 167–97.
• –––, 2018, The Quality of Life: Aristotle Revised , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Kristjánsson, K., 2010, “Positive psychology, happiness, and virtue: The troublesome conceptual issues,” Review of general psychology , 14(4): 296.
• –––, 2012, “Positive Psychology and Positive Education: Old Wine in New Bottles?” Educational Psychologist , 47(2): 86–105.
• –––, 2018, “The flourishing–happiness concordance thesis: Some troubling counterexamples,” The Journal of Positive Psychology , 13(6): 541–552.
• Krueger, A., D. Kahneman, C. Fischler, D. Schkade, N. Schwarz and A. Stone, 2009, “Time Use and Subjective Well-Being in France and the U.S,” Social Indicators Research ,(93): 7–18.
• Larsen, R. J. and Z. Prizmic, 2008, “Regulation of Emotional Well-Being: Overcoming the Hedonic Treadmill,” The Science of Subjective Well-Being , M. Eid and R. J. Larsen (eds.), New York: Guilford Press: 258–289.
• Lauinger, W., 2015, “A Framework for Understanding Parental Well-Being,” Philosophia , 43(3): 847–868.
• Layard, R., 2005, Happiness: Lessons from a new science , New York: Penguin.
• LeBar, M., and D. Russell, 2013, “Well-Being and Eudaimonia: A Reply to Haybron,” Aristotelian Ethics in Contemporary Perspective , 21: 52.
• Lin, E., 2015, “How to Use the Experience Machine,” Utilitas , 28(3): 314–32.
• Loewenstein, G. and E. Haisley, 2008, “The Economist as Therapist: Methodological Ramifications of ‘Light’ Paternalism,” The Foundations of Positive and Normative Economics , A. Caplin and A. Schotter (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press, 210–248.
• Lucas, R. E., 2008, “Personality and Subjective Well-Being,” The Science of Subjective Well-Being , M. Eid and R. J. Larsen (eds.), New York: Guilford Press: 171–194.
• Lucas, R. E., A. E. Clark, Y. Georgellis and E. Diener, 2004a, “Re-Examining Adaptation and the Setpoint Model of Happiness: Reactions to Changes in Marital Status,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 84: 527–539.
• –––, 2004b, “Unemployment alters the set point for life satisfaction,” Psychological Science , 15(1): 8–13.
• Luhmann, M., and S. Intelisano, 2018, “Hedonic Adaptation and the Set Point for Subjective Well-Being,” Handbook of Well-Being , E. Diener, S. Oishi, and L. Tay (eds.), Salt Lake City: DEF Publishers.
• Lumber, R., M. Richardson, and D. Sheffield, 2017, “Beyond Knowing Nature: Contact, Emotion, Compassion, Meaning, and Beauty Are Pathways to Nature Connection,” PLOS ONE , 12(5): e0177186.
• Luo, S., 2018, “Happiness and the Good Life: A Classical Confucian Perspective,” Dao , 71(2): 1–18.
• Lykken, D. and A. Tellegen, 1996, “Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon,” Psychological Science , 7(3): 186–9.
• Lyubomirsky, S., 2007, The How of Happiness , New York: Penguin.
• Lyubomirsky, S., L. King and E. Diener, 2005, “The Benefits of Frequent Positive Affect: Does Happiness Lead to Success?” Psychological Bulletin , 131(6): 803–855.
• Lyubomirsky, S., K. M. Sheldon and D. Schkade, 2005, “Pursuing Happiness: The Architecture of Sustainable Change,” Review of General Psychology , 9(2): 111–131.
• MacLeod, A. K., 2015, “Well-Being: Objectivism, Subjectivism or Sobjectivism?,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 16 1073–1089.
• Martin, M. W., 2012, Happiness and the Good Life , New York: Oxford University Press.
• May, T., 2015, A Significant Life Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Mayerfeld, J., 1996, “The Moral Asymmetry of Happiness and Suffering,” Southern Journal of Philosophy , 34: 317–338.
• –––, 1999, Suffering and Moral Responsibility , New York: Oxford.
• McFall, L., 1989, Happiness , New York: Peter Lang.
• McMahon, D. M., 2005, Happiness: A History , New York: Atlantic Monthly Press.
• McPherson, D., 2020, Virtue and Meaning: A Neo-Aristotelian Perspective , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Metz, T., 2014, “Gross National Happiness: A Philosophical Appraisal,” Ethics and Social Welfare , 8(3): 218–32.
• Meynell, H., 1969, “Human Flourishing,” Religious Studies , 5: 147–154.
• Millgram, E., 2000, “What’s the Use of Utility,” Philosophy and Public Affairs , 29(2): 113–136.
• Mitchell, P., 2018, “Adaptive Preferences, Adapted Preferences,” Mind , 127(508): 1003–25.
• Moller, D., 2011, “Wealth, Disability, and Happiness,” Philosophy & Public Affairs , 39(2): 177–206.
• Montague, R., 1967, “Happiness,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society , 67: 87–102.
• Morris, S., 2011, “In defense of the hedonistic account of happiness,” Philosophical Psychology , 24(2): 261 – 281.
• –––, 2015, Science and the End of Ethics , New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Mulligan, K., 2016, “Happiness, Luck and Satisfaction.,” ARGUMENTA , 1(2): 133–45.
• Mulnix, J. W., & Mulnix, M. J., 2015a, Happy Lives, Good Lives: A Philosophical Examination , Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.
• ––– (eds.), 2015b, Theories of Happiness: An Anthology , Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.
• Murphy, M. C., 2001, Natural Law and Practical Rationality , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Myers, D. G. and E. Diener, 1995, “Who Is Happy?” Psychological Science , 6(1): 10–19.
• Nettle, D., 2005, Happiness: The Science Behind Your Smile , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Noddings, N., 2003, Happiness and Education , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Nozick, R., 1974, Anarchy, State, and Utopia , New York: Basic Books.
• –––, 1989, The Examined Life , New York: Simon and Schuster.
• Nussbaum, M. C., 2000, Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• –––, 2008, “Who Is the Happy Warrior? Philosophy Poses Questions to Psychology,” The Journal of Legal Studies , 37(s2): S81-S113.
• Oishi, S., Choi, H., Buttrick, N., et al., 2019, “The psychologically rich life questionnaire,” Journal of Research in Personality , 81: 257–270.
• Parducci, A., 1995, Happiness, Pleasure, and Judgement: The Contextual Theory and Its Applications , Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
• Parfit, D., 1984, Reasons and Persons , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Paul, L. A., 2016, Transformative Experience , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Pavot, W., 2008, “The Assessment of Subjective Well-Being: Successes and Shortfalls,” The Science of Subjective Well-Being , M. Eid and R. J. Larsen (eds.), New York: Guilford Press, 124–140.
• Phillips, J., L. Misenheimer and J. Knobe, 2011, “The Ordinary Concept of Happiness (and Others Like It),” Emotion Review , 71: 929–937.
• Phillips, J., S. Nyholm, and S. Liao, 2014, “The Good in Happiness,” Oxford Studies in Experimental Philosophy (Volume 1), T. Lombrozo, S. Nichols, and J. Knobe (eds.), 253–93.
• Phillips, J., De Freitas, J., Mott, C., Gruber, J., & Knobe, J., 2017, “True happiness: The role of morality in the folk concept of happiness,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 146(2): 165–181.
• Posner, E. and C. R. Sunstein (eds.), 2010, Law and Happiness , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Purcell, S., 2013, “Natural Goodness and the Normativity Challenge: Happiness Across Cultures,” Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association , 87: 183–94.
• Quong, J., 2011, Liberalism Without Perfection , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Raibley, J., 2010, “Well-being and the priority of values,” Social Theory and Practice , 36(4): 593–620.
• –––, 2011, “Happiness is not Well-Being,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 13(6): 1105–1121.
• –––, 2012, “Health and Well-Being,” Philosophical Studies , 165(2): 469–89.
• –––, 2013, “Values, Agency, and Welfare,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 187–214.
• Rawls, J., 1971, A Theory of Justice , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Raz, J., 1986, The Morality of Freedom , New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2004, “The Role of Well-Being,” Philosophical Perspectives , 18(1): 269–294.
• Rescher, N., 1972, Welfare: The Social Issues In Philosophical Perspective , Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
• –––, 1980, Unpopular Essays on Technological Progress , Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
• Ricard, M., 2006, Happiness: A Guide to Developing Life’s Most Important Skill , New York: Little, Brown and Co.
• Roberts, R. C., 2019, “Joys: A Brief Moral and Christian Geography,” Faith and Philosophy , 36(2): 195–222.
• Rodogno, R., 2014, “Happiness and Well-Being: Shifting the Focus of the Current Debate,” South African Journal of Philosophy , 33(4): 433–46.
• –––, 2015, “Prudential Value or Well-Being,” Handbook of Value , T. Brosch and D. Sander (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press, 287–312.
• Rodogno, R., Krause-Jensen, K., & Ashcroft, R. E., 2016, “‘Autism and the good life’: a new approach to the study of well-being,” Journal of Medical Ethics , 42(6): 401–408.
• Ross, L. and R. E. Nisbett, 1991, The Person and the Situation: Perspectives of Social Psychology , Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
• Rossi, M., 2018, “Happiness, Pleasures, and Emotions,” Philosophical Psychology , 31(6): 898–919.
• Rossi, M., & Tappolet, C., 2016, “Virtue, Happiness, and Well-Being,” The Monist , 99(2): 112–127.
• Russell, D., 2013, Happiness for Humans , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Ryan, R. M. and E. L. Deci, 2001, “On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being,” Annual Review of Psychology , 52: 141–166.
• Ryff, C. D., 1989, “Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 57(6): 1069–1081.
• Samson, C., 2019, “Indigenous and Western Views of Happiness: An Essay on the Politics of Contentment,” Regimes of Happiness: Comparative and Historical Studies , B. Turner, J. T. Jen, and Y. Contreras-Vejar (eds.), London: Anthem Press, 219–34.
• Savulescu, J., R. Ter Meulen, and G. Kahane, 2011, Enhancing Human Capacities , Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
• Scanlon, T., 1999, What We Owe to Each Other , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Schooler, J. W., D. Ariely and G. Loewenstein, 2003, “The Pursuit and Assessment of Happiness Can Be Self-Defeating,” The Psychology of Economic Decision , I. Brocas and J. Carillo (eds.), New York: Oxford University.
• Schultz, B., 2017, The Happiness Philosophers , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Schwartz, B., 2004, The Paradox of Choice , New York: HarperCollins.
• Schwarz, N. and F. Strack, 1999, “Reports of Subjective Well-Being: Judgmental Processes and Their Methodological Implications,” Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology , D. Kahneman, E. Diener and N. Schwarz (eds.), New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press: 61–84.
• Schwitzgebel, E., 2008, “The Unreliability of Naive Introspection,” Philosophical Review , 117(2): 245–273.
• –––, 2011, Perplexities of Consciousness , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Schwitzgebel, E. and R. T. Hurlburt, 2007, Describing Inner Experience? Proponent Meets Skeptic , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Scruton, R., 1975, Reason and Happiness. Nature and Conduct , R. S. Peters (ed.), New York: Macmillan: 139–61.
• Seligman, M., 2002, Authentic Happiness , New York: Free Press.
• –––, 2011, Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-being , New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Sen, A., 1987a, Commodities and Capabilities , New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 1987b, On Ethics and Economics , Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
• –––, 2009, The Idea of Justice , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Sidgwick, H., 1907 [1966], The Methods of Ethics , New York: Dover Publications.
• Silventoinen, K., S. Sammalisto, M. Perola, D. I. Boomsma, B. K. Cornes, C. Davis, L. Dunkel, M. De Lange, J. R. Harris and J. V. B. Hjelmborg, 2003, “Heritability of adult body height: a comparative study of twin cohorts in eight countries,” Twin Research , 6(5): 399–408.
• Singer, P., 1972, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Philosophy and Public Affairs , 1(3): 229–243.
• Singh, R., and A. Alexandrova, forthcoming, “Happiness Economics as Technocracy,” Behavioural Public Policy , first online 12 Dec 2019: doi:10.17863/CAM.46854
• Sizer, L., 2010, “Good and good for you: An affect theory of happiness,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 80(1): 133–163.
• Skidelsky, E., 2014, “What Can We Learn From Happiness Surveys?,” Journal of Practical Ethics , 2(2): 20–32.
• –––, 2017, “Happiness, Pleasure, and Belief,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy , 95(3): 435–446.
• Slote, M., 1982, “Goods and Lives,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly , 63: 311–26.
• –––, 1983, Goods and Virtues , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Smart, J. J. C., 1973, “An Outline of a System of Utilitarian Ethics,” Utilitarianism: For and Against , J. J. C. Smart and B. Williams, New York: Cambridge University Press: 3–74.
• Snow, N. E., and Trivigno, F. V., 2014, The Philosophy and Psychology of Character and Happiness , New York: Routledge.
• Sosis, C., 2012, “Happiness: The Potential Power of Environment,” The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication , 7: 1–10.
• –––, 2014, “Hedonic possibilities and heritability statistics,” Philosophical Psychology , 27(5): 681–702.
• Spahn, A., 2015, “Can Technology Make Us Happy?,” Well-Being in Contemporary Society , J. H. Søraker, et al. (eds.), Cham: Springer, 93–113.
• Sprigge, T. L. S., 1987, The Rational Foundations of Ethics , New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
• –––, 1991, “The Greatest Happiness Principle,” Utilitas , 3(1): 37–51.
• Stenberg, J., 2019, “The All-Happy God,” Faith and Philosophy , 36(4): 423–41.
• Stevenson, C. M., 2018, “Experience Machines, Conflicting Intuitions and the Bipartite Characterization of Well-Being,” Utilitas , 30(4): 383–98.
• Stevenson, B. and J. Wolfers, 2008, “Economic Growth and Subjective Well-Being: Reassessing the Easterlin Paradox,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity , Spring 2008: 1–87.
• Stiglitz, J. E., J.-P. Fitoussi, and M. Durand, 2019, Measuring What Counts: The Global Movement for Well-Being , New York: New Press.
• Stiglitz, J. E., Amartya. Sen, and J.-Paul. Fitoussi, 2009, Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress , Paris: Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.
• Sugden, R., 2008, “Capability, Happiness, and Opportunity,” Capabilities and Happiness , L. Bruni, F. Comim, and M. Pugno (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press, 299–322.
• Suikkanen, J., 2011, “An Improved Whole Life Satisfaction Theory of Happiness,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 1(1): 1–18.
• –––, 2019. “The Advice Models of Happiness: A Response to Feldman,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 9(2), available online , doi:10.5502/ijw.v9i2.837
• Sumner, L. W., 1996, Welfare, Happiness, and Ethics , New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2000, “Something In Between,” Well-Being and Morality , R. Crisp and B. Hooker (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press, 1–19.
• Tatarkiewicz, W., 1976, Analysis of Happiness , The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Telfer, E., 1980, Happiness , New York: St. Martin’s Press.
• Thaler, R. H. and C. R. Sunstein, 2008, Nudge : improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness , New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Thomas, D. A. L., 1968, “Happiness,” Philosophical Quarterly , 18: 97–113.
• Tiberius, V., 2006, “Well-Being: Psychological Research for Philosophers,” Philosophy Compass , 1: 493–505.
• –––, 2008, The Reflective Life , New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2014, Moral Psychology: A Contemporary Introduction , New York: Routledge
• –––, 2018, Well-Being As Value Fulfillment , New York: Oxford University Press, USA.
• Tiberius, V. and A. Plakias, 2010, “Well-Being,” The Moral Psychology Handbook , J. Doris, G. Harman, S. Nichols, et al . (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press.
• Trout, J. D., 2005, “Paternalism and Cognitive Bias,” Law and Philosophy , 24: 393–434.
• –––, 2009, The Empathy Gap: Building bridges to the good life and the good society , New York: Viking Press.
• Trout, J. D., and S. A. Buttar, 2000, “Resurrecting ‘Death Taxes’: Inheritance, Redistribution, and the Science of Happiness,” Journal of Law & Politics , 16(4): 765–847.
• van der Deijl, Willem, 2016, “What Happiness Science Can Learn from John Stuart Mill,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 6(1): 164–79.
• –––, 2017a, “Are Measures of Well-Being Philosophically Adequate?,” Philosophy of the Social Sciences , 47(3): 209–34.
• –––, 2017b, The Measurement of Wellbeing in Economics: Philosophical Explorations , Ph.D. Dissertation, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
• –––, 2017c, “Which Problem of Adaptation?,” Utilitas , 29(4): 474–92.
• van der Rijt, J.-W., 2013, “Public Policy and the Conditional Value of Happiness,” Economics and Philosophy , 29(3): 381–408.
• –––, 2015, “The Political Turn Towards Happiness,” Well-Being in Contemporary Society , J. H. Søraker, et al. (eds.), Cham: Springer, 215–31.
• Veenhoven, R., 1984, Conditions of Happiness , Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
• –––, 1997, “Advances in Understanding Happiness,” Revue Québécoise de Psychologie , 18: 29–79.
• –––, 2005, “Is Life Getting Better? How Long and Happily Do People Live in Modern Society?” European Psychologist , 10(4): 330–343.
• Velleman, J. D., 1991, “Well-Being and Time,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly , 72(1): 48–77.
• Verhoef, A., 2018, “Paul Ricoeur: Philosophy, Theology and Happiness,” Stellenbosch Theological Journal , 4(2): 151–66.
• Vitrano, C., 2010, “The subjectivity of happiness,” Journal of Value Inquiry , 44(1): 47–54.
• –––, 2014, The Nature and Value of Happiness , Boulder: Westview Press.
• Višak, T., 2015, “Sacrifices of Self Are Prudential Harms: A Reply to Carbonell,” The Journal of Ethics , 19(2): 219–29.
• Vittersø, J., ed., 2016, Handbook of Eudaimonic Well-Being , Berlin: Springer.
• Von Wright, G. H., 1963, The Varieties of Goodness , London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• Walker, M., 2011, “Happy-People-Pills for All,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 1(1): 1–22.
• Waterman, A. S., 1993, “Two Conceptions of Happiness: Contrasts of Personal Expressiveness (Eudaimonia) and Hedonic Enjoyment,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 64(4): 678–691.
• –––, ed., 2013, The Best within Us: Positive Psychology Perspectives on Eudaimonia , Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Weijers, D., 2013, “Intuitive Biases in Judgments about Thought Experiments: The Experience Machine Revisited,” Philosophical Writings , 41(1): 17–31.
• –––, 2014, “Nozick’s experience machine is dead, long live the experience machine!,” Philosophical Psychology , 27(4): 513–535.
• White, M. D., 2013, “Can We—and Should We—Measure Well-Being?,” Review of Social Economy , 71(4): 526–33.
• White, M. P. and P. Dolan, 2009, “Accounting for the Richness of Daily Activities,” Psychological Science , 20(8): 1000–1008.
• White, N. P., 2006, A Brief History of Happiness , Oxford: Blackwell.
• Wierzbicka, A., 2004, “‘Happiness’ in cross-linguistic & cross-cultural perspective,” Daedalus , 133(2): 34–43.
• Williams, B., 1981, Moral Luck. Moral Luck , New York, Cambridge University Press: 20–39.
• Wilson, J., 1968, “Happiness,” Analysis , 29: 13–21.
• Wodak, D., 2019, “What If Well-Being Measurements Are Non-Linear?,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy , 97(1): 29–45.
• Wong, D. B., 2013, “On Learning What Happiness Is,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 81–101.
• Wren-Lewis, S, 2013, “Well-Being as a Primary Good: Towards Legitimate Well-Being Policy,” Philosophy & Public Policy Quarterly , 31(2): 2–9.
• –––, 2014, “How successfully can we measure well-being through measuring happiness?,” South African Journal of Philosophy , 33: 417–432.
• –––, 2019, The Happiness Problem: Expecting Better in an Uncertain World , Chicago, IL: Policy Press.
• Zamuner, E., 2013, “Happiness, Consciousness, and the Ontology of Mind,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 237–54.
• Zhang, E. Y., 2019, “Forgetfulness and Flow: ‘Happiness’ in Zhuangzi’s Daoism,” Science, Religion and Culture , 6(1): 77–84.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

• World Database of Happiness , Erasmus University of Rotterdam.
• Positive Psychology Center , University of Pennsylvania.
• The Happiness and Well-Being Project , with Suggested Readings and links to Funded Research , Saint Louis University.

Aquinas, Thomas | Aristotle | Bentham, Jeremy | character, moral: empirical approaches | communitarianism | consequentialism | economics: philosophy of | emotion | ethics: ancient | ethics: virtue | hedonism | Kant, Immanuel | liberalism | Mill, John Stuart | moral psychology: empirical approaches | pain | paternalism | Plato | pleasure | well-being

Acknowledgments

For helpful comments, many thanks are due to Anna Alexandrova, Robert Biswas-Diener, Thomas Carson, Irwin Goldstein, Richard Lucas, Jason Raibley, Eric Schwitzgebel, Stephen Schueller, Adam Shriver, Edward Zalta, and an anonymous referee for the SEP. Portions of Section 2 are adapted from Haybron 2008, “Philosophy and the Science of Subjective Well-Being,” in Eid and Larsen, The Science of Subjective Well-Being , and used with kind permission of Guilford Press.

Copyright © 2020 by Dan Haybron < dan . haybron @ slu . edu >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2023 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

• Essay Guides
• Other Essays
• Happiness Essay: Definition, Outline & Examples
• Speech Topics
• Basics of Essay Writing
• Essay Topics
• Main Academic Essays
• Research Paper Topics
• Basics of Research Paper Writing
• Miscellaneous
• Chicago/ Turabian
• Data & Statistics
• Methodology
• Admission Writing Tips
• Admission Advice
• Other Guides
• Student Life
• Studying Tips
• Understanding Plagiarism
• Academic Writing Tips
• Basics of Dissertation & Thesis Writing

• Research Paper Guides
• Formatting Guides
• Basics of Research Process
• Admission Guides
• Dissertation & Thesis Guides

Happiness Essay: Definition, Outline & Examples

Table of contents

Use our free Readability checker

A happiness essay is an academic paper that explores the concept of happiness, and how it can be achieved and maintained in our lives. The purpose of a happiness essay is to explore the psychological, social, and cultural factors that contribute to happiness. On this type of essay, students should provide insights into how individuals can cultivate a happy and fulfilling life.

In this article, we will explore the definition of happiness and its various components and outline the key elements of happiness essay structure. Whether you are seeking how to write a happiness essay or want to know more about this feeling, this is the right article. You will also find en example for your inspiration. Struggling with your writing? Say goodbye to stress and let our experts handle your ' write my essay for me ' challenge. Our team of skilled writers is ready to tackle any topic and deliver top-notch papers tailored to your instructions.

What Is a Happiness Essay?

The definition of a happiness essay can differ, but in general, a happiness essay is a paper that examines emotions, experiences, and perspectives related to the pursuit of contentment. Likewise, it may explore the philosophical and psychological aspects of delight and how it is affected by factors like wealth, relationships, and personal circumstances. A happiness essay provides a deeper understanding of enjoyment, how it can be achieved, and its influence on society. It is an opportunity to take readers on a reflective and stimulating journey, exploring the essence of joy. Writing a thematic essay on happiness is also a chance for writers to share their thoughts and observations with other people. Let's dive in and explore what delight really means to you!

Purpose of an Essay on Happiness

The reason for writing an essay about happiness is to explore the concept of delight to understand what it means to different people. For example, many believe it primarily depends on external factors such as wealth, success, or material possessions. However, it can be illustrated that true joy largely comes from internal factors, like one's outlook, personal growth, and relationships, especially with family and friends. A happiness essay helps to dispel common misconceptions about what satisfaction truly is. Writing a paper on this subject can describe a deeper, healthy understanding of this universal pursuit.

Ideas to Write a Happiness Essay on

When you want to write a happiness essay , first, it is important to ask: What is happiness to you? How can it be understood? One approach is to define happiness and examine its various dimensions, such as psychological, emotional, and physiological.  For example, career satisfaction is a crucial factor in achieving contentment. When people enjoy their jobs and feel fulfilled, they tend to report higher levels of delight. It's worth exploring the link between happiness and career satisfaction and how people can find meaning in their work.  Another idea of how to be happy would look at factors like relationships, personal growth, and achievement. Besides, the connection between money and happiness can also be a significant factor in the quality of life. Can you buy satisfaction?  The pursuit of happiness is a fundamental aspect of life, and analyzing its various dimensions can help us gain valuable insights into what leads to a happy life.

Happiness Essay Outline

An outline for a happiness essay serves as a roadmap for writers to keep their paper organized. It helps to break down researched content into manageable sections while ensuring that all necessary information is included.  The essay outline on happiness example might look something like this:

• Topic definition
• Topic importance
• Thesis statement
• Topic sentence
• Supporting evidence
• Concluding sentence, connected to your thesis
• Summarizing main points
• Final thoughts and future recommendations
• Encouraging readers to reflect on their delight

This outline provides a comprehensive format for an essay about happiness, ensuring that articles are well-structured, easy to understand, and cover all the necessary information.

Structure of a Happiness Essay

Happiness essay structure is critical to a successful article because it helps to organize the ideas clearly and coherently. It is easier for readers to follow and understand writers' perspectives on this complex and multifaceted topic if the essay has the following sections: Introduction:  provides context for the topic with a clear thesis statement. Body:  delves into the details while providing evidence to support the thesis. Conclusion:  summarizes the main points while restating the thesis statement in a new way. By following this structure, writers can produce compelling essays on happiness in life that engage and inform readers.

Happiness Essay Introduction

The introduction of a happiness essay is critical to setting the stage for the article’s body. Good introductions should have three key elements: a hook, background information, and a thesis statement.  The hook draws readers in and keeps them engaged, but a boring or generic one may make them lose interest. The background information provides context for the topic and gives the audience a better understanding of why the essay is being written. Lastly, the thesis statement states the writer's stance on contentment, providing a roadmap for the rest of the essay.  An essay about happiness introduction is an important part that sets the tone and lays the foundation for the paper. By following this structure, authors can ensure that the introduction of their paper is well-organized, concise, and effective in drawing the readers into their piece.

Happiness Essay Introduction Example

An introduction to your paper should be engaging, interesting, brief, and to the point. It clearly states the objectives of the research and introduces readers to the key arguments that will be discussed. Here is an example of a happiness essay introduction:

Satisfaction is never a straightforward and easily attainable idea. It has intrigued philosophers, religious figures, and people alike for centuries. Some say contentment is found inside a material wealth lifestyle, and others believe it is a state of mind or a result of spiritual fulfillment. But what is happiness, really? And how can we cultivate it in our own lives?

Happiness Essay Thesis Statement

A happiness essay thesis statement is the backbone of an article and a crucial element in your paper. A good thesis statement about happiness should be arguable, specific, and relevant to the topic. It is important for defining the scope of an article and highlighting its focus while also identifying what it will not cover.  Finally, the thesis statement tells readers the writer's point of view and sets a standard for judging whether the essay achieves its goal. By creating an effective statement, writers can significantly impact their paper's quality by providing direction and focus to the author’s argument.

Happiness Thesis Statement Example

This thesis statement defines the pursuit of delight and outlines its contributing factors. Here is an example of a happiness essay thesis statement sample:

True happiness comes from family, friends, and learning to be content in life, while money can only purchase momentary happiness.

Happiness Essay Body

A happiness body paragraph is a component of the body section of an article that provides evidence, examples, and supporting arguments to develop an essay's central idea. Good paragraphs cover a topic in-depth and engage readers, prompting them to reflect on what brings joy and how to pursue it. A paragraph about happiness should be well-structured and focused, analyzing factors contributing to contentment in a logical and coherent manner. A well-crafted essay body on happiness includes several paragraphs, each focused on specific aspects of enjoyment while supporting an article's overall argument. Following these guidelines, writers can create persuasive essay paragraphs.

Happiness Body Paragraph Example

Body paragraphs should provide a deeper understanding of the topic while engaging readers with relevant, thought-provoking information. Happiness body paragraph example:

Contentment brings a smile to our faces, peace to our hearts, and a skip in our steps. It's what many of us strive for every day, and it turns out it's not just good for our spirits but our health too! Studies have linked contentment to lower stress, reduced risk of heart disease, and elevated life satisfaction. Delight can come from doing what you love, being with loved ones, or having a sense of purpose. Or, it may simply be found in everyday moments like a sunny day, a good meal, or a breathtaking sunset. Although joy can be fleeting and affected by life events, we can still work to cultivate it in our lives.

Happiness Essay Conclusion

A conclusion is the last section of an essay that summarizes the main points while offering a final perspective on the topic. To write a strong conclusion on a happiness essay, consider these key elements: 

• summarize the main arguments
• provide closure
• include a final thought or reflection
• leave a lasting impression
• avoid introducing new information.

A good conclusion can make the difference between a forgettable essay and one that stays with the reader long after they've finished. Following these guidelines ensures that your essay conclusion about happiness effectively wraps up the argument and provides readers with memorable final impressions.

Happiness Essay Conclusion Sample

Conclusion helps readers better understand the topic by providing a sense of resolution or insight. Here is an example of a happiness essay conclusion:

In conclusion, delight is a difficult and multi-faceted concept that can influence various factors, including personal relationships, life events, and individual perspectives. The pursuit of contentment is a common initiative for all humans, and it is evident that becoming content requires a perfect balance and order of internal and external factors. This article presents evidence that helps you see clearly that contentment is not a fixed state. It is a journey that needs effort, reflection, and self-awareness to enjoy. I hope this paper has helped you realize a deeper understanding of this topic and become better equipped to embark on your pursuit of joy. 

How to Write an Essay on Happiness?

If you want to write an essay on happiness, remember that it can be a hard yet rewarding experience. Whether you are doing it for a class assignment, a job, a scholarship application, or personal growth, exploring what contentment means to you can be the journey of self-discovery.  You should clearly understand the topic and have a well-structured plan. The steps to effective happiness essay writing include defining satisfaction, conducting research, and organizing thoughts. When writing, it's crucial to consider factors that contribute to delight and obstacles that can hinder the process. Following the steps below, you can craft an article that effectively communicates your perspective on this topic.

1.  Pick a Topic About Happiness

Choosing a topic about happiness essay can be daunting, but with some guidance and creativity, you may find a subject that is both interesting and relevant. When brainstorming for happiness essay topics, follow these steps:

• Start with a broad idea related to your issue. Narrow the focus to a specific aspect, gather information, list potential cases, evaluate options, refine the matter, and check for relevance to your audience.
• Gather information, consider the different perspectives, and take note of the arguments you come across.
• Come up with five to ten potential concerns and evaluate each, asking questions such as if it is interesting, has enough information available, and if you can find a unique approach.
• Refine your chosen discussion to make it specific, focused, relevant, and interesting to your audience.

2. Do In-Depth Research

Gathering information from credible sources is crucial when writing an essay about happiness. Here are some tips to ensure that you collect accurate and relevant facts:

• Research from trustworthy sources like academic journals, books by experts, and government websites.
• Evaluate information's credibility and reliability. When you are reading, take notes on the information that you find. Write down the author, title, and publication date of each source to keep track of your research.
• Use multiple sources to broaden your understanding of your topic.
• Organize your research with a citation manager or bibliography.

Following these tips, you can delve into a wealth of credible sources for your happiness essays to elevate your article to new heights of insight.

3. Create an Outline for a Happiness Essay

Crafting an outline is essential in writing an essay on happiness and can give your work the structure and direction it needs to succeed. Here's how to create an effective happiness essay outline:

• Framework Start by outlining the main sections of your essay - introduction, body, and conclusion.
• Pinpoint your ideas Determine the key points you want to convey in each section.
• Supplement with specifics Add details that reinforce and support your ideas under each main point.
• Follow the guide Use the happiness essay outline example above as a starting point, but feel free to customize depending on the situation.

By following these steps and utilizing an essay outline , you'll have a clear map to guide you as you craft your paper, ensuring that your ideas are coherently organized, and your writing flows effortlessly.

4. Write an Essay About Happiness

In this essay about happiness, we will delve into the elusive and complex nature of this emotion. Here is an example to follow when you write your happiness essay.

Contentment is a subjective experience that varies significantly from person to person. It is often considered the ultimate goal of human life, and many people spend their entire lives searching for it. Despite its elusive nature, it is a crucial component of well-being and has been linked to numerous benefits for physical, mental, and emotional health. The reasons to smile or experience joy are varied and can be both internal and external. Some individuals find joy in the simple things in life, like being with family, pursuing their passions, or exploring new experiences. On the other hand, others may find it through accomplishing personal goals, acquiring material goods, or attaining financial security. Nonetheless, it's crucial to keep in mind that these external sources of happiness may not always be possible and may not alleviate suffering. Conversely, true joy comes from within and is characterized by a sense of being content, satisfied, and with purpose. It can be cultivated through mindfulness, gratitude, and self-reflection. By focusing on personal growth, forming meaningful relationships, and finding meaning and purpose in life, individuals, including children, can develop a deep sense of satisfaction that is not dependent on external circumstances and is not easily disturbed by life's problems. In conclusion, delight is a complex and multifaceted experience that both internal and external factors can influence. While external sources can bring temporary joy, true and lasting contentment can only be found within. Individuals can create a foundation for joy that will endure throughout their lives by focusing on personal growth and cultivating a positive mindset.

5. Proofread Your Happiness Essay

When proofreading your happiness essay, make sure to take your time and approach it methodically. Follow these steps:

• Read through the entire essay to get a sense of its overall structure and flow.
• Pay close attention to the introduction, as this sets the tone for the entire piece.
• Look for typos, grammatical errors, and awkward phrasing .
• Ensure your paragraphs are well-organized, with clear transitions between ideas. Check that your happy essay accurately reflects your thoughts and clearly conveys the message you want.
• Finally, read the paper out loud to yourself, or have someone else read it to you.

This can help you pick up on any errors that you might have missed during your initial proofreading. Finally, the article will leave a lasting impression on your reader and enhance your credibility as a writer.

Happiness Essay Examples

If you're looking to write truly captivating happiness essays, it's always helpful to seek inspiration from various sources. Consider checking out these excellent essay examples about happiness:  Happiness essay example 1

Essay example about happiness 2

Happiness essay sample 3

Essay on happiness example 4

Example of a happiness essay 5

They offer a rich tapestry of perspectives on what enjoyment truly means. Whether you draw on your own experiences or delve into the experiences of others, a happiness essay example will serve as a valuable resource as you strive to make your mark on this timeless topic.

Happiness Essay Writing Tips

When writing a happiness essay, there are key tips to keep in mind to help you create a compelling piece of work. Here are a few suggestions to get you started in happiness essays writing:

• Explore the concept from a cultural or historical perspective, looking at how attitudes towards your topic have changed over time across different societies.
• Consider how relationships, community, and social connections shape our enjoyment. How can these factors interact?
• Weigh the benefits and drawbacks of different approaches, such as positive or negative thinking, mindfulness, and self-care, offering a well-rounded perspective on the topic.
• Reflect on the connection between happiness and success, considering whether one necessarily leads to the other or can be pursued independently of success.
• Incorporate humor and lightheartedness into your writing, making your essay entertaining.

By going about integrating these unique tips into your writing day by day, you'll be able to craft essays on happiness that are both original and memorable, capturing the reader's imagination from start to finish. Students can explore a vast range of topics through our platform, from an essay about true friendship  and a  family essay to an illustration essay that will show how to convey complex ideas in a clear and engaging way.

Bottom Line on Happiness Essay Writing

To write a happiness essay, you should consider providing long and in-depth ways to explore what truly brings us joy. Instead of repeating common knowledge, take a personal approach and reflect on the things that delight you. Consider the fact that relationships, gratitude, mindfulness, and activities all contribute to shaping our joy. Your happiness essays should also showcase your introspective side. Examine any challenges or obstacles you have faced in your journey toward contentment. This will make your paper not only unique but also relatable and insightful. The goal is to create a piece that offers a fresh perspective on the concept of happiness and a true reflection of your experiences.

Buy custom essay online from StudyCrumb and get a happiness paper delivered on time. Top-notch quality is guaranteed!

Daniel Howard is an Essay Writing guru. He helps students create essays that will strike a chord with the readers.

You may also like

Happiness—Concept, Measurement and Promotion pp 1–14 Cite as

What is Happiness? Why is Happiness Important?

• Yew-Kwang Ng 2 , 3  
• Open Access
• First Online: 04 December 2021

7725 Accesses

The (net) happiness (or welfare) of an individual is the excess of her positive affective feelings over negative ones. This subjective definition of happiness is more consistent with common usage and analytically more useful. Over the past century or so, both psychology and economics has gone through the anti-subjectivism revolution (behaviorism in psychology and ordinalism in economics) but has come back to largely accept subjectivism (cognitive psychology and recent interest of economists on happiness issues).

Download chapter PDF

1.1 What is Happiness?

Different people attain happiness in different ways. Some enjoy reading; some seldom open a book. Some enjoy spending money; some enjoy owning wealth; others enjoy non-material pursuits. Everyone wants to be happy. However, what is happiness?

A person is seldom very happy or very unhappy. Kwang may be enjoying the music that he has been listening to all-day while working and also enjoying most of the work he is doing. However, he also feels a little tired late in the afternoon after working for seven hours. (So he almost never works at night as it decreases his happiness.) As a biological organism, we feel good eating fresh and nutritious food when hungry. This clearly has survival value. Thus, contrary to the pure subjectivist, happiness is not completely subjective. The nice or bad feelings are subjective in the sense that it is felt by a person subjectively. However, they do have a substantial objective basis, although this might be shaped by the different experiences of different persons.

We feel bad when we are sick; virtually all others are like this, given the biological need for survival. If someone enjoyed being sick, he would get ill more often and have a lower chance of survival. His genes would not be passed on as successfully. In time, such genes would cease to exist. Hence, no one derives positive feelings from sickness. Thus, we can be quite confident that sickness makes the individual feel bad. This is so despite the belief by Lu Xun (鲁迅 1881–1936), a very famous Chinese writer in the first half of the twentieth century, who claimed that a small sickness is a blessing as it allows the person enjoyment from a few days off work. The poor old Lu Xun must be very overworked!

The (net) happiness of an individual over any period of time is their nice feelings (positive affective feelings, as the psychologist calls it) less their bad (negative) feelings over that period, with both types of feelings weighted by their intensities and duration. This is a subjective conception of happiness and needs some explanation. Anyone must be capable of feeling to have happiness. Stone, water, and almost certainly, all plants, do not have happiness. Only affective feelings are included, and these are the feelings that the individual cares for positively or negatively, or that make them feel good or bad. One may visually feel the difference in the color of a book. However, if they do not care which color it is, their feeling of color here is not affective. All affective feelings are included, including the more basic good and bad feelings of smell, taste, sight, etc. and the more spiritual or sophisticated feelings of proudness, delight, shame, worry, distress, etc.

The degrees or intensities of positive or negative affective feelings of an individual over a given period of time may be represented by a curve such as the one in Fig.  1.1 . Then, the amount of (net) happiness this individual enjoys over this period is given by the areas bounded by this curve above the line of neutrality minus the areas below this line. This is what I view as my happiness (over a given time interval) and I believe that I am representative of most people in this respect. This is also the concept of (objective) happiness preferred by Kahneman ( 1999 ) and sophisticatedly argued for and analysed by Kahneman et al. ( 1997 ). Footnote 1

Amount of happiness illustrated

This affective or subjective definition of happiness is called ‘hedonic’ in philosophy. However, for the general public, the term hedonism has a tendency to be mistakenly interpreted as being exclusively or excessively concerned with current pleasure such as to disregard the future or others. Thus, I try to avoid using ‘hedonic’. If properly interpreted in its philosophical sense, there is nothing wrong with hedonism. What is wrong is harming others, not enjoying oneself.

Happiness is the most direct word and most commonly used. The meaning of ‘happiness’ is clear and precise and misunderstanding is minimal. ‘Well-being’ could be taken to be a variety of meanings, including physical well-being or economic well-being. Even if an additional adjective is added to become ‘subjective well-being’, it is still less precise than ‘happiness’. Footnote 2 It could still mean either overall happiness or the more psychiatric sense of being free from mental illness. While ‘life satisfaction’ is also quite comprehensive and clear in meaning, it suffers from two fundamental problems as discussed in Chap. 4 . Thus, I strongly prefer to use the terminology of ‘happiness’ for the concept discussed above.

Different types of feelings may be qualitatively different; beautiful sights are different from delicious tastes. However, in principle, we have no difficulty in comparing different types of feelings in terms of their quantitative significance. True, in practice, it may be difficult to compare the happiness significance of pushpins versus poetry. We may not have enough information regarding how many people really enjoy poetry and to what extent, etc. However, this is a matter of inadequate information, not incomparability in principle. As for myself, I have no difficulty in saying that I would give up pushpins rather than give up poetry (On the well-being effects of practicing poetry, see Croom 2015 ).

Of course, we care and/or should care about things other than our own feelings, such as the feelings of others, moral principles, etc. These relate to the happiness of others and the happiness of ourselves and others in the future. For the happiness of an individual in a given period, it consists of and only of their positive and negative feelings, as described above.

This does not mean that, for any given period, an individual only cares about or just maximizes their happiness in this period. Obviously, they take account of the effects on their future happiness. It also does not mean they maximize their own happiness only. Not only do I derive happiness by helping others to be happy (by writing this book, for example), I (and any other person) may also be prepared to sacrifice a little of our own happiness if the happiness of others may be increased substantially (more on this in Chap. 2 ).

Our definition of happiness here is purely subjective. Many scholars do not subscribe to this concept, based on a variety of grounds, which are all unacceptable in my view. Here, let us discuss just two main (somewhat interrelated) grounds for diverging from, or qualifying the purely subjective definition.

First, from Aristotle to Etzioni ( 2018 ), many knowledgeable scholars require, on top of the component of subjective affective feelings, some consistency with morality to qualify for happiness or eudaimonia. In my view, this unnecessarily confuses the two very different concepts. Being happy and being moral are two quite different concepts. One may be happy without being moral and one may be moral without being happy. Lumping the two together leads to confusion. It may be socially very desirable for us to encourage people to be moral, and/or convince them that one important way to be happy is to be moral, etc., but the two are conceptually very distinct. Essentially, to be immoral is to cause unnecessary unhappiness or reduction in happiness on others. We should use happiness to define morality, not use morality to define happiness. This latter is standing things on their head, and will likely lead to unclear thinking. Footnote 3

Examining the hedonic and eudaimonic well-being indicators in a nationally representative longitudinal study of US adults, Pancheva et al. ( 2020 , Abstract) show that ‘the two accounts largely converged with about 70% of the sample observations registering high/low scores in both well-being dimensions’. Moreover, for the minority (30%) of divergent patterns, they ‘revealed substantial changes over a 10-year period with respondents registering low hedonic /high eudaimonic well-being at time t having greater chances of upward movement toward improved well-being compared to individuals who experienced high hedonic /low eudaimonic levels in the first time period’. This supports our position that if account is taken of the effects in the future and on others, only hedonic happiness needs be taken into account.

If we view Aristotle’s eudaimon as ‘an ethical doctrine that would provide guidelines for how to live’ (Ryff and Singer 2008 , p.15), then it may be a very good guide, especially from a social viewpoint. It may also be true that ‘striving to improve one’s hedonic well-being fails in its aim, whereas striving to improve one’s eudaimonic functioning succeeds’ (Sheldon et al. 2019 ). Similarly, even if a firm’s ultimate aim is to maximize profits, it may be counter-productive to too directly, openly, and exclusively focus on profits in all its activities; it may be more profits-efficient to emphasize much on customer relation, employee’s welfare, and even market shares. However, viewed as what is ultimately of value, non-hedonic concept of happiness is debatable. Whether it is eudaimon, self-actualization, self-autonomy, etc., if the resulting outcomes involve much more misery than happiness, such that net happiness is a huge negative sum, it is not a desirable world in the ultimate or intrinsic sense.

To avoid misunderstanding, but at the risk of repetition, let us clarify one important point. The need to take into account the effects on others and the future does not mean that the happiness of any individual for any period has to be adjusted to take into account these indirect effects. If we required such adjustment, it would become something similar to Aristotle’s eudaimon. Rather, we take at face value the unadjusted happiness of any individual in any given period as of intrinsic value. Thus, if Mr. A enjoyed his binge drinking one evening, that happy feeling was then of intrinsic value. However, if his binge drinking led to his drunk driving that killed/wounded Ms. B, the great suffering imposed on Ms. B or her big loss of future happiness should be taken into account. Such accounting may thus lead us to agree that binge drinking should be discouraged or even banned. This is justified on the bad effects on others and in the future, not based on having to adjust Mr. A’s happy feelings that evening. In other words, no distinction is made between personal happiness and moral happiness (or eudaimon). Happiness is happiness. But the morality of a certain act does not depend only on the effects on the happiness of the person concerned, but also on the effects on others and on the future.

Secondly, many scholars want to add some objective component to the definition of happiness. For example, as described by Adler et al. ( 2017a , pp. 24–5), ‘The most salient objective approach among psychologists is the ‘eudaimonic’, or self-realization paradigm, where well-being is construed as an on-going, dynamic process of effortful living by means of engagement in activities perceived as meaningful (e.g., Ryan and Deci 2001 ). Advocates of this approach maintain that living a life of virtue, understood as developing the valuable parts of one’s human nature, or actualizing one’s inherent potentials in the service of something greater, constitutes the good life for an individual (Boniwell and Henry 2007 ; DelleFave et al. 2011 ). From this perspective, positive experiences are not in themselves important for a good life, and are relevant only insofar as they involving [sic] appreciating objectively worthwhile ways of being or functioning’. Similarly, Adler et al. ( 2017a , p. 22) defines happiness or well-being as ‘ everything that makes a person’s life … goes well ’ (italics original).

Some happiness researchers (e.g. Kahneman 1999 ; Di Tella et al. 2003 ; Közegi and Rabin 2008 ; Layard and Nickell 2005 ; Layard 2010 ) are in favour of the hedonic concept while others (e.g. Ryff 1989 ; Waterman 1993 ; Etzioni 2018 ) are in favour of the eudaimonic concept. The majority seem to regard both as relevant. The problem with the above ‘eudaimonic’, ‘prudential’, and/or ‘objective’ approach to the definition of happiness is that it confuses happiness with (objective) factors that are usually conducive to happiness and elements that are usually important for the happiness in the future and of others. To minimize violations to the common meaning of the concept of happiness, and to be consistent with the universally accepted point (again from Aristotle to Etzioni 2018 ) that happiness is intrinsically valuable (the controversial part is that it is also the only thing that is intrinsically valuable, ultimately speaking, a point to be discussed in Chap. 5 ), happiness must be subjective. However, our subjective happiness is affected by a host of objective factors. The different ways or methods we lead our lives may also have very different effects on our own health, and hence our future happiness, as well as different effects on the happiness of others. For example, a person may become happy getting drunk, but may do harm to his health (hence reducing happiness in the future) or cause harm on others by drink driving, as mentioned above.

Aristotle was probably largely right that a life of contemplation and virtue, and actualizing one’s inherent nature (Delle Fave et al. 2011 ) is the right way to wellbeing or happiness (Norton 1976 ), or that the usual result of eudaimonic action is hedonic happiness (Kashdan et al. 2008 ). ‘At the opposite end, a selfish individual who has little regard for another’s welfare and is primarily, or even exclusively, concerned with the pursuit of his personal interest … will usually fail to achieve both his own happiness and that of others’ (Ricard 2017 , pp. 160–1). Lasting happiness is associated more with selflessness rather than self-centeredness (Dambrun and Ricard 2011 ). Disinterested kindness to others provides profound satisfaction (Seligman 2002 ); kindness activities boost happiness (Dunn et al. 2008 ; Aknin et al. 2012 , Rowland and Curry 2018 ). All these wise observations and research results are very important for individuals and societies in terms of promoting a good life.

However, as the basis for the definition of happiness, they only serve to confuse. For example, they lead to such misleading assertions as ‘psychological wellbeing cannot exist just in your own head: it is a combination of feeling good as well as actually having meaning, engagement, good relationships, and accomplishment’ (Adler et al. 2017b , p. 122). It is simpler and clearer to regard your happiness or psychological wellbeing as just existing in your own head, but your engagement, relationships, accomplishment, etc. may affect your own future happiness and that of others.

Adler et al. ( 2017b , p. 123) allege that the purely hedonic concept of happiness (‘just in your head’) ‘stumbles fatally on the fact that human beings persist in having children: couples without children are likely happier, subjectively, than childless [?!] couples [with children], and so if all humans pursued … [such] subjective happiness, the species would have died out long ago’. First, this seems to be inconsistent with the finding that ‘having children increases mothers’ life satisfaction and happiness’ (Priebe 2020 , Abstract). Even ignoring this inconsistency, the argument is clearly due to the lack of consideration of the happiness of people/children in the future. A life with children may be less happy but may be a better life as it gives rise to future people with additional happiness. Thus, if happiness in the future is not ignored, the hedonic concept of happiness does not ‘stumble’. Footnote 4 It is also questionable that a life with children is less happy. Footnote 5

True, ‘Objective and subjective indicators of wellbeing are both important’ (Stiglitz et al. 2010 , p. 15; see also Fleurbaey and Blanchet 2013 ; Jorgenson 2018 ). However, the objective indicators are important only because: 1. They are indirect indicators of subjective wellbeing; 2. They are important for subjective wellbeing (i.e. happiness) in the future; 3. They are important for the subjective wellbeing of others. One of the reasons the second factor may be important maybe because they contribute to the prevention of government’s manipulation of ‘people’s preferences and/or knowledge’ (Unanue 2017 , p. 75). Similar to this possible usefulness of objective indicators of happiness, the ‘operational definition’ of happiness (Thin et al. 2017 , p. 40) may also be useful. However, properly understood, it should be ‘operational indicators ’, not definitions of happiness. Also similarly, such factors as capabilities, functioning, flourishing, etc. (see, e.g. Hasan 2019 ) are important also, ultimately speaking, only for their contributions to welfare or happiness.

Consider: ‘Sen ( 1999 , p. 14) provides some more realistic cases that may have significant relevance to public policy. Sen thinks hedonism is problematic because ‘[a] person who is ill-fed, undernourished, unsheltered and ill can still be high up in the scale of happiness or desire-fulfillment if he or she has learned to have realistic desires and to take pleasure in small mercies.’ If such a person can be said to be doing well, then there seems to be something problematic about hedonism. Our tendency is to say that person has adapted as best as she can to poor life circumstances, and she is making the best of a bad situation, but that does not mean she is doing well: The destitute thrown into beggary, the vulnerable landless labourer precariously surviving at the edge of subsistence, the over-worked domestic servant working around the clock, the subdued and subjugated housewife reconciled to her role and her fate, all tend to come to terms with their respective predicaments. (p. 15)’ (Hersch 2018 , p. 2234). In my view, such cases may well be very undesirable; however, this is so because they tend to reduce happiness in the long run. Taking account of effects in the future and on others will account for them. On the other hand, if they do not [unlikely though] reduce happiness in the long run, they are not bad.

Despite the above explanations, some people may still prefer to have a different conception of happiness. For example, consider two hypothetical scholars who both died in an air crash at the same age. Madam A suffered from debilitating illness and a broken family throughout much of her life, leading to her undergoing enormous pain and distress. However, working long and exhausting hours, she made important breakthroughs in knowledge and was awarded a Nobel prize just before her death. Though she died happy, her unhappiness throughout her whole life clearly outweighs her final happiness for a few days. Mr. B was a healthy and happily married man who enjoyed life a lot. He also enjoyed his work and performed satisfactorily. Just before his death, he learned that his expected promotion did not go through as it was found that his only major contribution was contained in another publication years before his. He died unhappy and his career was not a very successful one. However, his final unhappiness for a few days is far exceeded by his high level of happiness for a long time.

According to our conception of happiness, Madam A had an unhappy life while Mr. B had a happy one. However, according to some other conception of happiness (which emphasizes final satisfaction with one’s life), A had a happy life and B had an unhappy one. Moreover, some, if not many, people may prefer to have a life like A’s to one like B’s. Several issues are involved here.

To simplify from the complication of interest earnings from savings, assume a society with zero interest rate and zero inflation rate. Consider two persons similar in all aspects except that X had a high annual income and consumption level ($80,000) during the first half of his life which was unexpectedly halved in the second half of life. In contrast, Y started with half the initial level of X’s (i.e. $40,000) for the first half of his life but the level was unexpectedly doubled for the second half. Though their income and consumption over the whole life are the same, Y probably had a happier life, provided that the level of $40,000 per annum was not so low as to make him malnourished. (Malnourishment in the first half may be worse than that in the second half as it could affect one’s health for both halves.) Subject to this proviso, most people also prefer to be in the situation of Y than X. When one has been accustomed to a high level of consumption, one needs a high level to be happy. Thus, subject to the absence of health-damaging under-consumption, it is better to have a profile of increasing consumption level than one that is decreasing. However, this consideration does not apply to the case of Madam A versus Mr. B where the profiles are already stated in terms of happiness, not in terms of consumption.

Many people may have faulty telescopic faculty so as not to make full allowance for the future, as believed by Pigou ( 1912 , 1929 , 1932 , p. 25), a well-known economist early in the twentieth century. When one looks backward in time, events far back may also appear less important. But this is a similar mistake as having a faulty telescopic faculty.

Madam A had a more successful life than Mr. B who had a happier life. The difference is due to A’s much higher contribution to knowledge which, presumably, would make others happier. Madam A may also have a higher life satisfaction than B, at least at the end, but this is still not a happier life. A may prefer to have her unhappy life over B’s happy life. She may rationally have this preference if she believed that her contribution to knowledge would make others happier and if she cared for the happiness of others. This care may make life satisfaction (which is more likely affected by one’s contribution to others) differ from the happiness of the same person, as will be discussed further in Chap. 4 .

True, despite the above explanations, some people may still opt to use a somewhat different conception of happiness than the one we define above. However, the fact that momentary experience sampling (Csikszentmihalyi and Hunter 2003 ) of happiness and fatigue is predictive of cardiovascular disease progression, while overall evaluation of life is not so predictive (Karmarck et al. 2007 ), support both the use of momentary experience sampling as a method of measuring happiness and our definition of happiness above. Moreover, most people will agree that the good and bad feelings one has are important in affecting whether one is happy or not, even if not exclusively. Thus, one does not have to agree with our conception of happiness completely to find the rest of this book interesting and important.

In addition to the above two points, many scholars (including Sumner 1996 ; Chekola 2007 ; Adler 2017b ) want to include some cognitive element into happiness or subjective well-being (SWB). Some define SWB as being inclusive of both affective happiness and cognitive life satisfaction. I find this confusing, if not also misleading. Using happiness, welfare and SWB as synonymous and defined in the affective sense as discussed above, is most consistent with the common usage and most useful analytically. Then, usually one’s life satisfaction (defined cognitively) may largely be affected by one’s own happiness, but also by one’s belief in contribution to society (ultimately and rationally, should be to happiness). Then, it is at least conceptually possible for most or even all individuals in a society to be unhappy (net happiness being negative) and yet still have high life satisfaction, as discussed in more detail in Chap. 4 . This may be due to each believing that she has made huge contributions to the happiness of others. Yet, due to imperfect knowledge or misfortunes, the believed (perhaps mistakenly) contributions did not really materialize into happiness for most individuals. At least in outcome, such a society of unhappy individuals is miserable, despite high life satisfaction. Life satisfaction is not meaningless and may be useful for certain purposes, including the potential to affect happiness in the future. Happiness and life satisfaction also tend to be mutually reinforcing. However, ultimately, it is happiness that is of intrinsic value. Thus, I prefer to focus mainly on happiness, especially when the two differ, as discussed further in the next section and Chap. 4 .

1.2 Why is Happiness Important?

Over the past century or more, psychology has gone through at least three important phases of subjectivism, behaviorism, and cognitivism. Classical psychologists spoke of mind, consciousness, and used introspection in their analysis. Then came the Watson-Skinner behaviorist revolution which prohibited the analysis of anything subjective: only actual behaviors were the proper subject matter of psychology. This allowed psychology to make huge advances in becoming more scientific, but concomitantly caused some to feel that it had ‘gone out of its mind…and lost all consciousness’ (Chomsky 1959 , p. 29). The reaction against the excesses of behaviorism resulted in the cognitive revolution which has been prevalent for the past few decades, and which has made much headway.

Economics has gone through similar phases. Older economists (since the Neoclassical revolution in the nineteen century) used more subjective terms like satisfaction, marginal utility, and even happiness, pleasure, and pain. After the indifference-curve or ordinalism revolution in the 1930s, modern economists are very adverse to the more subjective concepts and very hostile to cardinal utility and interpersonal comparisons of utility. (See Kaminitz 2018 on the histories and approaches on this by economists and psychologists.) They prefer to use the more objective concepts like preference and choice. In a very important sense, these changes represent an important methodological advance, making economic analysis to be based on more objective grounds. However, the change or correction has been carried into excess, making economics unable to tackle many important problems, divorced from fundamental concepts, and even misleading. In my view, while we should prefer to use more objective concepts when they are sufficient, we should not shy away from the more subjective concepts and even their interpersonal comparison when they are needed.

Perhaps we may date the commencement of the subjectivist counter-revolution to the dominance of objectivism/ordinalism in economics at 1997, with the appearance of three papers (Oswald 1997 ; Frank 1997 ; Ng 1997 ) on happiness in Economic Journal , with Easterlin ( 1974 ) as the earliest forerunner. In the last 2–3 decades, many top journals in economics have published papers on happiness studies and economists are less reluctant to speak in terms of subjective concepts including happiness, including its cardinal measurability and interpersonal comparability.

Happiness is more important than the objective concepts of choice, preference and income (especially if narrowly interpreted and eschewing cardinal utility and interpersonal comparison, as is the usual practice in modern economics) for at least two reasons. First, happiness is the ultimate objective of most, if not all people (more on this in Chap. 5 ). We want money (or anything else) only as a means to increase our happiness. If having more money does not substantially increase our happiness (Chap. 7 ), then money is not very important, but happiness is.

Secondly, for economically advanced countries (the number of which is increasing) there is evidence suggesting that, for the whole of society, and in the long run (in real purchasing power terms), money does not buy happiness, or at least not much (Easterlin 1974 ; Veenhoven 1984 ; Argyle and Martin 1991 , p. 80; Oswald 1997 ; Asadullah et al. 2018 ; Cheng et al. 2018 ; Luo et al. 2018 ). This is known as the Easterlin paradox of unhappy growth, the failure of money or economic growth to increase happiness (For the sister paradox of happy stagnation for Japan in the last three decades, see Chap. 13 ). The reasons are not difficult to see. Once the basic necessities and comforts of life are adequate, further consumption can actually make us worse off due to problems like excessive fat and cholesterol and stress. Our ways to increase happiness further then take on the largely competitive forms like attempting to keep up with or surpassing the Joneses. From a social viewpoint, such competition is a pure waste (Frank 1997 ). On top of this, production and consumption to sustain the competition continue to impose substantial environmental costs, making economic growth quite possibly happiness-decreasing (Ng and Wang 1993 , and Chap. 7 ). To avoid this sad outcome, a case can be made for increasing public spending (contrary to the currently popular view against public expenditures among economists) to safeguard the environment and to engage in research and development that will increase welfare (Ng 2003 ). This is especially so since relative-income effects makes the traditional estimate of optimal public spending sub-optimal (Ng 1987a ). As the schoolmates of one’s child all receive expensive birthday gifts, one feels the need to give as expensive gifts. Thus, the perceived importance of private expenditures is inflated relative to that of public spending (Ng 2003 and Chaps. 14 and 15).

The return of both psychology and economics to largely accept subjectivism is unavoidable and much to be welcome. Happiness is the ultimate and only intrinsic value (Chap. 5 ) and it is subjective. The great British economist Arthur Pigou ( 1922 ) regarded the study of economics (and arguably other studies as well, though we should not insist on immediate effects) should be mainly for bearing fruits, not just shedding lights (though shedding lights itself is a kind of fruit). Happiness is the ultimate fruit.

For discussions of the various concepts of happiness, see, e.g. Veenhoven (1984, 2000 ), Kim-Prieto et al. ( 2005 ), Brülde ( 2007 ), Haybron ( 2007 ). The subjective concept I use is what philosophers called the hedonistic theory or what Haybron ( 2000 ) calls ‘psychological happiness’. This is distinct from the ‘prudential happiness’ (or ‘eudaimonic’) and differs from the concept of happiness as life satisfaction itself or something similar, e.g. ‘happiness as involving the realizing of global desires, a life plan, requires a level of rationality to develop’ (Chekola 2007 , p. 67). It is a pure affective view, a mental-state concept, and internalist ( in your head/mind). Using ‘happiness’ in this sense is most consistent with the common usage of the term. For the various concepts of happiness, see Mulnix and Mulnix ( 2015 ), Clark et al. ( 2018 ), Diener et al. ( 2018 ), Etzioni ( 2018 ), Helliwell ( 2018 ), Myers and Diener ( 2018 ) (SWB or happiness includes not just narrow sense of pleasure but all positive affective feelings like ‘contentment, delight, ecstasy, elation, enjoyment, euphoria, exhilaration, exultation, gladness, gratification, gratitude, joy, liking, love, relief, satisfaction, Schadenfreude, tranquility, and so on’ Moore 2013 ).

See Diener et al. ( 2003 ) on the concept of subjective well-being.

Thus I find the contrast between utility and morality, as discussed in the Discussion Forum on Amitai Etzioni—Twenty years of ‘ The Moral Dimension: Toward a New Economics ’ in Socio-Economic Review , 2008, 6:135–173, fails to recognize points made in this chapter and in Chap. 5 , and comes across as rather suspicious, if not shallow.

On the relevance of future people, especially potential future people, see Ng ( 1989 ). On the other ‘stumbling’ allegation based on the Brave New World , see Chap. 2 .

‘For parents who have had children due to the generosity of family policies, having children increases parent’s life satisfaction by 0.33–0.41 points on a 10 point scale. This effect is significantly more pronounced when parents are over the age of 50. Yet, children’s effects on life satisfaction and happiness is negative for single and full-time working parents. The positive effect of having children on life satisfaction and happiness has substantially eroded over the EVS (European Values Survey) waves which explains the reductions in the fertility rate in Europe’ (Ugur 2020 , Abstract).

ADLER, Alejandro, BONIWELL, Ilona, GIBSON, Evelyn, METZ, Thaddeus, SELIGMAN, Martin, UCHIDA, Yukiko & XING, Zhanjun (2017a). Definitions of terms. In Happiness Transforming the Development Landscape , pp. 21–38, The Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH.

Google Scholar  

ADLER, Alejandro, UNANUE, Wenceslao, OSIN, Evgeny, RICARD, Matthieu, ALKIRE, Sabina & SELIGMAN, Martin (2017b). Psychological wellbeing. In Happiness Transforming the Development Landscape , pp. 118–155), The Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH.

AEGYLE, M., & MARTIN, M. (1991). The psychological causes of happiness. In STRACK, F., ARGYLE, M., & SCHWARZ, N. (Eds.), Subjective well-being. An interdisciplinary perspective , pp. 77–100, Oxford: Pergamon Press.

AKNIN, L. B., HAMLIN, J. K., & DUNN, E. W. (2012). Giving leads to happiness in young children.  PLoS One ,  7 (6), e39211.

Article   Google Scholar  

ASADULLAH, M. N., XIAO, S., & YEOH, E. (2018). Subjective well-being in China, 2005–2010: The role of relative income, gender, and location.  China Economic Review ,  48 , 83–101.

BONIWELL, Ilona & HENRY, Jane (2007). Developing conceptions of well-being. Social Psychology Review, 9: 3–18.

BRÜLDE, Bengt (2007). Happiness and the good life. Introduction and conceptual framework. Journal of Happiness Studies , 8(1): 1–14.

CHEKOLA, Mark (2007). Happiness, rationality, autonomy and the good life. Journal of Happiness Studies , 8(1): 51–78.

CHENG, H., CHEN, C., LI, D., & YU, H. (2018). The mystery of Chinese people’s happiness.  Journal of Happiness Studies ,  19 (7), 2095–2114.

CHOMSKY, N. (1959). A review of BF Skinner’s Verbal Behavior.  Language ,  35 (1), 26–58.

CLARK, A. E., FLÈCHE, S., LAYARD, R., POWDTHAVEE, N., & WARD, G. (2018).  The Origins of Happiness: The Science of Well-Being over the Life Course , Princeton University Press.

CROOM, A. M. (2015). The practice of poetry and the psychology of well-being. Journal of Poetry Therapy, 28, 21–41.

CSIKSZENTMIHALYI, Mihaly & HUNTER, Jeremy (2003). Happiness in everyday life: The uses of experience sampling. Journal of Happiness Studies , 4: 185–199.

DAMBRUN, Michaël & RICARD, Matthieu (2011). Self-centeredness and selflessness: A theory of self-based psychological functioning and its consequences for happiness. Review of General Psychology , 15(2): 138–157.

DELLE FAVE, Antonella, MASSIMINI, Fausto & BASSI, Marta (2011).Hedonism and eudaimonism in positive psychology. In A. DelleFave (Eds.) Psychological Selection and Optimal Experience across Cultures. Cross-Cultural Advancements in Positive Psychology , 2: 3–18.New York: Springer.

DI TELLA, R., MACCULLOCH, R., OSWALD, A. (2003). “The Macroeconomics of Happiness”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4): 809–827.

DIENER, E., LUCAS, R. E., & OISHI, S. (2018). Advances and open questions in the science of subjective well-being. Collabra: Psychology , 4(1), 15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.115 .

DIENER, Ed, SCOLLON, Christie, N. & LUCAS, Richard, E. (2003). The evolving concept of subjective wellbeing: the multifaceted nature of happiness. Advances in Cell Aging and Gerontology , 15: 187–219.

DUNN, E. W., AKNIN, L. B., & NORTON, M. I. (2008). Spending money on others promotes happiness.  Science ,  319 (5870), 1687–1688.

EASTERLIN, Richard A. (1974). Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence. In DAVID, Paul, & REDER, Melvin W. (eds.) Nations and Households in Economic Growth, Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz . New York: Academic Press.

ETZIONI, Amitai (2018). Happiness is the wrong metric. In  Happiness is the Wrong Metric , pp. 3–40. Springer, Cham.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

FLEURBAEY, Marc and DIDIER, BLANCHET (2013).  Beyond GDP: Measuring Welfare and Assessing Sustainability, Oxford University Press.

FRANK, R. H. (1997). Conspicuous consumption: Money well spent? Journal of Economic, 107: 1832–1847.

HASAN, Hamid (2019). Confidence in subjective evaluation of human well-being in Sen’s capabilities perspective, Journal of Happiness Studies, 20(1): 1–17.

HAYBRON, D. M. (2000). Two philosophical problems in the study of happiness, Journal of Happiness Studies , 1(2): 207–225.

HAYBRON, Daniel M. (2007). Life satisfaction, ethical reflection, and the science of happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies , 8: 99–138.

HELLIWELL, John F. (2018). What’s special about happiness as a social indicator?  Social Indicators Research  135.3 (2018): 965–968.

HERSCH, Gil (2018). Ignoring Easterlin: Why Easterlin’s correlation findings need not matter to public policy.  Journal of Happiness Studies ,  19 (8), 2225–2241.

JORGENSON, Dale W. (2018). Production and welfare: progress in economic measurement.  Journal of Economic Literature, 61(3): 867–919.

KAHNEMAN, Daniel. (1999). Objective happiness. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener & N. Schwarz (eds.). Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 3–25). Russell Sage Foundation.

KAHNEMAN, Daniel, WAKKER, Peter P. & SARIN, Rakesh (1997).Back to bentham? Explorations of experienced utility. Quarterly Journal of Economics , 112(2): 375–405.

KAMINITZ, S. C. (2018). Happiness studies and the problem of interpersonal comparisons of satisfaction: Two histories, three approaches. Journal of Happiness Studies 19(2), 423–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-016-9829-7

KARMARCK, Thomas W., MULDOON, Matthew F., SHIFFMAN, Saul S., & SUTTON-TYRRELL, Kim (2007). Experiences of demand and control during daily life are predictors of carotid atherosclerotic progression among health men. Health Psychology , 26: 324–332.

KASHDAN, Todd. B., BISWAS-DIENER, Robert & KING, Laura A. King, (2008). Reconsidering happiness: The costs of distinguishing between hedonics and eudaimonia. Journal of Positive Psychology , 3(4): 219–233.

KIM-PRIETO, Chu, DIENER, Ed, TAMIR, Maya, SCOLLON, Christie & DIENER, Marissa (2005). Integrating the diverse definitions of happiness: A time-sequential framework of subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies , 6(3): 261–300.

KŐSZEGI, Botond & RABIN, Matthew (2008). Choices, situations, and happiness. Journal of Public Economics , 92(8), 1821–1832.

LAYARD, R., MAYRAZ, G. & NICKELL, S. (2010). Does relative income matter? Are the critics right? In Diener, et al. pp. 139–165.

LAYARD, Richard (2005). Happiness: Lessons from a New Science . New York and London: Penguin.

LUO, Yangmei, WANG, Tong, and HUANG, Xiting (2018) . Which types of income matter most for well‐being in China: Absolute, relative or income aspirations?  International Journal of Psychology, 53(3): 218–222.

MOORE, A. (2013). Hedonism. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://www.plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2013/entries/hedonism/ .

MULNIX, Jennifer W. & MULNIX, M. J. (Eds.) (2015). Theories of Happiness: An Anthology . Broadview Press.

MYERS, David G. and DIENER, Ed (2018). The scientific pursuit of happiness.  Perspectives on Psychological Science  13(2): 218–225.

NG, Yew-Kwang (1987). Relative-income effects and the appropriate level of public expenditure, Oxford Economic Papers , 293–300.

NG, Yew-Kwang (1989). What should we do about future generations? The impossibility of Parfit’s theory X. Economics and Philosophy , 5(2): 235–253.

NG, Yew-Kwang (1997). A case for happiness, cardinal utility, and interpersonal comparability. Economic Journal , 107 (445): 1848–1858.

NG, Yew-Kwang & LIU, Po-Ting (2003). Global environmental protection – solving the international public-good problem by empowering the United Nations through cooperation with WTO. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues , 3(4): 409–417.

NG, Yew-Kwang & WANG, Jianguo (1993). Relative income, aspiration, environmental quality, individual and political myopia: Why may the rat-race for material growth be welfare reducing? Mathematical Social Sciences , 26: 3–23.

NORTON, David L. (1976). Personal Destinies: A Philosophy of Ethical Individualism . Princeton University Press.

OSWALD, Andrew J. (1997).Happiness and economic performance. The Economic Journal , 107: 1815–1831.

PANCHEVA, M.G., RYFF, C.D. & LUCCHINI, M. (2020). An integrated look at well-being: Topological clustering of combinations and correlates of hedonia and eudaimonia . Journal of Happiness Studies . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-020-00325-6

PIGOU, Arthur C. (1912/1929/1932), Wealth and Welfare . Later editions (1920, 1924, 1929, 1932) assume the title The Economics of Welfare. London: Macmillan.

PIGOU, Arthur C. (1922), Empty economic boxes: A reply. Economic Journal , 32: 458–465.

PRIEBE, J. (2020). Quasi-experimental evidence for the causal link between fertility and subjective well-being. J Popul Econ 33, 839–882. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-020-00769-3

RICARD, Matthieu (2017). Altruism and happiness. In Happiness Transforming the Development Landscape (pp. 156–68). The Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH.

ROWLAND, Lee, and CURRY, Oliver Scott (2018). A range of kindness activities boost happiness. Journal of Social Psychology, just-accepted (2018).

RYAN, Richard M. & DECI, Edward L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: a review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52 , 141–166.

RYFF, Carol D. & SINGER, Burton H. (2008). Know thyself and become what you are: A eudaimonic approach to psychological well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9:13–39.

RYFF, Carol D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological wellbeing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 57: 1069–1081.

SELIGMAN, M. E. P. (2002) . Authentic Happiness: Using the New Positive Psychology To realize Your Potential for Lasting Fulfillment . New York: Free Press.

SEN, A. (1999).  Development as freedom . New York: Borzoi.

SHELDON, K.M., CORCORAN, M. & PRENTICE, M. (2019). Pursuing eudaimonic functioning versus pursuing hedonic well-being: The first goal succeeds in its aim, Whereas the second does not. Journal of Happiness Studies 20(3), 919–933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-018-9980-4

STIGLITZ, Joseph E., SEN, Amartya. & FITOUSI, Jean-Paul (2010). Mismeasuring Our Lives: Why GDP Doesn’t Add Up . New York, N.Y.: New Press.

SUMNER, Leonard W. (1996). Welfare, Happiness and Ethics . New York: Clarendon Press.

THIN, Neil, HAYBRON, Daniel, BISWAS-DIENER, Robert, AHUVIA, Aaron & TIMSIT, Jean (2017). Desirability of sustainable happiness as a guide for public policy.In Happiness Transforming the Development Landscape (pp. 39–59).The Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH.

UGUR, Z.B. (2020). Does having children bring life satisfaction in Europe?. Journal of Happiness Studies 21(4), 1385–1406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-019-00135-5

UNANUE, Wenceslao (2017). Subjective wellbeing measures to inform public policies. Happiness, The Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH,60.

VEENHOVEN, Ruut (1984). Conditions of Happiness . Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

Book   Google Scholar  

VEENHOVEN, Ruut (2000). The four qualities of life: Ordering concepts and measures of the good life. Journal of Happiness Studies , 1: 1–39.

WATERMAN, Alan S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 64: 678–691.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Economics, Fudan University, Shanghai, China

Yew-Kwang Ng

Economics, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yew-Kwang Ng .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Ng, YK. (2022). What is Happiness? Why is Happiness Important?. In: Happiness—Concept, Measurement and Promotion. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4972-8_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4972-8_1

Published : 04 December 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-33-4971-1

Online ISBN : 978-981-33-4972-8

eBook Packages : Social Sciences Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• How to write an argumentative essay | Examples & tips

How to Write an Argumentative Essay | Examples & Tips

Published on July 24, 2020 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on July 23, 2023.

An argumentative essay expresses an extended argument for a particular thesis statement . The author takes a clearly defined stance on their subject and builds up an evidence-based case for it.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

When do you write an argumentative essay, approaches to argumentative essays, introducing your argument, the body: developing your argument, concluding your argument, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about argumentative essays.

You might be assigned an argumentative essay as a writing exercise in high school or in a composition class. The prompt will often ask you to argue for one of two positions, and may include terms like “argue” or “argument.” It will frequently take the form of a question.

The prompt may also be more open-ended in terms of the possible arguments you could make.

Argumentative writing at college level

At university, the vast majority of essays or papers you write will involve some form of argumentation. For example, both rhetorical analysis and literary analysis essays involve making arguments about texts.

In this context, you won’t necessarily be told to write an argumentative essay—but making an evidence-based argument is an essential goal of most academic writing, and this should be your default approach unless you’re told otherwise.

Examples of argumentative essay prompts

At a university level, all the prompts below imply an argumentative essay as the appropriate response.

Your research should lead you to develop a specific position on the topic. The essay then argues for that position and aims to convince the reader by presenting your evidence, evaluation and analysis.

• Don’t just list all the effects you can think of.
• Do develop a focused argument about the overall effect and why it matters, backed up by evidence from sources.
• Don’t just provide a selection of data on the measures’ effectiveness.
• Do build up your own argument about which kinds of measures have been most or least effective, and why.
• Don’t just analyze a random selection of doppelgänger characters.
• Do form an argument about specific texts, comparing and contrasting how they express their thematic concerns through doppelgänger characters.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

An argumentative essay should be objective in its approach; your arguments should rely on logic and evidence, not on exaggeration or appeals to emotion.

There are many possible approaches to argumentative essays, but there are two common models that can help you start outlining your arguments: The Toulmin model and the Rogerian model.

Toulmin arguments

The Toulmin model consists of four steps, which may be repeated as many times as necessary for the argument:

• Make a claim
• Provide the grounds (evidence) for the claim
• Explain the warrant (how the grounds support the claim)
• Discuss possible rebuttals to the claim, identifying the limits of the argument and showing that you have considered alternative perspectives

The Toulmin model is a common approach in academic essays. You don’t have to use these specific terms (grounds, warrants, rebuttals), but establishing a clear connection between your claims and the evidence supporting them is crucial in an argumentative essay.

Say you’re making an argument about the effectiveness of workplace anti-discrimination measures. You might:

• Claim that unconscious bias training does not have the desired results, and resources would be better spent on other approaches
• Cite data to support your claim
• Explain how the data indicates that the method is ineffective
• Anticipate objections to your claim based on other data, indicating whether these objections are valid, and if not, why not.

Rogerian arguments

The Rogerian model also consists of four steps you might repeat throughout your essay:

• Discuss what the opposing position gets right and why people might hold this position
• Highlight the problems with this position
• Present your own position , showing how it addresses these problems
• Suggest a possible compromise —what elements of your position would proponents of the opposing position benefit from adopting?

This model builds up a clear picture of both sides of an argument and seeks a compromise. It is particularly useful when people tend to disagree strongly on the issue discussed, allowing you to approach opposing arguments in good faith.

Say you want to argue that the internet has had a positive impact on education. You might:

• Acknowledge that students rely too much on websites like Wikipedia
• Argue that teachers view Wikipedia as more unreliable than it really is
• Suggest that Wikipedia’s system of citations can actually teach students about referencing
• Suggest critical engagement with Wikipedia as a possible assignment for teachers who are skeptical of its usefulness.

You don’t necessarily have to pick one of these models—you may even use elements of both in different parts of your essay—but it’s worth considering them if you struggle to structure your arguments.

Regardless of which approach you take, your essay should always be structured using an introduction , a body , and a conclusion .

Like other academic essays, an argumentative essay begins with an introduction . The introduction serves to capture the reader’s interest, provide background information, present your thesis statement , and (in longer essays) to summarize the structure of the body.

Hover over different parts of the example below to see how a typical introduction works.

The spread of the internet has had a world-changing effect, not least on the world of education. The use of the internet in academic contexts is on the rise, and its role in learning is hotly debated. For many teachers who did not grow up with this technology, its effects seem alarming and potentially harmful. This concern, while understandable, is misguided. The negatives of internet use are outweighed by its critical benefits for students and educators—as a uniquely comprehensive and accessible information source; a means of exposure to and engagement with different perspectives; and a highly flexible learning environment.

The body of an argumentative essay is where you develop your arguments in detail. Here you’ll present evidence, analysis, and reasoning to convince the reader that your thesis statement is true.

In the standard five-paragraph format for short essays, the body takes up three of your five paragraphs. In longer essays, it will be more paragraphs, and might be divided into sections with headings.

Each paragraph covers its own topic, introduced with a topic sentence . Each of these topics must contribute to your overall argument; don’t include irrelevant information.

This example paragraph takes a Rogerian approach: It first acknowledges the merits of the opposing position and then highlights problems with that position.

Hover over different parts of the example to see how a body paragraph is constructed.

A common frustration for teachers is students’ use of Wikipedia as a source in their writing. Its prevalence among students is not exaggerated; a survey found that the vast majority of the students surveyed used Wikipedia (Head & Eisenberg, 2010). An article in The Guardian stresses a common objection to its use: “a reliance on Wikipedia can discourage students from engaging with genuine academic writing” (Coomer, 2013). Teachers are clearly not mistaken in viewing Wikipedia usage as ubiquitous among their students; but the claim that it discourages engagement with academic sources requires further investigation. This point is treated as self-evident by many teachers, but Wikipedia itself explicitly encourages students to look into other sources. Its articles often provide references to academic publications and include warning notes where citations are missing; the site’s own guidelines for research make clear that it should be used as a starting point, emphasizing that users should always “read the references and check whether they really do support what the article says” (“Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia,” 2020). Indeed, for many students, Wikipedia is their first encounter with the concepts of citation and referencing. The use of Wikipedia therefore has a positive side that merits deeper consideration than it often receives.

An argumentative essay ends with a conclusion that summarizes and reflects on the arguments made in the body.

No new arguments or evidence appear here, but in longer essays you may discuss the strengths and weaknesses of your argument and suggest topics for future research. In all conclusions, you should stress the relevance and importance of your argument.

Hover over the following example to see the typical elements of a conclusion.

The internet has had a major positive impact on the world of education; occasional pitfalls aside, its value is evident in numerous applications. The future of teaching lies in the possibilities the internet opens up for communication, research, and interactivity. As the popularity of distance learning shows, students value the flexibility and accessibility offered by digital education, and educators should fully embrace these advantages. The internet’s dangers, real and imaginary, have been documented exhaustively by skeptics, but the internet is here to stay; it is time to focus seriously on its potential for good.

If you want to know more about AI tools , college essays , or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

• Ad hominem fallacy
• Post hoc fallacy
• Appeal to authority fallacy
• False cause fallacy
• Sunk cost fallacy

College essays

• Choosing Essay Topic
• Write a College Essay
• Write a Diversity Essay
• College Essay Format & Structure
• Comparing and Contrasting in an Essay

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

An argumentative essay tends to be a longer essay involving independent research, and aims to make an original argument about a topic. Its thesis statement makes a contentious claim that must be supported in an objective, evidence-based way.

An expository essay also aims to be objective, but it doesn’t have to make an original argument. Rather, it aims to explain something (e.g., a process or idea) in a clear, concise way. Expository essays are often shorter assignments and rely less on research.

At college level, you must properly cite your sources in all essays , research papers , and other academic texts (except exams and in-class exercises).

Add a citation whenever you quote , paraphrase , or summarize information or ideas from a source. You should also give full source details in a bibliography or reference list at the end of your text.

The exact format of your citations depends on which citation style you are instructed to use. The most common styles are APA , MLA , and Chicago .

The majority of the essays written at university are some sort of argumentative essay . Unless otherwise specified, you can assume that the goal of any essay you’re asked to write is argumentative: To convince the reader of your position using evidence and reasoning.

In composition classes you might be given assignments that specifically test your ability to write an argumentative essay. Look out for prompts including instructions like “argue,” “assess,” or “discuss” to see if this is the goal.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2023, July 23). How to Write an Argumentative Essay | Examples & Tips. Scribbr. Retrieved March 25, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-essay/argumentative-essay/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, how to write a thesis statement | 4 steps & examples, how to write topic sentences | 4 steps, examples & purpose, how to write an expository essay, unlimited academic ai-proofreading.

✔ Document error-free in 5minutes ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

8 Effective Strategies to Write Argumentative Essays

In a bustling university town, there lived a student named Alex. Popular for creativity and wit, one challenge seemed insurmountable for Alex– the dreaded argumentative essay!

One gloomy afternoon, as the rain tapped against the window pane, Alex sat at his cluttered desk, staring at a blank document on the computer screen. The assignment loomed large: a 350-600-word argumentative essay on a topic of their choice . With a sigh, he decided to seek help of mentor, Professor Mitchell, who was known for his passion for writing.

Entering Professor Mitchell’s office was like stepping into a treasure of knowledge. Bookshelves lined every wall, faint aroma of old manuscripts in the air and sticky notes over the wall. Alex took a deep breath and knocked on his door.

“Ah, Alex,” Professor Mitchell greeted with a warm smile. “What brings you here today?”

Alex confessed his struggles with the argumentative essay. After hearing his concerns, Professor Mitchell said, “Ah, the argumentative essay! Don’t worry, Let’s take a look at it together.” As he guided Alex to the corner shelf, Alex asked,

Table of Contents

“What is an Argumentative Essay?”

The professor replied, “An argumentative essay is a type of academic writing that presents a clear argument or a firm position on a contentious issue. Unlike other forms of essays, such as descriptive or narrative essays, these essays require you to take a stance, present evidence, and convince your audience of the validity of your viewpoint with supporting evidence. A well-crafted argumentative essay relies on concrete facts and supporting evidence rather than merely expressing the author’s personal opinions . Furthermore, these essays demand comprehensive research on the chosen topic and typically follows a structured format consisting of three primary sections: an introductory paragraph, three body paragraphs, and a concluding paragraph.”

He continued, “Argumentative essays are written in a wide range of subject areas, reflecting their applicability across disciplines. They are written in different subject areas like literature and philosophy, history, science and technology, political science, psychology, economics and so on.

Alex asked,

“When is an Argumentative Essay Written?”

The professor answered, “Argumentative essays are often assigned in academic settings, but they can also be written for various other purposes, such as editorials, opinion pieces, or blog posts. Some situations to write argumentative essays include:

1. Academic assignments

In school or college, teachers may assign argumentative essays as part of coursework. It help students to develop critical thinking and persuasive writing skills .

2. Debates and discussions

Argumentative essays can serve as the basis for debates or discussions in academic or competitive settings. Moreover, they provide a structured way to present and defend your viewpoint.

3. Opinion pieces

Newspapers, magazines, and online publications often feature opinion pieces that present an argument on a current issue or topic to influence public opinion.

4. Policy proposals

In government and policy-related fields, argumentative essays are used to propose and defend specific policy changes or solutions to societal problems.

5. Persuasive speeches

Before delivering a persuasive speech, it’s common to prepare an argumentative essay as a foundation for your presentation.

Regardless of the context, an argumentative essay should present a clear thesis statement , provide evidence and reasoning to support your position, address counterarguments, and conclude with a compelling summary of your main points. The goal is to persuade readers or listeners to accept your viewpoint or at least consider it seriously.”

Handing over a book, the professor continued, “Take a look on the elements or structure of an argumentative essay.”

Elements of an Argumentative Essay

An argumentative essay comprises five essential components:

Claim in argumentative writing is the central argument or viewpoint that the writer aims to establish and defend throughout the essay. A claim must assert your position on an issue and must be arguable. It can guide the entire argument.

2. Evidence

Evidence must consist of factual information, data, examples, or expert opinions that support the claim. Also, it lends credibility by strengthening the writer’s position.

3. Counterarguments

Presenting a counterclaim demonstrates fairness and awareness of alternative perspectives.

4. Rebuttal

After presenting the counterclaim, the writer refutes it by offering counterarguments or providing evidence that weakens the opposing viewpoint. It shows that the writer has considered multiple perspectives and is prepared to defend their position.

The format of an argumentative essay typically follows the structure to ensure clarity and effectiveness in presenting an argument.

How to Write An Argumentative Essay

Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to write an argumentative essay:

1. Introduction

• Begin with a compelling sentence or question to grab the reader’s attention.
• Provide context for the issue, including relevant facts, statistics, or historical background.
• Provide a concise thesis statement to present your position on the topic.

2. Body Paragraphs (usually three or more)

• Start each paragraph with a clear and focused topic sentence that relates to your thesis statement.
• Furthermore, provide evidence and explain the facts, statistics, examples, expert opinions, and quotations from credible sources that supports your thesis.
• Use transition sentences to smoothly move from one point to the next.

3. Counterargument and Rebuttal

• Acknowledge opposing viewpoints or potential objections to your argument.
• Also, address these counterarguments with evidence and explain why they do not weaken your position.

4. Conclusion

• Restate your thesis statement and summarize the key points you’ve made in the body of the essay.
• Leave the reader with a final thought, call to action, or broader implication related to the topic.

5. Citations and References

• Properly cite all the sources you use in your essay using a consistent citation style.
• Also, include a bibliography or works cited at the end of your essay.

6. Formatting and Style

• Follow any specific formatting guidelines provided by your instructor or institution.
• Use a professional and academic tone in your writing and edit your essay to avoid content, spelling and grammar mistakes .

Remember that the specific requirements for formatting an argumentative essay may vary depending on your instructor’s guidelines or the citation style you’re using (e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago). Always check the assignment instructions or style guide for any additional requirements or variations in formatting.

Did you understand what Prof. Mitchell explained Alex? Check it now!

Fill the Details to Check Your Score

Prof. Mitchell continued, “An argumentative essay can adopt various approaches when dealing with opposing perspectives. It may offer a balanced presentation of both sides, providing equal weight to each, or it may advocate more strongly for one side while still acknowledging the existence of opposing views.” As Alex listened carefully to the Professor’s thoughts, his eyes fell on a page with examples of argumentative essay.

Example of an Argumentative Essay

Alex picked the book and read the example. It helped him to understand the concept. Furthermore, he could now connect better to the elements and steps of the essay which Prof. Mitchell had mentioned earlier. Aren’t you keen to know how an argumentative essay should be like? Here is an example of a well-crafted argumentative essay , which was read by Alex. After Alex finished reading the example, the professor turned the page and continued, “Check this page to know the importance of writing an argumentative essay in developing skills of an individual.”

Importance of an Argumentative Essay

After understanding the benefits, Alex was convinced by the ability of the argumentative essays in advocating one’s beliefs and favor the author’s position. Alex asked,

“How are argumentative essays different from the other types?”

Prof. Mitchell answered, “Argumentative essays differ from other types of essays primarily in their purpose, structure, and approach in presenting information. Unlike expository essays, argumentative essays persuade the reader to adopt a particular point of view or take a specific action on a controversial issue. Furthermore, they differ from descriptive essays by not focusing vividly on describing a topic. Also, they are less engaging through storytelling as compared to the narrative essays.

Alex said, “Given the direct and persuasive nature of argumentative essays, can you suggest some strategies to write an effective argumentative essay?

Turning the pages of the book, Prof. Mitchell replied, “Sure! You can check this infographic to get some tips for writing an argumentative essay.”

Effective Strategies to Write an Argumentative Essay

As days turned into weeks, Alex diligently worked on his essay. He researched, gathered evidence, and refined his thesis. It was a long and challenging journey, filled with countless drafts and revisions.

Finally, the day arrived when Alex submitted their essay. As he clicked the “Submit” button, a sense of accomplishment washed over him. He realized that the argumentative essay, while challenging, had improved his critical thinking and transformed him into a more confident writer. Furthermore, Alex received feedback from his professor, a mix of praise and constructive criticism. It was a humbling experience, a reminder that every journey has its obstacles and opportunities for growth.

Frequently Asked Questions

An argumentative essay can be written as follows- 1. Choose a Topic 2. Research and Collect Evidences 3. Develop a Clear Thesis Statement 4. Outline Your Essay- Introduction, Body Paragraphs and Conclusion 5. Revise and Edit 6. Format and Cite Sources 7. Final Review

One must choose a clear, concise and specific statement as a claim. It must be debatable and establish your position. Avoid using ambiguous or unclear while making a claim. To strengthen your claim, address potential counterarguments or opposing viewpoints. Additionally, use persuasive language and rhetoric to make your claim more compelling

Starting an argument essay effectively is crucial to engage your readers and establish the context for your argument. Here’s how you can start an argument essay are: 1. Begin With an Engaging Hook 2. Provide Background Information 3. Present Your Thesis Statement 4. Briefly Outline Your Main 5. Establish Your Credibility

The key features of an argumentative essay are: 1. Clear and Specific Thesis Statement 2. Credible Evidence 3. Counterarguments 4. Structured Body Paragraph 5. Logical Flow 6. Use of Persuasive Techniques 7. Formal Language

An argumentative essay typically consists of the following main parts or sections: 1. Introduction 2. Body Paragraphs 3. Counterargument and Rebuttal 4. Conclusion 5. References (if applicable)

The main purpose of an argumentative essay is to persuade the reader to accept or agree with a particular viewpoint or position on a controversial or debatable topic. In other words, the primary goal of an argumentative essay is to convince the audience that the author's argument or thesis statement is valid, logical, and well-supported by evidence and reasoning.

Great article! The topic is simplified well! Keep up the good work

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• AI in Academia
• Trending Now

Simplifying the Literature Review Journey — A comparative analysis of 6 AI summarization tools

Imagine having to skim through and read mountains of research papers and books, only to…

• Publishing Research
• Reporting Research

How to Optimize Your Research Process: A step-by-step guide

For researchers across disciplines, the path to uncovering novel findings and insights is often filled…

How to Improve Lab Report Writing: Best practices to follow with and without AI-assistance

Imagine you’re a scientist who just made a ground-breaking discovery! You want to share your…

Achieving Research Excellence: Checklist for good research practices

Academia is built on the foundation of trustworthy and high-quality research, supported by the pillars…

Digital Citations: A comprehensive guide to citing of websites in APA, MLA, and CMOS style

In today’s digital age, the internet serves as an invaluable resource for researchers across all…

How to Improve Lab Report Writing: Best practices to follow with and without…

Digital Citations: A comprehensive guide to citing of websites in APA, MLA, and CMOS…

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for…

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic writing?

309 Happiness Essay Topics & Research Questions

What is happiness? This is one of the fundamental questions discussed in philosophy, psychology, religion, sociology, and other sciences. Many research papers and essays explore this phenomenon, and the topic of happiness is an infinite source of inspiration.

If you decide to write a paper on happiness, this is a great chance to learn what happiness is for you. To help you create outstanding writing, our expert team has collected the best happiness essay topics.

🔝 Top 10 Happiness Essay Topics

✍️ happiness essay prompts, ❓ happiness research questions.

• ⚖️ Happiness Argumentative Essay
• ➡️ Essay about Cause and Effect of Happiness

🤩 More Happiness Essay Titles

✏️ writing about happiness: step by step, 🔗 references.

• How to find happiness?
• What are the signs of a happy person?
• The most common myths around happiness.
• The effects of positive psychology on happiness.
• How does happiness change over the lifespan?
• The effects of happiness on physical well-being.
• The most popular theories of happiness.
• The world’s happiest countries.
• The definition of family happiness.
• Can money buy happiness?

Writing an essay on happiness can be tricky since this is a very complex phenomenon. However, if you focus on its specific aspect, you can easily do research and write a well-crafted paper. Consider our ideas on how you can narrow the topic of happiness.

Can Money Buy Happiness: Argumentative Essay Prompt

There’s an ongoing debate about the connections between happiness and money. If you want to investigate this controversial topic in your essay, it’s essential to consider both sides before jumping to conclusions.

Recent research by Kahneman, Killingsworth, and Mellers suggests that people are generally happier as they earn more. More than 30,000 adults aged between 18 and 65 living in the US with different incomes participated in a survey. Researchers measured their happiness at random intervals in the day via an app called Track Your Happiness.

The results revealed that happiness rises with income, even in the high salary range. However, there was a so-called “unhappy minority” — about 20 percent of participants, whose happiness didn’t progress after the person reached a certain income level. You might want to mention this research as an argument in your essay.

What Does Happiness Mean to You: Essay Prompt

There’s no one universal definition of happiness. It differs from person to person. If you’re writing a narrative essay , you can describe what happiness is for you. For more formal assignments, you might want to define happiness from a psychological, philosophical, or religious perspective.

Neuroscientists have demonstrated a great interest over the past years in what happens in our brains when we’re happy. According to neuroscience , happiness is the release of dopamine and serotonin (two types of neurotransmitters) in response to external factors.

While medical studies see happiness as a physiological process, in religion, happiness is sacral. To be precise, biblical scholar Jonathan Pennington defines happiness as something that cannot be found outside since this is a feeling of complete alignment with God and his coming kingdom.

Aristotle Happiness: Essay Prompt

When writing a happiness essay, it’s almost impossible not to mention the Ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle. In one of his works, The Nicomachean Ethics , he presented one of the first happiness theories, which is still relevant today.

According to Aristotle, happiness lies in achieving all the good, such as health, knowledge, wealth, and friends , which leads to the perfection of human nature. Often, happiness requires us to make choices, some of which may be very challenging. For example, the lesser good sometimes promises immediate pleasure, while the greater good requires sacrifice. Aristotle’s theory of happiness remains one of the most influential frameworks and is worth mentioning in your writing.

Prompt for Happiness Is a Choice Essay

Is happiness a choice? This is another complex question you can build your essay around.

To give you some food for thought, psychologist Sonja Lyubomirsky believes that roughly 50 percent of people’s natural happiness level is genetically determined . However, if we work on our happiness consistently, with effort and dedication, we can boost it.

It sounds shocking, but we make around 35,000 conscious decisions daily, each contributing to our happiness. As mentioned earlier, genetics make up roughly half of the happiness levels. The rest depends on our choices, and only 10% of happiness depends on circumstances.

• How do sociological perspectives shed light on factors contributing to happiness?
• How does a cross-disciplinary approach enrich our understanding of happiness?
• What is the impact of relationships on well-being?
• How can happiness be measured subjectively and objectively?
• What does the economics of happiness say about human well-being ?
• How does health contribute to human happiness?
• Does income directly relate to happiness ?
• What are the socio-economic and sociodemographic characteristics of happiness?
• How do classical and neo-classical economic theories conceptualize happiness?
• How do social security and welfare contribute to happiness?
• Can employment affect happiness?
• Who is happier: self-employed or those working for hire ?
• What is the impact of retirement on happiness?
• What is the link between female happiness and marital status?
• Should sacrifices be made for the sake of children’s well-being?
• How do meaningful personal relationships contribute to happiness?
• How does feeling in control of one’s life affect happiness?
• What is the relationship between freedom and happiness ?
• What is the connection between a community’s religious diversity and happiness?
• What is the link between the amount of leisure time and happiness?
• How do outdoor activities affect happiness?
• How does culture affect the way people evaluate happiness?
• How do social networks influence a person’s happiness?
• What is the difference between top-down and bottom-up theories of life satisfaction ?
• What is the impact of regular involvement in sports on happiness?
• How often should one meet with friends to feel happy?
• Is loneliness inversely related to happiness?
• What is the impact of political stability on happiness?
• Is living in a democratic state a determinant of happiness?
• Can economic freedom contribute to one’s happiness levels?
• What are the economic consequences of social happiness?
• Is happiness a fundamental goal of a democratic society ?
• Can happiness be attained by well-organized governmental efforts?
• Happiness versus well-being: are these concepts the same?
• What is the math behind the Gross National Happiness (GNH) index?

Questions about Happiness: Psychology

• What is the impact of family bonds on subjective well-being?
• Psychology Answers Whether Money Buys Happiness .
• Can physical health be a reflection of internal happiness?
• Are life challenges a stimulant of happiness?
• How to Increase Happiness Across All Three Types of Subjective Well-Being .
• Are psychometric scales valid and reliable for measuring happiness?
• What is the role of gratitude in positive psychology?
• Does Your Personality Predict Your Happiness?
• What is the link between gratitude and happiness?
• Is gratitude an alternative to materialism and a tool for attaining happiness?
• Happiness and Academic Success Relationship .
• What is the concept of “good human life” in psychology?
• How does evolutionary psychology explain the origins of happiness?
• How has the concept of happiness evolved across different psychological theories?
• Self-Esteem and Happiness Analysis .
• How does subjective well-being vary across different age groups?
• What is the role of social support in happiness?
• To what extent does genetics determine the baseline happiness level?
• The Happiness Tips and Examples from Real Life .
• How do cultural norms influence the understanding of happiness?
• How does the experience of flow states contribute to happiness?
• How can mindfulness meditations increase happiness?
• Do Stay-at-Home Mothers Exhibit More Indicators of Happiness Than Full-Time Working Mothers ?
• Is there a genuine science of happiness?
• Positive psychology : a new science of happiness or old data in a new package?
• How does the quality of interpersonal relationships affect happiness?
• What cognitive and emotional processes are involved in positive self-appraisal ?
• Generosity Motivating Factors and Wellbeing .
• What are the dimensions of psychological well-being?
• How does the engagement in prosocial behaviors contribute to happiness?
• What is the impact of pursuing extrinsic and intrinsic goals on happiness?
• How does having a life purpose contribute to happiness?
• Spiritual Satisfaction of Basic Psychological Needs .
• Positive psychology coaching: how to learn to help others attain happiness?
• What are the neurobiological correlates of happiness?
• Relationship of Proactive Personality, Financial Planning Behavior, and Life Satisfaction .
• What is the impact of spiritual well-being on happiness?
• Happiness on prescription: do anti-depressants contribute to well-being?
• What personality traits are associated with sustained happiness levels?
• How Does Regular Alcohol Consumption Affect Happiness?
• How do positive psychology interventions at school affect young adults’ happiness?
• What is the link between physical attractiveness and subjective happiness?
• What is the connection between happiness and neuroticism?
• What are the positive psychology teachings of Buddhism ?
• Is yoga a path to mature happiness?
• What is the impact of social comparison on happiness?

Philosophical Questions about Happiness

• How to achieve ultimate happiness?
• The dark side of happiness: what are the wrong ways of pursuing happiness?
• Can there be wrong types of happiness?
• Bhutanese Views on Happiness and Subjective Wellbeing .
• Is happiness egoistic self-indulgence?
• What are the philosophical problems in the study of happiness?
• Is there a link between happiness and compassion?
• Philosophy on Knowledge, Reality, and Good Life .
• Can happiness be universally possible?
• What are the conditions and causes of happiness?
• Relativity of happiness: are lottery winners happier than accident survivors?
• People and the Meaning of Life .
• How do emotional styles contribute to happiness?
• What are the personality traits of a happy person?
• What is Carson’s approach to happiness and satisfaction?
• Philosophical Views and Cultural Influences .
• What is the philosophical stance on happiness and pleasure?
• Can happiness be equated to hedonism?
• How can the pursuit of happiness be analyzed from a utilitarian perspective ?
• What is Benditt’s view of happiness and contentment?
• What were Aristotle’s ideas on the human good?
• What is the difference between classical and contemporary philosophy readings on happiness?
• What is the link between happiness and the meaning of life ?
• What is eudaimonic well-being ?
• What are the features of Diener’s happiness philosophy?
• What is the happiness philosophy of Plato?
• How has happiness research in philosophy progressed over time?
• Money Cannot Bring True Happiness .
• What is the concept of happiness in English sayings?
• Is ancient happiness wisdom applicable to modern times?
• What are the contributions of the world’s famous happiness philosophers?
• What does Islam say about happiness?
• What were John Stuart Mill’s views on the moral and political philosophy of happiness?
• Personal happiness or societal well-being: what should be prioritized?
• How do Foucault’s teachings describe children’s happiness?
• What were Ibn Rushd’s ideas on happiness?
• How have ancient philosophers influenced contemporary debates on the nature of happiness?
• Human Development and Wellbeing .
• How do Eastern and Western approaches to happiness differ?
• How did stoics achieve happiness?
• Is greater happiness for a greater number of people desirable?

⚖️ Happiness Argumentative Essay: Topic Ideas

• Nature vs. nurture : the role of personal choices in achieving happiness.
• Can happiness be increased by technological advancements?
• The Relationship between Money and Happiness .
• Happiness can’t be achieved with anti-depressants.
• Cultivating positive brains is vital for happiness.
• Happiness levels in rich and poor nations .
• Is unhappiness more important in moral terms than happiness?
• Gay Marriages: Isn’t It Time to Allow Them Feel Happy?
• Emotional control plays a vital role in a person’s ability to be happy.
• Happiness is inseparable from pleasure.
• Happiness inevitably leads to human flourishing.
• Are there moral limits to satisfaction?
• Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness .
• There should always be a place for virtue in happiness.
• Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon: examining Lykken and Tellegen’s views.
• Suffering is not mutually exclusive with happiness.
• Technological progress distances people from simple happiness.
• Goodness means different things to people.
• Health, Wealth, and Happiness: Government’s Responsibility .
• Happiness and meaning are two main aspects of a virtuous life.
• Is happiness research relevant for economists?
• Happiness research can offer implications for public policy .
• Happiness: a contribution to an economic revolution.
• How To Achieve Well-being and Enjoyment in Life?
• The paradox of choice: does an abundance of options lead to greater happiness?
• Implications of happiness research for environmental economics .
• Diversity is a vital determinant in modern happiness research.
• Happiness research should be country-specific.
• National Well-Being Before and During the Pandemic .
• A need for more programs for increasing personal happiness.
• Happiness is a relative concept .
• Happiness can prosper only in democracies.
• Collective and individual happiness are interrelated.
• Psychological Well-Being, Self-Efficacy, and Personal Growth .
• Happiness affects mental and physical health in many ways.
• The impact of happiness on achievement.
• Do acts of kindness increase happiness levels?
• The impact of relationships on individual happiness: quantity vs. quality.
• Hedonism vs. eudaimonism: which leads to a more fulfilling life?
• Happiness depends on income, but not exclusively.
• Should maximizing happiness be the government’s social policy ?
• Insights of happiness research for public policy and administration.
• Democracy: Equality of Income and Egalitarianism .
• Human happiness is impossible without favorable social conditions.
• Happiness scales don’t work.
• There’s a tangible degree of utility for human happiness.
• Instagram Use and Psychological Well-Being in Women .
• The significance of adaptation and change in sustaining lasting happiness.
• Happiness is culturally constructed.
• Happiness is not equal to well-being.
• Personal happiness is a principal element of productivity .
• Preventive healthcare can boost people’s well-being and happiness.
• Happiness at work determines general happiness to a large degree.
• Morality plays a huge role in the folk conceptions of happiness.

➡️ Essay about Cause and Effect of Happiness: Topics

• Causes of happiness and unhappiness.
• Culturally specific causes of happiness.
• Physical appearance peculiarities and happiness.
• Individual traits’ impact on perceived happiness.
• Chinese Population: Future Growth and Wellbeing .
• Effect of overestimating and underestimating the importance of happiness on well-being.
• Influence of happiness on one’s body and mind.
• Absence of happiness as a probable cause of mental health disorders .
• Can unhappiness cause cancer?
• The Citizen Science: Impact on Personal Wellbeing .
• Causes of marital unhappiness.
• Effects of chronic stress and unhappiness at work .
• Unhappiness as a cause or effect of loneliness .
• Happiness and success – what’s the cause in this relationship?
• Effect of wealth on happiness.
• Social Justice, Feminism and Well-Being .
• The impact of living in a democracy versus autocracy on people’s perceived happiness.
• Causes of male happiness.
• The influence of consumerism culture on happiness.
• Differences between the causes of male and female happiness.
• Instagram Use and Psychological Well-Being .
• How do the causes and effects of happiness change with age?
• Effects of happiness on the elderly.
• The impact of education level on happiness.
• Causes of happiness in Eastern and Western cultures.
• Can a cause of happiness in one culture be a cause of unhappiness in another one?
• Divorce of Parents and Impact on Child’s Well-Being .
• The influence of the number of children one has on the perceived happiness level.
• Can the pursuit of one’s dream be a cause of happiness?
• Freedom as a cause of happiness.
• The causes of material versus spiritual happiness.
• Video Gaming and Children’s Psychosocial Well-Being .
• Causes of happiness in the workplace.
• Effects of being happy and emotionally stable on academic performance.
• The impact of happiness on the quality of social relationships.
• Can happiness be a source of productivity?
• The Impact of Self-Care on Well-Being among Practicing Psychologists .
• Individually determined causes of happiness and misery.
• Environmental causes of human happiness.
• How do causes of happiness change over time?
• The COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on Social Well-Being .
• Can happiness cause health improvements?
• Moral causes of happiness.
• The effect of positive body image on a person’s happiness.
• How does high self-esteem affect one’s happiness?
• People’s recipes for long-term happiness across cultures.
• Polling Exercise: Self-Fulfillment Over Self-Indulgence .
• Effects of happiness on sociability.
• Happiness causes in single-parent families and double-parent families.
• Causes of happiness among very wealthy people.
• Positive Impact of the Environment on Families .
• Is happiness a stable concept? What causes happiness to change?
• Causes of happiness as seen by feminists .
• Strong friendship bonds as a cause of happiness.
• Psychological wealth as a precondition of happiness.

Pursuit of Happiness Essay Topics

• The unending pursuit of happiness is too commercialized.
• Pursuit of happiness in the movies.
• History: In Search of the American Dream .
• The scientific pursuit of happiness: approaches from different sciences’ perspectives.
• People often get lonely in the pursuit of happiness.
• Self-defeating pursuit of happiness.
• Historical cases of happiness pursuits.
• Materialism and pursuit of happiness.
• Positive Psychology to Lead a Normal Life .
• Experientialism and happiness.
• Time, money, and social connections in the happiness equation.
• Therapy vs. medications in the pursuit of happiness.
• What should a person know to pursue happiness successfully?
• Pursuit of happiness: rural vs. urban perspectives.
• Pursuit of happiness in the Age of Enlightenment .
• How do advances in biotechnology serve the pursuit of happiness?
• Psychobiotics and gut-brain relationships: happiness via nutrition.
• Downshifting for the sake of happiness.
• The impact of race on the choice of happiness pursuit methods.
• Perceived security and pursuit of happiness.
• Experiential consumption in the pursuit of happiness.
• The origins of the hunt for happiness.

Happiness at Work: Topic Ideas

• The benefits of happy employees for the organization.
• The reciprocal relationship between happiness and success.
• Job Satisfaction and Ethical Behavior in Prisons .
• Impact of happiness and optimism on performance .
• Waiting to become happy as the greatest success limitation.
• Police: Issue of Job Satisfaction, Hazards and Risks .
• Cultivation of positive brains for motivation, workplace creativity, and resilience.
• Escaping the cult of the average for the sake of happiness.
• Psychological flexibility is the key to workplace success.
• Human Resource Regulations: Working Hours and Minimum Salary .
• Independence as a cause of happiness at work.
• Work-life balance and happiness.
• Attaining happiness in the knowledge-intensive workplace.
• Approaches to measuring happiness at work.
• Diversity at the Workplace: Problem and Importance .
• Happiness at work: small firms, SMBs, and corporations.
• Cross-cultural correlates of happiness at work.
• The art of staying happy in the workplace.
• Work-Life Balance in the Last Decade .
• The quality of relationships with colleagues as a determinant of happiness.
• Workplace conflict and happiness.
• Happiness and financial/non-financial rewards.
• Positive psychology coaching for staff.
• Impacts of Parenting on Work, Life, and Family .
• Can a person working nine-to-five be really happy?
• Happiness and overtime work.
• Happiness in the educational workplace.
• Steps to Reduce Stress at Work .
• Happy doctors and nurses: can seeing suffering every day align with happiness?
• Anger control and happiness at work.
• Culture of respect and workplace happiness.
• Exploring the Concepts of Productivity and Stress Levels in the Workplace .
• Happiness at work and broader life satisfaction.
• Happiness among emergency workers.
• Happiness and workplace burnout.
• Work Efficiency Impact Factors .
• Can real happiness be attained through work?
• Organizational learning measures for supporting staff happiness.
• Happiness at work and organizational effectiveness.
• Human Factors: Workload and Stress Relationship .
• Are happy employees more committed to their employer?
• Happiness at work and motivation.
• Happy staff and growth mindsets.
• Work-Related Stress and Meditation & Mindfulness .
• How do workers of different ages conceptualize happiness at work?
• Self- and peer-related orientations and happiness at work.

We’ve prepared a small writing guide to help you make a well-structured and captivating happiness essay. Consider the best tips for the introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion .

Happiness Essay Introduction

The introduction is an essential part of an academic essay that presents the topic, provides background information, and catches readers’ attention. Here are the three main elements to include in your introduction.

Body Paragraphs about Happiness

The body is the longest essay part, leading readers through your ideas, arguments, and evidence for your thesis . It’s always divided into two or more paragraphs, each centering around a topic sentence.

A topic sentence describes the paragraph’s central idea and should be expanded with evidence and examples. It also helps to transition smoothly from one section to another.

Remember, we’ve already developed a thesis statement about the connection between happiness and productivity. An example of a happiness topic sentence for this essay is shown below.

To find supporting evidence for your thesis, you can check out major theories, previously done research, statistics , case studies, and articles on the topic.

Happiness Essay Conclusion

The conclusion is a vital part of an essay that reminds readers of your thesis statement and summarizes the main points. Nothing new is presented in this section, but you might want to encourage readers to think deeper about the topic.

The critical requirement for the conclusion is paraphrasing your thesis statement from the introduction. You can keep the keywords but change the rest.

Happiness is a complex phenomenon many writers, poets, and scientists try to explore. If you also want to contribute to happiness discussion and share your ideas, writing an essay is a great opportunity. Consider our top happiness essay topics and writing tips to write a memorable paper.

• Happiness | Harvard Business School
• Happiness | TED
• Research Topic: Happiness | Association for Psychological Science
• Three New Ideas About Happiness and Well-Being | Greater Good Magazine
• Happiness Articles & More | Greater Good Magazine
• Happiness in Psychology and Philosophy | Cogut Institute for the Humanities
• Happiness | UCLA Anderson Review
• The Five Big Questions of Happiness Research | Longevity
• 10 Questions: How Can We Be Happy? | CBS News
• Can Money Buy Happiness? Scientists Say It Can. | The Washington Post

301 Abortion Essay Topics & Research Questions on Laws, Ethical Issues & More

333 football research topics & essay titles.

Argumentative Essay On Happiness

What Is Happiness? Most often today when people are asked what makes them happy, they instantly reply money, clothes and cars. In particular with the younger generation, their concept of happiness Has been fabricated with music videos and false value to materialistic items. Notably not all parts of the world have the same options or opportunities as someone else may have on the opposite side of the planet. Some believe money brings happiness whereas one may see happiness as being with family and friends.

A recent study done by World Happiness Report, developed by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network, analyzing the levels of appiness in 158 countries, which in result are indicators of the countries social development. Just like every culture is different in its own particular ways, happiness to one may be disgraceful to another in a different country. Yet humans always will seek for true happiness in their lifetimes, but will never figure out it’s always been the simple little things in our daily life that bring joy and happiness.

One of the hardest concepts humans will always argue about is what is true happiness. Happiness is one of those words where it has a different meaning to everyone. You can feel it when your happy by emotions of pride, joy and love. Yet to understand its causes and effects is a subject that was researched well by Ruut Veenhoven who once said, “Happiness is conceived as the overall appreciation of one’s life as a whole”. The concepts of happiness around the globe over generations has changed very much over the past 50 years.

Happiness is the feeling of being satisfied, yet it is not the meaning that has changed but the desires a human requires to Keep their satisfaction. However, in countries like North Korea, Somalia, and so on, they aintain repressive laws which strip them of their most basic god given rights from expressing views to assembling peacefully for speaking their mind. Yet in Canada we are allowed to gather around in a peaceful manner to protest our beliefs and thoughts at any time, the same cannot be said about other regions of the globe.

All humans require happiness to live a long and healthy lifestyle, so we all in some way or another have similar requirements that makes us Happy. Happiness has two sides to it, the subjective and objective Meanings, expressed by Rutt Veenhoven. Feeling happy about your life and everything you have is the subjective sense Of happiness due to one’s state of mind, further on objective happiness is how good the living conditions are and also having peace and freedom.

In an article done by the Forbes, it has been said that America, land of freedom and opportunity only came at 10th in the rankings of World’s Happiest Countries. A country where the whole world is well aware of its caliber yet it falls short to a country on the opposite side of the world, Denmark. For the simple fact that each income per person is an astonishing $57,000 a year. This creates a whole different objective sense of happiness, where it would ssist with making your own path you’d like to achieve in life.

So does that mean that money is the only reason that makes Denmark happy? In a sense yes, but money does also create more opportunity to provide for your family or invest in future establishments. Even though Denmark creates more of a income for the families who live there, the similarities is that America and Denmark both have Freedom to do as they please. People in both countries have the same opportunity to live a happy life. A question that has always been asked in curiosity, is, does happiness vary across Different cultures?

In some cultures, mostly non-western cultures according to Dan Weijers from his article called Journal Of Happiness Study, states happiness in non-western parts of the World, is a less valued emotion compared to in America or Canada. Researchers from The University of Wellington in New Zealand say that being raised in a culture where happiness Is not encouraged, creates a feeling of voidness. Yet if you carefully examine Western Civilization it is clear to see that humans attempt to increase their personal happiness so that they could forget about anything negative.

It is such a part of everyone’s life to be a happy camper that not showing signs of joy, raises concern of something wrong. In contrast with for example in East Asia where the people are told to believe that it is inappropriate to show emotions of joy. In some cases it is said that strong beliefs in karma and others viewing you as selfish for your thoughts, that you will be cursed with myths of supernatural beings that resent your current happiness and might punish you. There are many factors that affect happiness in a whole, with this in mind, any of these factors can be a negative or positive mpact.

Happiness in a society is very critical to a person’s social life and overall appreciation for being alive. If a society is happy, that will create an atmosphere for those who are friendly and open to coincide with one another to have a happy social life, opposite for a society that has poor social development. It is nearly impossible to be happy in an unhappy environment, that is why this is an important necessary factor for what true happiness is. That being said, we still as one, face disasters we all must encounter which in turn affects a society’s happiness.

From hanges in climate, poverty, increase in crime, hunger, and so many more issues that a strong community or society would be able to tackle. Fatih Muslu from her book, Strong Society Vs Weak Society, states that countries with strong states in power usually over power the weaker societies declining them to flourish into a society with freedom and choice. For example the weak power of democratic ways in Arab is so bad that it is one of the world’s most discussed topics. Muslu also states that social scientists have researched in depth to figure out that in middle eastern regions, “Middle East is considered culturally

More Essays

• Definition Of Happiness Essay
• Aristotle’s Essay On Happiness
• Less Stuff More Happiness Analysis Essay
• The Pursuit Of Happiness Essay
• Essay about Epicuruss Philosophy Of Happiness
• Happiness Definition Essay
• Paradox Of Happiness Essay
• Definition Essay On Happiness
• The Pursuit Of Happiness In Aristotles Nicomachean Ethics Essay
• The Pursuit Of Happiness In Rasselas The Happy Valley Essay

Happy Lives and the Highest Good: An Essay on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics

1 Responses

Joseph Almeida , Franciscan University of Steubenville. [email protected]

The fundamental subject of the Nicomachean Ethics is human happiness, i.e., eudaimonia . From the very beginning of the treatise Aristotle links happiness with the ends of human action and therefore also with human goodness. He proposes early on that finality and self-sufficiency are two defining features of happiness. However, he is discontent with the generality of this determination and pushes the argument to greater specificity so that by Book I chapter 7 he is able to articulate an initial, more particular, and more substantive conclusion to the question which concerns him. Eudaimonia , as it turns out, is rational activity of the soul in accordance with virtue, i.e., arete , or excellence. The continuation of his argument in Books II through VI, as amplified by Books VIII and IX, appear, almost without exception, to indicate that the relevant rational activity is practical. The virtue or excellence of this practical intellect is phronesis , or practical wisdom, which operates in connection with the moral virtues and is ordered, paradigmatically, to the political life. Thus far, then, Aristotle’s argument indicates that eudaimonia is virtue in the practical life so understood. Surprisingly, however, as Lear emphasizes in the very beginning of her book, Aristotle shifts his focus in NE Book X from the practical to the speculative or theoretical intellect. In chapter 7 thereof he argues that the most final human happiness is the noetic function of theoria , i.e., the philosophic contemplation of truth, and that to this intellectual activity the life of political virtue stands secondary. It is this tension in Aristotle’s treatment of human happiness that is, at its broadest level, the subject of L.’s book.

More particularly, L. defends a monistic version of philosophic contemplation as ultimate human happiness. Thus her book is the newest addition to a longstanding debate among Aristotelian scholars between monistic and inclusivist interpretations of NE . To the inclusivist eudaimonia is essentially a class of human goods of sufficient intrinsic value to be regarded as constituents of human happiness. To the monist, on the other hand, eudaimonia is not a class of goods but rather one or more independent activities, standing in some form or another as the final cause of other relevant human goods. L.’s own position is, in essence and in outline, that practical rationality, exhibited in the activities of moral virtue is 1) an end in itself, but also 2) ultimately choice-worthy for the sake of philosophic contemplation. Contemplation, therefore, can be understood as the only human good choice-worthy for itself alone and not for the sake of anything else and thus as Aristotle’s monistic eudaimonia . The problem is how practical rationality in general and the acts of moral virtue in particular can be ordered to contemplation as the final and monistic human end, if they are also ends in themselves. This is what L. calls the problem of mid-level ends. What is new in her approach is the nature of the ordering between the life of moral virtue and the contemplative life of philosophy. In her view the activities of moral virtue are approximations of the proper activity of contemplation. She defines the approximation in relation to truth as the object of rational capacity taken in its totality, both practical and theoretical. L. in a sense coins this word “approximation” for the purpose of her argument, and the essential integrity of her account stands or falls with her development of this idea.

Aristotle’s texts are somewhat special in the classical corpus (as are other Greek philosophical writings of similar originality and depth) because they present some issues which are properly the province of the professional classicist and others which are more properly the province of the professional philosopher. Thus one can usefully divide approaches to Aristotle according to this distinction. L.’s work aligns significantly in the direction of the purely philosophical. While L. describes her work as “an interpretation of the Nicomachean Ethics ” (p. 5) her hermeneutics is finally at the service of her philosophic project, as she herself reveals in moments of more candid admission: for example: “Aristotle never explicitly says that excellent practical reasoning is good because its essence is defined with reference to wise contemplation” (p. 90).

L. apportions her argument into eight chapters. In chapter 1 she provides a general introduction. In chapter 2 she attempts to distinguish Aristotle’s particular understanding of teleology as applied to the finality of eudaimonia . In chapter 3 she focuses on self-sufficiency, interpreting it as a function of finality. In chapter 4 she develops the notion of approximation as a general solution to the problem of mid-level ends. Chapter 5 is the heart of her argument: there she applies her theory of approximation to the practical rationality of moral virtue. In chapter 6 she discusses the relation to practical rationality of to kalon , translated throughout as “the fine.” In chapter 7 she applies the theory of approximation to the particular virtues of courage, temperance, and greatness of soul. And finally, in chapter 8 she comes back to philosophic contemplation and pragmatic approximation through the query why should a philosopher also choose the moral life. L.’s argument is full, intricate, and, I think it fair to say, in places controversial. My procedure here will be to describe in clear and brief summaries the central proposal of each chapter, with some general comments about her overall project reserved for final remarks.

After her introduction L. develops in chapter 2 what she sees as the correct understanding in NE of the conception of acting for an end. She sets her view against the inclusivists’ misunderstanding, as she sees it, of Aristotle’s ethical teleology (p. 3). Notwithstanding that the bulk of NE pertains to human choice, L.’s position is that for Aristotle human action aims not so much at an object of desire as at a goal that functions as a “normative standard” (p. 12) defining the final fulfillment of human activity and therefore also its precise and particular good (p.13). L. looks to Aristotle’s natural philosophy for the paradigm of final causality. In natural processes Aristotle sees the “essence or form” of a natural entity as that which defines the proper specifications and final completion of natural motion. Thus essence or form is the end of natural motion and as such determines its value and defines its proper goodness. L. applies this conception of teleology to several passages in NE that describe happiness as the convergence of the various areas of human good (pp. 21 ff.) and as the most hierarchical of ends (pp. 23 ff.). From these premises she constructs a monistic interpretation of Aristotle’s argument wherein eudaimonia becomes the normative standard of all human action determining both its proper limits and final fulfillment. At the end of this first chapter L. reinforces her teleological interpretation by: 1) suggesting that all terminology of desire in NE be construed normatively, e.g. haireta understood to mean “choice-worthy not “chosen” (pp. 34 ff.); 2) arguing that the internal and external ends of mid-level activities cannot be explained as either coinciding by chance (pp. 37 ff.) or exhibiting separate functions, e.g., one determining the value of the mid-level activity and another determining its limitation (pp. 38 ff.); and 3) dismissing Akrill’s well-known idea that mid-level activities are instrumental to eudaimonia precisely because they are valuable in their own right as ends of human action.

In chapter 3 L. accounts for the self-sufficiency of happiness in terms of its finality. She rejects explicitly the inclusivist’s interpretation that self-sufficiency means the inclusion within “happiness” of all or most other significant human goods (p. 48); indeed, she discusses Plato’s Philebus to highlight Aristotle’s departure from his master on this point. For L. happiness is an organizing principle that determines the sufficiency of all goods chosen for its sake. In this way self-sufficiency is a function of the normative aspect of the finality of eudaimonia . Thus: “A self-sufficient final cause makes the network [leading to it] lack nothing further [emphasis hers] for its desirability” (p. 52). All, or at least most, goods ordinarily thought to be significantly desirable, i.e., essential to a happy life, must be desirable because happiness is their final cause. A corollary of her conception is that it is no contradiction to the notion of self-sufficiency for one or more significantly desirable goods to be lacking from the happy life. L. braces against the tempting objection that her account opens an inclusivist door reintroducing desire to the causality of action by emphasizing that her version of self-sufficiency is a form of objective “teleological subordination” (p. 59).

Chapters 4 and 5 contain the core of L.’s fundamental thesis. First in chapter 4 she argues that mid-level ends can both be choice-worthy for their own sakes and also choice-worthy for the sake of a more final end by virtue of approximating the proper activities of that end. Despite a long prefatory attempt to find forms of approximation in the final causality of Aristotle’s Prime Mover, 1 the crux of her argument involves again an application of Aristotle’s natural philosophy. In De Anima (415a25-b7) Aristotle explains reproduction as an animal’s attempt to “participate” in the eternal and divine in the only way possible for it. In On Generation and Corruption (337a1-7) he speaks of coming to be and passing away as an imitation of divine circular motion. L.’s analysis merges all distinctions between participation and imitation into the general modality which she calls “approximation” (p. 85). In a very brief paragraph (p. 86) she adds a second premise critical to her project that approximating an intrinsically valuable end makes the approximation also an end in itself. Then in chapter 5 she argues more particularly that the rational activity of practical intellect in the life of moral virtue, while an end in itself, is also an approximation of theoretical rationality. Because it is such an approximation, it is therefore also choice-worthy for the sake of the more perfect end of philosophic contemplation. The connections, simplified, are as follows: truth and precision are proper functions of both practical and theoretical reasoning; theoretical intellect, however, both in terms of its precision and in terms of its proper object, grasps truth in a more perfect way ( cf . p. 114); therefore, practical rationality is an approximation of “contemplative truthfulness … as a target of emulation” (p. 122). Thus, in her view, approximation allows for the ordering of practical rationality to theoretical rationality in graduated levels of finality, mid-level to supreme.

In chapters 6 and 7 L. reaches the moral virtues themselves as a testing ground of her theory of approximation. She argues first in chapter 6 that moral action is an end in itself because it is kalon or fine. In her analysis this means that moral choice of the intermediate is 1) beautiful because it is ordered, symmetric, and bounded and 2) visibly determined by the final and highest human end of philosophic contemplation. This is so because the act of practical rationality in moral choice is an approximation of the rationality of contemplation. She intends this proposition as an objective notion because, for her, moral agents need not be conscious of the relation of their actions to contemplation; indeed, only the moral agent who is also a philosopher will ever be actually and fully conscious of this relationship (p. 132). Then in chapter 7 L. considers the particular moral virtues of courage, temperance, and greatness of soul. In the case of courage — let this suffice for an example — L. weaves connections from death in battle to philosophic contemplation. Acts of courage are ordered to the preservation of the good of political freedom. When the moral agent chooses death in battle for the sake of this particular good, he exhibits a commitment to its best use which is the life of leisure. Since the highest and best use of leisure is philosophic contemplation, the courageous act is an objective and visible, if not conscious, commitment to contemplation as the highest and best use of the very life which courage aims at preserving. Indeed, literally for L., “the life of contemplation is what makes courageous actions worth undertaking” (p. 160) and “we can conclude, although Aristotle does not do so in his discussion … that the activity of courage is ultimately choiceworthy for the sake of contemplation” (p. 162).

In her final chapter L. examines from a slightly different perspective the relationship between the life of practical rationality in its paradigmatically political form and the more divine-like life of philosophic contemplation. Through a reading of NE Book X she attempts to answer the question why the philosopher, who is already committed to the divine life of contemplation, should choose also to live a moral life. After all Aristotle assigns this life in Book X only a secondary status. L. contends that the political life is also divine and as such worthy of the philosopher’s choice. She rejects all dualistic notions of the human being as partly political and partly philosophic. She also rejects any notion that happiness consists in a simple maximization of contemplation. Rather the key to a full monistic happiness is the teleological relationship between practical and contemplative rationality. The activity of intellect in the moral choices of political life approximates the intellection of contemplation. In this light L. holds that the activity of practical rationality is a kind of contemplation, a theoria tis as she calls it (p. 205). To act morally in this highest political sense is in L.’s view consistent with the organization of one’s entire life toward contemplation. The philosopher himself knows this teleological reality better than any, and in those instances when practical action is inevitable, it is the morally virtuous choice which maintains his disposition to the life of contemplation. In this sense the two lives, the life of politics and the life of philosophy, are the modalities by which the political animal best and most fully honors the divine life of nous in himself.

At the center of L.’s project, various meandering musings notwithstanding, is the application of Aristotle’s scheme of final causality in natural philosophy to his ethical thinking. It is through such an application that L. approaches the important relationship in NE expressed in the phrase “that for the sake of which.” This transference raises many technical questions, not the least of which is the removal of awareness from final ethical causality. One clear and clearly intended consequence of L.’s project is that the moral agent as such pursues his ultimate human happiness unconsciously. Thus she commits herself to the unusual, if not nonsensical proposition that the soldier who takes a bullet pro patria does so, ultimately, but without the slightest inkling, for the sake of the philosophic life. That the philosopher alone is fully aware of his true human purpose seems a counsel of despair for the vast majority of the human race. Problems of this sort are always the wedge between the monist and the inclusivist. For this reason, while L.’s reading of NE is extremely clever, it is doubtful whether it will convert committed inclusivits or others who wish to connect awareness with meaningful human action. However, the cleverness is precisely the value of her work. It is genuine philosophizing prompted by significant problems in an important text and will cause readers to have to consider again their own thinking in order to address adequately her more provocative points. Accordingly, the book is worth the considerable effort it will take to give it a fair and thorough reading.

[[For a response to this review by Gabriel Richardson Lear, please see BMCR 2004.07.34 .]]

1 . In an Appendix on Plato’s view of love in the Symposium L. continues the line of thought begun with reference to Aristotle’s Prime Mover. She tries to show that approximation is also at play in Diotima’s account of the love of the beautiful. The connection in her mind seems to be an approach to divine final causality which Aristotle first learnt from Plato. Otherwise L.’s treatment is peripheral to the proof of her main thesis.

Happiness Essay

Our activity

Finished orders

Professional writers

Writers online now

Operators are online

Of 5 average writers' score

While learning, there are times you will encounter the most peculiar types of assignments and exams, and not because they are weird but mostly because they are personal. One of those moments will demand you to know how to write a happiness essay. The incredible thing about such topics is their flexibility in terms of creativity and vocabulary. Writing such an article will take you on a spiritual journey and will help you discover more on the social aspects of life than any school could teach you. The important thing when writing any essay is to put your effort into it no matter how demanding it can be.

A quick rundown on happiness essays is that we have all encountered moments of highs and lows in our lives. We are never pleased all the time, and yet we can learn to be. You will discover more about true happiness researching materials from philosophers, psychologists, and authors from all around the world. We know the task may be tedious and may be out of your abilities for now. However, in good time, you will learn all there is to know on writing happiness essays.

We have taken the liberty to highlight the crucial guidelines that will set you apart as an excellent student as you write a short essay about happiness in life. You will learn how to explore controversial statements such as money can’t buy happiness in great detail. Here is the blueprint for your perfect essay.

Choosing the Topic

Before beginning to write your paper, follow the instructions on the essay. This prompt from your teacher can be the very difference between a pass and a fail. The prompt will specify on word count, format and perhaps even allocate a topic for your essay. Be sure to ask for help understanding the instructions if in doubt. Sometimes, the teacher will demand creativity by letting you choose the topic for discussion under the happiness essay.

A great way to choose a topic is self-reflection and by meditating on it. The question will be something you are passionate to write about and explore further with your audience. People face a lot of fears and anxieties in life, and they’ll understand your topic better if it resonates with them. A good subject clicks with the audience or is personal to the writer. It may have been a heartbreak, the death of a loved one or even the importance of therapy. All these may be put under a happiness essay because they speak on what happens when one is happy or when one is not happy. You may write about something that makes many people happy, an example being how pets prolong the life of their owners. It should be a creative guess, something your teacher or audience may have never read before.

Happiness essays are a fascinating topic and maybe convenient to earn you good grades. People are curious to know more about it will pay great attention if you’re creative from the start to the finish line.

Writing the Thesis Statements

The thesis statement is the core generator of your spaceship. The heart of your paper that breathes life into it. This is because it should give the reader a general idea of what your paper purposes to do and explain. It is vital to the paper and should be executed well enough to start your essay with a bang.

The topic of your paper is based on a subjective sentiment that is happiness is different to many people. Thus, you should make your thesis statement something that is disputable and is your own opinion. It is not a research paper. Therefore you won’t have to argue for a particular point if it does not apply to anyone. Be objective and straight to the point when stating your main idea. Preferably, place it at the end of your introduction paragraph for a smooth transition to the main body paragraphs.

There are a few different ways of stating the main idea of your happiness essay, and here they are. First, you may choose to use phrases that show a cause and effect relationship on the topic. An example would be, “Whenever people lose a loved one, it is often difficult to express happiness even amidst friends.” Thus, either use happiness as the subject or the object, relating the thesis with happiness on the frontline. Support your thesis statement with some information. Reclassify your data into two groups. One should be arguing for the factor that affects happiness, and the other group should be the effects it has on happiness. Or the first group should have details supporting the causes of happiness and the other supporting the impact happiness has on an individual. Give citations from material researched from psychologists, philosopher, professor, and even online sites.

Check Our Samples

Argumentative Essay

New Technology: Beneficial or Dangerous?

Academic level: Bachelor

Subject: Communication

Paper format: MLA

Corporate Social Responsibility

Subject: Management

Paper format: Harvard

Master’s Prepared Nurse Interview

Academic level: Master

Paper format: APA

Research Paper

The Maya Tribe

Academic level: Undergraduate

Subject: History

Sample Thesis Statements on Happiness

Wealth is not the key to a happy life as we would not need therapy or rich people.

The paycheck should not determine happiness from our workplaces but rather from how we are respected and appreciated there.

Happy marriages are not based on love, wealth, or sex but rather on a good friendship, trust, and respect.

Our happiness should not be measured by our wealth but by our self-progress and the achievement of our goals.

Contentment is the doorway to true happiness because coveting what we don’t have is as bad a not appreciating what we do have at the moment.

The pursuit of happiness is a fundamental human right, as stated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of independence. It should, therefore, be as important to us as breathing purified air.

How to Write and Summarize the Essay

There’s a way that makes your conclusion easy and remarkable at first glance.

Create an outline for your essay that makes it easier to write on the first draft.

Remember to proofread your document for any grammar and spelling errors.

Follow the prompt provided by your teacher. These are the instructions that will guide you when writing your paper.

Follow the structure of a good essay and adhere to the rules of Literature. Make your first paragraph the introduction that includes the thesis statement. The main body paragraphs should legitimize your thesis statement and should consist of illustrations and examples. A minimum of 3 and a maximum of 5 sections should do.

Write about things that are close to your heart. That way you won’t mess up.

Helpful Pointers for Crafting a Happiness Essay

Once you’ve determined the topic worth discussion, there are a few more helpful tips that you need to know before embarking on the quest before you. Writing a short essay about happiness has never been easier than this.

Pick a group of people with similar characteristics and discuss how the topic is related to the. For example, ‘How depression may have set into the relatives of the people who died in the 9/11 attack.’ Or you could pick an individual, including yourself and talk more about how you or they define happiness. An example would be,’ How Lexi my pet snake changed my life when I had leukemia.’

Juggle with bright ideas on how happiness is defined and what are its effects. Cover most of your ground from having necessities to appreciating the little things in life. Good research will also be of help in documenting how different groups, cultures, and people view happiness and experience it.

Create an outline with your main points explaining the main idea from your introduction paragraph . Use a bubble map to sketch out these ideas into cardinal points.

Be creative within your main body paragraphs. Maturely express yourself and your ideas, giving reasons for the thesis statement in each paragraph. The topic sentence of each paragraph should be an explanation of the thesis statement. Follow through with a logical explanation that supports your opinion. The more creative you get, the better your grades, and the more interested your essay would be.

When writing your conclusion, be sure to highlight the most critical points and restate your thesis statement for emphasis. Make a summary of the causes and effects of happiness and give an inspiring call to action for your readers. An example would be to say, ‘Happiness is a state of mind, so don’t forget to meditate every day.”

Use linking phrases and words that connect illustrations to the thesis statement or statements to each other in a synchronized way. The level of harmony in your paper should be creative and flow smoothly throughout the article. Let the readers connect to the story magically without having to use much of their thinking. They should be able to meditate on your words afterward rather than struggle to get through your paper.

Do not overextend yourself beyond the necessary word limit that is required of you simply because you may have made a mistake in understanding the instructions. This will make you have to do the task again. Save yourself the pain of a low grade by adhering to the given rules and composing a quality paper that answers the question on the teacher’s mind. High school papers are meant to see if you are learning well and sticking to instructions is one way they gauge your intellect. So don’t give them a chance to fail you as you write your essay about happiness in life.

Hot to Be Rid of Distractions as You Write You Essays about Happiness

It is fairly wise to write your happiness essay while you’re happy. And quite often we are stimulated by external forces that won’t give us a moment’s peace. Even as we conjure our brilliant happiness definition essay, the pursuit of happiness essay, or just talking about how money can’t buy happiness. And often we assume the piece until the deadline is close before we jump into a hurried frenzy to get it out of the way.

Well, this is not an excellent way to earn a perfect grade. If you procrastinate a lot, chances are you might continue this habit for a very long time. However, kudos to you if control comes natural to you and you do tasks on time. Use wise tactics such as switching off your phone or putting it on airplane mode and eating early before doing your assignment. Forget Netflix or that game that you so desperately need to watch. Come to terms with the fact that the task is essential and will earn you good grades.

Examples of Happiness Essays

Below are four examples of well-crafted essays about happiness. The first is can money buy happiness essay, and the second is the happiness definition essay, the third is the pursuit of happiness essay, and the fourth is the essay about happiness in life. All these essays are essays about happiness and are fantastic examples.

Can Money Buy Happiness Essay?

The abstract concept of happiness has been a contentious topic for the longest time. For many, the journey towards happiness is higher than the destination of happiness. Every single person has their sources of joy. Others draw it from their achievements, others from seeing their fellow man becoming successful while other choices see controversial. Happiness is a state of mind more often than not. It is usually not the expression of joy or laughter, as some might think. Studies on depression have shown that even sad people mask generally their emotions with these outward expressions of happiness. The source of happiness has different foundations based on biology, physiology, religion, and psychology of the human psyche. This essay works to explore more on the economic aspect of this profoundly puzzling topic.

The very thought of happiness may trigger superficial expectations of a stable life. It may be idealized as the American dream of an excellent suburban home. A picket fence and children playing freely around the house while the parents have a good talk in the living room. The reality is, money cannot buy all the necessary components that will make up a delighted individual. A Polish researcher once identified the four essential values for happiness. The first is a state of profound joy, possession of the best goods, pure luck, and a sense of self-actualization with life satisfaction.

It is common knowledge that humanity is economically classed into some different categories. We have the upper class, the middle class, and the lower class citizens. So does this make any class happier than the other? Obviously, as with any other philosophical question, the answer lies more in-depth than the surface. Hunger, disaster, and suffering may be a fate of the poor. But in some outcomes, the rich also have their version of this, and their money does not make them any happier. Happiness may not be fully explained by one’s pleasure and prosperity, seeing that all humans go through stages of highs and lows. Happiness is an immaterial possession, and even the lowest class of citizens may find pleasure in such commonplace things as life and contentment.

Then arises the question of why even the richest people still work. It’s not about maintaining their billionaire statuses but rather for the feeling of self-actualization. The work we put ourselves to do may be the source of our greatest happiness and satisfaction. What’s more, people who are most motivated to work because of money are usually very problematic at work and fatigued by the end of the day.

In all honesty, happiness can only be truly understood and felt by having moments of deep sadness and dissatisfaction. Our ability to overcome these dark moments is what distinguishes happiness from deep depressive states. The pleasure we feel after overcoming a difficult task, healing from a significant illness, or being promoted after years of hard toil are all ways we can experience true satisfaction. Money may buy away our moments of sadness, but it cannot buy happiness.

Happiness Definition Essay

Happiness is a versatile and multifaceted subject worth exploring and defining. Is it perhaps the things money can buy or is it the pleasure we get from the things we treasure. I mostly believe that happiness is a personal affair that can be defined in different ways. In most cases, humans can’t pick out the moments of happiness because we think it is based on material things and the opinions of others. Especially in the age of social media where happiness is mediated by the number of likes and comments on the things we post to our accounts. Whatever the case, happiness is evasive and can change definitions depending on our expectations and our long term goals.

However, most people agree that happiness is an overwhelming emotion that is generated from a fate of well-being or fulfillment. It is the culmination of your thoughts, feelings, achievements, wealth, spirituality, philosophies, and relationships in your life. Somehow, different people may have common definitions of happiness. A great example is that we all love going to amusement parks, riding rollercoasters, going to the movies, and playing with children or pets in the park. These are all commonplace activities that fill us with a sense of fulfillment by human interaction and giving access to simple pleasures. These feelings fill our body with feel-good hormones such as adrenaline, oxytocin, serotonin ad dopamine that wash over us with an overwhelming wave of happiness. Whenever we feel low, these activities return us to our better, happier state of mind.

By another definition, happiness is fleeting and involves momentary feelings of pleasure. Comics and stand-up comedians have learned the value of telling jokes as they help people relate to the dark moments in a happier way. People laugh for different reasons such as funny pranks, well-written jokes, and moments of stimulating social interaction and to alleviate anxiety in public places. Therefore, laughter can be one of the more straightforward definitions of happiness.

Achievements in our lives give us a general sense of joy and maybe equated to real happiness. Whether they are promoted, finally go out on a date or learn to ride a bike, people usually feel happy about these things. Achievements define an improvement of our social standing or personal progress, and it is a way to be satisfied.

Sometimes, happiness is about being content with whatever is happening in your life. It means being happy and jovial without any real achievement or wealth of any form. This may be the actual form of happiness as it is not an outward emotion but based on a feeling of satisfaction with who you are at that point in time. Inner peace is the most accurate definition of lasting happiness.

Lastly, happiness can be found in having material wealth. This does not go against any moral laws and should be encouraged as it promotes hard work, patience, and even contentment with what you have achieved so far. When all is said and done, happiness is satisfying your desires in the way that you feel is best.

Pursuit of Happiness Essay

America is founded on a system that allows their citizens to pursue achievement and happiness with freedom and honor. The founding father, Thomas Jefferson famously included the phrase ‘pursuit of happiness’ in the U.S. Declaration of independence as a human right. By that definition, happiness is, therefore, a fundamental truth and a human right that should be pursued until one’s dying breath.

Most philosophers and scientists have agreed that it is human nature to follow their heart’s desires and aim to achieve them. This free will and independence is what makes happiness unique to each person and redefines happiness from every person’s perspective. The truth is that most human inventions and discoveries have been founded on the idea that humanity could avoid particular misfortunes. An example would be vaccinations in the field of medicine, and even space exploration is meant to find new homes for humanity in case Earth becomes uninhabitable.

Happiness is based on evolution, and once we have a sense of achievement, most people seek a higher state of that feeling. An example would be buying a new pair of shoe, then matching it up with some good socks and hen a new tie plus a striking blazer and finally a new car for yourself. With every achievement, our standards of happiness keep evolving and improving. This is what defines the pursuit of happiness and causes either contentment or social pressure to achieve something big. Generally, people will know when they feel happy or when they are dissatisfied with the direction of their life and their achievements.

Seeing that happiness is a state of mind, a person must always convince themselves to be happy despite the troubles they might be facing. You must expect and affirm your happiness each day for it is as visible yet elusive as smoke. Most people do this by meditating, doing yoga, exercising, reciting positive affirmations, and assessing their state of mind constantly. These are all healthy ways of coping with the constant pressure of pursuing material wealth, relationships, and achievements despite the mishaps that always occur. They help one to appreciate and celebrate little to considerable achievements in their lives and encourage a spirit of contentment.

An accurate way of pursuing happiness is by doing t others as we wish done unto us. Showing kindness, forgiveness, and other complementary virtues all give us a sense of peace and joy. These actions help us to be grateful and appreciate the little things in life. We should lose our focus on the negativity that is accompanied by the pursuit of happiness. Some of these things include; pending bills, car loans, mortgages, relationship issues, and even health issues. The ore we focus on them, the more they feed away on our happiness. As a ritual, we should meditate on the things that give us happiness and even share them with our friends and family.

In conclusion, the pursuit of happiness is a right that we get to enjoy at our pleasure. The truth is, we can achieve happiness and enjoy it every single day. Happiness is not an end goal, but the culmination of our thoughts and attitudes towards life’s crazy cycles of joy and sadness. Make it a habit to be grateful every day and stay positive.

Essay about Happiness in Life

Legends and fairy tale stories of fiction usually have a particular n formula that leaves the reader satisfied at the end. It is when the frog finally becomes a prince, when the dragon is slain, went the prince rescues and marries a princess and when the kingdom is restored to its true glory. The line is usually too famous to even repeat, but here it goes, “And they lived happily ever after.” It defines one of humanity’s greatest pursuit and forms an excellent line for ending stories.

Happiness is a psychological state. It has been sought after by monks, philosophers, and scientists from all around the world. But is there a formula or secret to happiness that we do not know about? I think not, simply because we all can find joy wherever we are in the stations of our lives.

It is a big world that has been existent before since any of us was here. The confusion is imminent when we are faced with advertisements and easy-going options for finding happiness. Therefore, it is no one’s fault when happiness becomes an illusion too hard to capture in their hands. It almost seems impossible to be simply happy and content with the blessings that they already have. Anyone willing to find they can always discover the solution for this. One should always stay motivated despite any challenges they face because everyone is facing some form of mishap to another. No one is perfect in this big bad wolf world.

The only way to achieve happiness is to be content with the environment we find ourselves in. Be grateful for the people in your life, the friends keeping you company and the family that is more loyal to you than you might notice. Pick out a hobby or visit amusement parks and movie theatres for an enjoyable time. Find whatever gives you purpose and pursue it without restrictions and permission.

Be willing to build happy relationships and friendships based on similar characteristics and mutual love from each other. Whatever relationship you might find yourself in, know your worth and leave whenever it becomes too toxic to bear. This is because close relationships might cause us depression and anxiety in the long run. Simply put, your loneliness can be very detrimental to your health, and you should find the birds of your feather and happily flock together. Also, make time for your loved ones, even with busy schedules and jobs. Your employment should not drag the happiness out of your life but should be a fountain of happiness as you achieve the goals and dreams of your youth.

Stay positive throughout your day and find positive affirmations that keep you connected to your inner strengths. Every single thought we have either eats away on our happiness or gives us a positive spin on life. Reinforce your joy with a purpose and satisfaction that is not based on the wealth you have or the way you are but the way you want to feel.

Nothing is as good as tackling a giant to the floor and cutting its head off. And that’s what we have done today as we explored the fantastic world of happiness essays. The instructions and guidelines provided are simple enough to answer all your problems and provided more solutions than one. We hope that this article will be of great help in your essay writing endeavors and that you will have an easy time as you tackle your next essay on happiness.

All the best as you write more pieces about happiness and discover for yourself why money can’t buy happiness. For more information and essay writing services, contact us.

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

• Essay Database >
• Essay Examples >
• Essays Topics >
• Essay on Happiness

Example Of Argumentative Essay On What Is Happiness Exactly?

Type of paper: Argumentative Essay

Topic: Happiness , Life , Satisfaction , Experiences , Individual , Believe , Job , Literature

Published: 03/08/2023

ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS

Is Happiness Really Happiness?

In his article, Life Satisfaction, Ethical Reflection, and The Science of Happiness, author Dan Haybron argues that being satisfied with one's life is necessary or rather important, but that it does not matter as much as one might think. Specifically, the argument is centered on the idea that happiness and its definition is varied depending on the individual. Moreover, another argument made is that what humans consider as happiness is in fact, satisfaction with life. This paper discusses Haybron's claims and whether there is merit in his argument.

Haybron continues by stating that most philosophical research and arguments have put forth that happiness relies significantly on a series of satisfactory occurrences (103). Yet, there is substantial reason to believe that one can be happy in their welfare (feeling) state regardless of satisfactory experiences. Happiness is essentially a totality view or rather a byproduct of a series of experiences that one has gone through. The writer agrees with Haybron’s view that happiness is inclusive of both pleasure and pain, and not solely satisfactory experiences. This would suggest that painful or excruciating experiences do often lead to positive outcomes. Haybron’s rationale is that there is a blessing in the chaos. Essentially, that one cannot be happy without a combination of the bitter with the sweet. To this end, “it is not just having a plurality of good moments, but having a good life. We [need] to see our lives as more than just the sum of their parts. The pains suffered in boot camp, or in pursuit of some other achievement might be seen as a good thing in the context of one's life as a whole" (105). So why then has the term satisfaction been so closely linked as meaning someone is indeed happy? The explanations for this are numerous. The common thought according to Haybron is that because one is satisfied with a particular experience or feeling, this is a contention that they are happy. This, from the perspective of the writer couldn't be further from the truth. One can be satisfied with an experience and still be unhappy. For example, an individual may believe that by obtaining a job making six figures will provide and offer them happiness. The individual may end up obtaining said job and then come to realize that while they were initially satisfied with the job, it has not made them happy. Conversely, they come to discover that the journey to obtaining the job was much more satisfactory than actually being offered the position. This is why it has often been said that the journey offers more contentment than the destination. Haybron reasons that individuals give attention to experiences that do not necessarily suggest happiness, but rather satisfaction – and this is where much of the problem rests upon in terms of where the intertwinement and interchangeability comes from (105). It seems that society has provided a kind of norm or rule discourse that most have followed. This is why most philosophical arguments related to happiness tend to weave the concept of satisfaction and align them together. Another argument that Haybron makes in the article is that happiness is believed to be something different to each individual. This in itself has also caused the problem with the two terms because one individual may consider themselves to be happy if they experience both positive and negative occurrences, while another may believe that they can only be happy if they indeed have positive or pristine happenings in their lives. These individuals reject the idea that pain produces happiness as well. Of course, there is validity in both arguments. The former is what Haybron contends, while the latter is what most philosophers offer as the true essence of happiness. The writer, however, questions the rationale behind only accepting the positive and subsequently, rejecting the negative because what is life without the ups and downs, valleys and mountaintops, etc.? In other words, how can one come to know what happiness is without enduring harsh and hard times? Haybron writes that happiness is essentially subjective rather than objective (105). This is why there are so many varying perspectives on both the term, happiness, and satisfaction. So in effect, while Haybron makes two claims in the article, they in fact stem from the same argument – that satisfaction and happiness are two different concepts even though they have been proverbially rolled into one and have come to be accepted as the same. The argument that most philosophers have made regarding happiness only consisting of satisfactory experiences is a plausible one because individuals have not only come to believe that life should only include pleasure, but also because how can one be satisfied with painful experiences? What rationale or reasoning could ever suggest that pain is fruitful and satisfactory? As noted earlier, and by Haybron, happiness is the sum of an individual’s life experiences, not only solitary or series of experiences as most contexts suggest.

In order for those that believe satisfaction and happiness are the same to even consider Haybron’s argument, they must come to understand the purpose behind pain, which is an entirely separate argument in itself. Yet, there is merit in both Haybron’s view and the majority outlook on happiness. The writer believes that it is easier for most to reject the Haybron perspective as opposed to accepting it because then that would mean that a significant shift in their beliefs would need to take place, and change is difficult for most people.

Works Cited

Haybron, Dan. "LIFE SATISFACTION, ETHICAL REFLECTION, AND THE SCIENCE OF HAPPINESS." Journal of Happiness Studies 8 (2007): 99-138. Web. 1 May 2016. <doi: 10.1007/s10902-006-9006-5>.

Cite this page

Share with friends using:

Removal Request

Finished papers: 2838

This paper is created by writer with

ID 271434991

If you want your paper to be:

Well-researched, fact-checked, and accurate

Original, fresh, based on current data

Eloquently written and immaculately formatted

275 words = 1 page double-spaced

Get your papers done by pros!

Other Pages

Enemy essays, frei essays, stahl essays, tokugawa essays, kilmer essays, horwitz essays, snelling essays, drifter essays, palestinian territories essays, behavior patterns essays, jared diamond essays, heloise essays, essay on moral reasoning and the global challenge, free essay on human resource management, the hagia sophia research proposal sample, structuration theory critical theory ict4d research paper sample, global warming essay sample 2, free critical thinking on the cask of amontillado an expedition to the human psyche, thesis on the personal values and virtues of being hardworking, positive influence of media on family relationships essay example, global financial crisis essay, pipelines environmental issues research paper example, example of research paper on christianity and islam mankind and apotheosis, example of essay on the individual and the state, critical thinking on a series of teaching and learning activities for science and technology, example of role of independent director thesis proposal, cigarette smoking essay examples 2, movie review on transforming energy, ulysses essay example, example of imperfect competition in labor market research paper, example of research paper on goal setting theory modification, cortical regions and their role in our vision course work examples, free essay on stress as a college student, good example of essay on understanding the plight of palestinian refugees, good case study on what are the primary issues in this case, book review on critical book review children of paradise by laura secor, good example of essay on demand, perfect model essay on aggression, french and raven bases of power essay sample, good example of corporate social responsibility report, good general motors capstone project example, the art of stefan sagmeister type to use as a writing model, free how red color enriches our understanding of chinese society and history essay example.

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline

Choose Your Test

Sat / act prep online guides and tips, how to write an a+ argumentative essay.

Miscellaneous

You'll no doubt have to write a number of argumentative essays in both high school and college, but what, exactly, is an argumentative essay and how do you write the best one possible? Let's take a look.

A great argumentative essay always combines the same basic elements: approaching an argument from a rational perspective, researching sources, supporting your claims using facts rather than opinion, and articulating your reasoning into the most cogent and reasoned points. Argumentative essays are great building blocks for all sorts of research and rhetoric, so your teachers will expect you to master the technique before long.

But if this sounds daunting, never fear! We'll show how an argumentative essay differs from other kinds of papers, how to research and write them, how to pick an argumentative essay topic, and where to find example essays. So let's get started.

What Is an Argumentative Essay? How Is it Different from Other Kinds of Essays?

There are two basic requirements for any and all essays: to state a claim (a thesis statement) and to support that claim with evidence.

Though every essay is founded on these two ideas, there are several different types of essays, differentiated by the style of the writing, how the writer presents the thesis, and the types of evidence used to support the thesis statement.

Essays can be roughly divided into four different types:

#1: Argumentative #2: Persuasive #3: Expository #4: Analytical

So let's look at each type and what the differences are between them before we focus the rest of our time to argumentative essays.

Argumentative Essay

Argumentative essays are what this article is all about, so let's talk about them first.

An argumentative essay attempts to convince a reader to agree with a particular argument (the writer's thesis statement). The writer takes a firm stand one way or another on a topic and then uses hard evidence to support that stance.

An argumentative essay seeks to prove to the reader that one argument —the writer's argument— is the factually and logically correct one. This means that an argumentative essay must use only evidence-based support to back up a claim , rather than emotional or philosophical reasoning (which is often allowed in other types of essays). Thus, an argumentative essay has a burden of substantiated proof and sources , whereas some other types of essays (namely persuasive essays) do not.

You can write an argumentative essay on any topic, so long as there's room for argument. Generally, you can use the same topics for both a persuasive essay or an argumentative one, so long as you support the argumentative essay with hard evidence.

Example topics of an argumentative essay:

• "Should farmers be allowed to shoot wolves if those wolves injure or kill farm animals?"
• "Should the drinking age be lowered in the United States?"
• "Are alternatives to democracy effective and/or feasible to implement?"

The next three types of essays are not argumentative essays, but you may have written them in school. We're going to cover them so you know what not to do for your argumentative essay.

Persuasive Essay

Persuasive essays are similar to argumentative essays, so it can be easy to get them confused. But knowing what makes an argumentative essay different than a persuasive essay can often mean the difference between an excellent grade and an average one.

Persuasive essays seek to persuade a reader to agree with the point of view of the writer, whether that point of view is based on factual evidence or not. The writer has much more flexibility in the evidence they can use, with the ability to use moral, cultural, or opinion-based reasoning as well as factual reasoning to persuade the reader to agree the writer's side of a given issue.

Instead of being forced to use "pure" reason as one would in an argumentative essay, the writer of a persuasive essay can manipulate or appeal to the reader's emotions. So long as the writer attempts to steer the readers into agreeing with the thesis statement, the writer doesn't necessarily need hard evidence in favor of the argument.

Often, you can use the same topics for both a persuasive essay or an argumentative one—the difference is all in the approach and the evidence you present.

Example topics of a persuasive essay:

• "Should children be responsible for their parents' debts?"
• "Should cheating on a test be automatic grounds for expulsion?"
• "How much should sports leagues be held accountable for player injuries and the long-term consequences of those injuries?"

Expository Essay

An expository essay is typically a short essay in which the writer explains an idea, issue, or theme , or discusses the history of a person, place, or idea.

This is typically a fact-forward essay with little argument or opinion one way or the other.

Example topics of an expository essay:

• "The History of the Philadelphia Liberty Bell"
• "The Reasons I Always Wanted to be a Doctor"
• "The Meaning Behind the Colloquialism ‘People in Glass Houses Shouldn't Throw Stones'"

Analytical Essay

An analytical essay seeks to delve into the deeper meaning of a text or work of art, or unpack a complicated idea . These kinds of essays closely interpret a source and look into its meaning by analyzing it at both a macro and micro level.

This type of analysis can be augmented by historical context or other expert or widely-regarded opinions on the subject, but is mainly supported directly through the original source (the piece or art or text being analyzed) .

Example topics of an analytical essay:

• "Victory Gin in Place of Water: The Symbolism Behind Gin as the Only Potable Substance in George Orwell's 1984"
• "Amarna Period Art: The Meaning Behind the Shift from Rigid to Fluid Poses"
• "Adultery During WWII, as Told Through a Series of Letters to and from Soldiers"

There are many different types of essay and, over time, you'll be able to master them all.

A Typical Argumentative Essay Assignment

The average argumentative essay is between three to five pages, and will require at least three or four separate sources with which to back your claims . As for the essay topic , you'll most often be asked to write an argumentative essay in an English class on a "general" topic of your choice, ranging the gamut from science, to history, to literature.

But while the topics of an argumentative essay can span several different fields, the structure of an argumentative essay is always the same: you must support a claim—a claim that can reasonably have multiple sides—using multiple sources and using a standard essay format (which we'll talk about later on).

This is why many argumentative essay topics begin with the word "should," as in:

• "Should all students be required to learn chemistry in high school?"
• "Should children be required to learn a second language?"
• "Should schools or governments be allowed to ban books?"

These topics all have at least two sides of the argument: Yes or no. And you must support the side you choose with evidence as to why your side is the correct one.

But there are also plenty of other ways to frame an argumentative essay as well:

• "Does using social media do more to benefit or harm people?"
• "Does the legal status of artwork or its creators—graffiti and vandalism, pirated media, a creator who's in jail—have an impact on the art itself?"
• "Is or should anyone ever be ‘above the law?'"

Though these are worded differently than the first three, you're still essentially forced to pick between two sides of an issue: yes or no, for or against, benefit or detriment. Though your argument might not fall entirely into one side of the divide or another—for instance, you could claim that social media has positively impacted some aspects of modern life while being a detriment to others—your essay should still support one side of the argument above all. Your final stance would be that overall , social media is beneficial or overall , social media is harmful.

If your argument is one that is mostly text-based or backed by a single source (e.g., "How does Salinger show that Holden Caulfield is an unreliable narrator?" or "Does Gatsby personify the American Dream?"), then it's an analytical essay, rather than an argumentative essay. An argumentative essay will always be focused on more general topics so that you can use multiple sources to back up your claims.

Good Argumentative Essay Topics

So you know the basic idea behind an argumentative essay, but what topic should you write about?

Again, almost always, you'll be asked to write an argumentative essay on a free topic of your choice, or you'll be asked to select between a few given topics . If you're given complete free reign of topics, then it'll be up to you to find an essay topic that no only appeals to you, but that you can turn into an A+ argumentative essay.

What makes a "good" argumentative essay topic depends on both the subject matter and your personal interest —it can be hard to give your best effort on something that bores you to tears! But it can also be near impossible to write an argumentative essay on a topic that has no room for debate.

As we said earlier, a good argumentative essay topic will be one that has the potential to reasonably go in at least two directions—for or against, yes or no, and why . For example, it's pretty hard to write an argumentative essay on whether or not people should be allowed to murder one another—not a whole lot of debate there for most people!—but writing an essay for or against the death penalty has a lot more wiggle room for evidence and argument.

A good topic is also one that can be substantiated through hard evidence and relevant sources . So be sure to pick a topic that other people have studied (or at least studied elements of) so that you can use their data in your argument. For example, if you're arguing that it should be mandatory for all middle school children to play a sport, you might have to apply smaller scientific data points to the larger picture you're trying to justify. There are probably several studies you could cite on the benefits of physical activity and the positive effect structure and teamwork has on young minds, but there's probably no study you could use where a group of scientists put all middle-schoolers in one jurisdiction into a mandatory sports program (since that's probably never happened). So long as your evidence is relevant to your point and you can extrapolate from it to form a larger whole, you can use it as a part of your resource material.

And if you need ideas on where to get started, or just want to see sample argumentative essay topics, then check out these links for hundreds of potential argumentative essay topics.

101 Persuasive (or Argumentative) Essay and Speech Topics

301 Prompts for Argumentative Writing

Top 50 Ideas for Argumentative/Persuasive Essay Writing

[Note: some of these say "persuasive essay topics," but just remember that the same topic can often be used for both a persuasive essay and an argumentative essay; the difference is in your writing style and the evidence you use to support your claims.]

KO! Find that one argumentative essay topic you can absolutely conquer.

Argumentative Essay Format

Argumentative Essays are composed of four main elements:

• A position (your argument)
• Your reasons
• Supporting evidence for those reasons (from reliable sources)
• Counterargument(s) (possible opposing arguments and reasons why those arguments are incorrect)

If you're familiar with essay writing in general, then you're also probably familiar with the five paragraph essay structure . This structure is a simple tool to show how one outlines an essay and breaks it down into its component parts, although it can be expanded into as many paragraphs as you want beyond the core five.

The standard argumentative essay is often 3-5 pages, which will usually mean a lot more than five paragraphs, but your overall structure will look the same as a much shorter essay.

An argumentative essay at its simplest structure will look like:

Paragraph 1: Intro

• Set up the story/problem/issue
• Thesis/claim

Paragraph 2: Support

• Reason #1 claim is correct
• Supporting evidence with sources

Paragraph 3: Support

• Reason #2 claim is correct

Paragraph 4: Counterargument

• Explanation of argument for the other side
• Refutation of opposing argument with supporting evidence

Paragraph 5: Conclusion

• Re-state claim
• Sum up reasons and support of claim from the essay to prove claim is correct

Now let's unpack each of these paragraph types to see how they work (with examples!), what goes into them, and why.

Paragraph 1—Set Up and Claim

Your first task is to introduce the reader to the topic at hand so they'll be prepared for your claim. Give a little background information, set the scene, and give the reader some stakes so that they care about the issue you're going to discuss.

Next, you absolutely must have a position on an argument and make that position clear to the readers. It's not an argumentative essay unless you're arguing for a specific claim, and this claim will be your thesis statement.

Your thesis CANNOT be a mere statement of fact (e.g., "Washington DC is the capital of the United States"). Your thesis must instead be an opinion which can be backed up with evidence and has the potential to be argued against (e.g., "New York should be the capital of the United States").

Paragraphs 2 and 3—Your Evidence

These are your body paragraphs in which you give the reasons why your argument is the best one and back up this reasoning with concrete evidence .

The argument supporting the thesis of an argumentative essay should be one that can be supported by facts and evidence, rather than personal opinion or cultural or religious mores.

For example, if you're arguing that New York should be the new capital of the US, you would have to back up that fact by discussing the factual contrasts between New York and DC in terms of location, population, revenue, and laws. You would then have to talk about the precedents for what makes for a good capital city and why New York fits the bill more than DC does.

Your argument can't simply be that a lot of people think New York is the best city ever and that you agree.

In addition to using concrete evidence, you always want to keep the tone of your essay passionate, but impersonal . Even though you're writing your argument from a single opinion, don't use first person language—"I think," "I feel," "I believe,"—to present your claims. Doing so is repetitive, since by writing the essay you're already telling the audience what you feel, and using first person language weakens your writing voice.

For example,

"I think that Washington DC is no longer suited to be the capital city of the United States."

"Washington DC is no longer suited to be the capital city of the United States."

The second statement sounds far stronger and more analytical.

Paragraph 4—Argument for the Other Side and Refutation

Even without a counter argument, you can make a pretty persuasive claim, but a counterargument will round out your essay into one that is much more persuasive and substantial.

By anticipating an argument against your claim and taking the initiative to counter it, you're allowing yourself to get ahead of the game. This way, you show that you've given great thought to all sides of the issue before choosing your position, and you demonstrate in multiple ways how yours is the more reasoned and supported side.

Paragraph 5—Conclusion

This paragraph is where you re-state your argument and summarize why it's the best claim.

Briefly touch on your supporting evidence and voila! A finished argumentative essay.

Your essay should have just as awesome a skeleton as this plesiosaur does. (In other words: a ridiculously awesome skeleton)

Argumentative Essay Example: 5-Paragraph Style

It always helps to have an example to learn from. I've written a full 5-paragraph argumentative essay here. Look at how I state my thesis in paragraph 1, give supporting evidence in paragraphs 2 and 3, address a counterargument in paragraph 4, and conclude in paragraph 5.

Topic: Is it possible to maintain conflicting loyalties?

Paragraph 1

It is almost impossible to go through life without encountering a situation where your loyalties to different people or causes come into conflict with each other. Maybe you have a loving relationship with your sister, but she disagrees with your decision to join the army, or you find yourself torn between your cultural beliefs and your scientific ones. These conflicting loyalties can often be maintained for a time, but as examples from both history and psychological theory illustrate, sooner or later, people have to make a choice between competing loyalties, as no one can maintain a conflicting loyalty or belief system forever.

The first two sentences set the scene and give some hypothetical examples and stakes for the reader to care about.

The third sentence finishes off the intro with the thesis statement, making very clear how the author stands on the issue ("people have to make a choice between competing loyalties, as no one can maintain a conflicting loyalty or belief system forever." )

Paragraphs 2 and 3

Psychological theory states that human beings are not equipped to maintain conflicting loyalties indefinitely and that attempting to do so leads to a state called "cognitive dissonance." Cognitive dissonance theory is the psychological idea that people undergo tremendous mental stress or anxiety when holding contradictory beliefs, values, or loyalties (Festinger, 1957). Even if human beings initially hold a conflicting loyalty, they will do their best to find a mental equilibrium by making a choice between those loyalties—stay stalwart to a belief system or change their beliefs. One of the earliest formal examples of cognitive dissonance theory comes from Leon Festinger's When Prophesy Fails . Members of an apocalyptic cult are told that the end of the world will occur on a specific date and that they alone will be spared the Earth's destruction. When that day comes and goes with no apocalypse, the cult members face a cognitive dissonance between what they see and what they've been led to believe (Festinger, 1956). Some choose to believe that the cult's beliefs are still correct, but that the Earth was simply spared from destruction by mercy, while others choose to believe that they were lied to and that the cult was fraudulent all along. Both beliefs cannot be correct at the same time, and so the cult members are forced to make their choice.

But even when conflicting loyalties can lead to potentially physical, rather than just mental, consequences, people will always make a choice to fall on one side or other of a dividing line. Take, for instance, Nicolaus Copernicus, a man born and raised in Catholic Poland (and educated in Catholic Italy). Though the Catholic church dictated specific scientific teachings, Copernicus' loyalty to his own observations and scientific evidence won out over his loyalty to his country's government and belief system. When he published his heliocentric model of the solar system--in opposition to the geocentric model that had been widely accepted for hundreds of years (Hannam, 2011)-- Copernicus was making a choice between his loyalties. In an attempt t o maintain his fealty both to the established system and to what he believed, h e sat on his findings for a number of years (Fantoli, 1994). But, ultimately, Copernicus made the choice to side with his beliefs and observations above all and published his work for the world to see (even though, in doing so, he risked both his reputation and personal freedoms).

These two paragraphs provide the reasons why the author supports the main argument and uses substantiated sources to back those reasons.

The paragraph on cognitive dissonance theory gives both broad supporting evidence and more narrow, detailed supporting evidence to show why the thesis statement is correct not just anecdotally but also scientifically and psychologically. First, we see why people in general have a difficult time accepting conflicting loyalties and desires and then how this applies to individuals through the example of the cult members from the Dr. Festinger's research.

The next paragraph continues to use more detailed examples from history to provide further evidence of why the thesis that people cannot indefinitely maintain conflicting loyalties is true.

Paragraph 4

Some will claim that it is possible to maintain conflicting beliefs or loyalties permanently, but this is often more a matter of people deluding themselves and still making a choice for one side or the other, rather than truly maintaining loyalty to both sides equally. For example, Lancelot du Lac typifies a person who claims to maintain a balanced loyalty between to two parties, but his attempt to do so fails (as all attempts to permanently maintain conflicting loyalties must). Lancelot tells himself and others that he is equally devoted to both King Arthur and his court and to being Queen Guinevere's knight (Malory, 2008). But he can neither be in two places at once to protect both the king and queen, nor can he help but let his romantic feelings for the queen to interfere with his duties to the king and the kingdom. Ultimately, he and Queen Guinevere give into their feelings for one another and Lancelot—though he denies it—chooses his loyalty to her over his loyalty to Arthur. This decision plunges the kingdom into a civil war, ages Lancelot prematurely, and ultimately leads to Camelot's ruin (Raabe, 1987). Though Lancelot claimed to have been loyal to both the king and the queen, this loyalty was ultimately in conflict, and he could not maintain it.

Here we have the acknowledgement of a potential counter-argument and the evidence as to why it isn't true.

The argument is that some people (or literary characters) have asserted that they give equal weight to their conflicting loyalties. The refutation is that, though some may claim to be able to maintain conflicting loyalties, they're either lying to others or deceiving themselves. The paragraph shows why this is true by providing an example of this in action.

Paragraph 5

Whether it be through literature or history, time and time again, people demonstrate the challenges of trying to manage conflicting loyalties and the inevitable consequences of doing so. Though belief systems are malleable and will often change over time, it is not possible to maintain two mutually exclusive loyalties or beliefs at once. In the end, people always make a choice, and loyalty for one party or one side of an issue will always trump loyalty to the other.

The concluding paragraph summarizes the essay, touches on the evidence presented, and re-states the thesis statement.

How to Write an Argumentative Essay: 8 Steps

Writing the best argumentative essay is all about the preparation, so let's talk steps:

#1: Preliminary Research

If you have the option to pick your own argumentative essay topic (which you most likely will), then choose one or two topics you find the most intriguing or that you have a vested interest in and do some preliminary research on both sides of the debate.

Do an open internet search just to see what the general chatter is on the topic and what the research trends are.

Did your preliminary reading influence you to pick a side or change your side? Without diving into all the scholarly articles at length, do you believe there's enough evidence to support your claim? Have there been scientific studies? Experiments? Does a noted scholar in the field agree with you? If not, you may need to pick another topic or side of the argument to support.

#2: Pick Your Side and Form Your Thesis

Now's the time to pick the side of the argument you feel you can support the best and summarize your main point into your thesis statement.

Your thesis will be the basis of your entire essay, so make sure you know which side you're on, that you've stated it clearly, and that you stick by your argument throughout the entire essay .

#3: Heavy-Duty Research Time

You've taken a gander at what the internet at large has to say on your argument, but now's the time to actually read those sources and take notes.

Check scholarly journals online at Google Scholar , the Directory of Open Access Journals , or JStor . You can also search individual university or school libraries and websites to see what kinds of academic articles you can access for free. Keep track of your important quotes and page numbers and put them somewhere that's easy to find later.

And don't forget to check your school or local libraries as well!

#4: Outline

Follow the five-paragraph outline structure from the previous section.

Fill in your topic, your reasons, and your supporting evidence into each of the categories.

Before you begin to flesh out the essay, take a look at what you've got. Is your thesis statement in the first paragraph? Is it clear? Is your argument logical? Does your supporting evidence support your reasoning?

By outlining your essay, you streamline your process and take care of any logic gaps before you dive headfirst into the writing. This will save you a lot of grief later on if you need to change your sources or your structure, so don't get too trigger-happy and skip this step.

Now that you've laid out exactly what you'll need for your essay and where, it's time to fill in all the gaps by writing it out.

Take it one step at a time and expand your ideas into complete sentences and substantiated claims. It may feel daunting to turn an outline into a complete draft, but just remember that you've already laid out all the groundwork; now you're just filling in the gaps.

If you have the time before deadline, give yourself a day or two (or even just an hour!) away from your essay . Looking it over with fresh eyes will allow you to see errors, both minor and major, that you likely would have missed had you tried to edit when it was still raw.

Take a first pass over the entire essay and try your best to ignore any minor spelling or grammar mistakes—you're just looking at the big picture right now. Does it make sense as a whole? Did the essay succeed in making an argument and backing that argument up logically? (Do you feel persuaded?)

If not, go back and make notes so that you can fix it for your final draft.

Once you've made your revisions to the overall structure, mark all your small errors and grammar problems so you can fix them in the next draft.

#7: Final Draft

Use the notes you made on the rough draft and go in and hack and smooth away until you're satisfied with the final result.

A checklist for your final draft:

• Formatting is correct according to your teacher's standards
• No errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation
• Essay is the right length and size for the assignment
• The argument is present, consistent, and concise
• Each reason is supported by relevant evidence
• The essay makes sense overall

#8: Celebrate!

Once you've brought that final draft to a perfect polish and turned in your assignment, you're done! Go you!

Be prepared and ♪ you'll never go hungry again ♪, *cough*, or struggle with your argumentative essay-writing again. (Walt Disney Studios)

Good Examples of Argumentative Essays Online

Theory is all well and good, but examples are key. Just to get you started on what a fully-fleshed out argumentative essay looks like, let's see some examples in action.

Check out these two argumentative essay examples on the use of landmines and freons (and note the excellent use of concrete sources to back up their arguments!).

The Use of Landmines

A Shattered Sky

The Take-Aways: Keys to Writing an Argumentative Essay

At first, writing an argumentative essay may seem like a monstrous hurdle to overcome, but with the proper preparation and understanding, you'll be able to knock yours out of the park.

Remember the differences between a persuasive essay and an argumentative one, make sure your thesis is clear, and double-check that your supporting evidence is both relevant to your point and well-sourced . Pick your topic, do your research, make your outline, and fill in the gaps. Before you know it, you'll have yourself an A+ argumentative essay there, my friend.

What's Next?

Now you know the ins and outs of an argumentative essay, but how comfortable are you writing in other styles? Learn more about the four writing styles and when it makes sense to use each .

Understand how to make an argument, but still having trouble organizing your thoughts? Check out our guide to three popular essay formats and choose which one is right for you.

Ready to make your case, but not sure what to write about? We've created a list of 50 potential argumentative essay topics to spark your imagination.

Need more help with this topic? Check out Tutorbase!

Our vetted tutor database includes a range of experienced educators who can help you polish an essay for English or explain how derivatives work for Calculus. You can use dozens of filters and search criteria to find the perfect person for your needs.

Courtney scored in the 99th percentile on the SAT in high school and went on to graduate from Stanford University with a degree in Cultural and Social Anthropology. She is passionate about bringing education and the tools to succeed to students from all backgrounds and walks of life, as she believes open education is one of the great societal equalizers. She has years of tutoring experience and writes creative works in her free time.

Student and Parent Forum

Our new student and parent forum, at ExpertHub.PrepScholar.com , allow you to interact with your peers and the PrepScholar staff. See how other students and parents are navigating high school, college, and the college admissions process. Ask questions; get answers.

Ask a Question Below

Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply!

Improve With Our Famous Guides

• For All Students

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 160+ SAT Points

How to Get a Perfect 1600, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 800 on Each SAT Section:

Score 800 on SAT Math

Score 800 on SAT Reading

Score 800 on SAT Writing

Series: How to Get to 600 on Each SAT Section:

Score 600 on SAT Math

Score 600 on SAT Reading

Score 600 on SAT Writing

Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests

What SAT Target Score Should You Be Aiming For?

15 Strategies to Improve Your SAT Essay

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 4+ ACT Points

How to Get a Perfect 36 ACT, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 36 on Each ACT Section:

36 on ACT English

36 on ACT Math

36 on ACT Reading

36 on ACT Science

Series: How to Get to 24 on Each ACT Section:

24 on ACT English

24 on ACT Math

24 on ACT Reading

24 on ACT Science

What ACT target score should you be aiming for?

ACT Vocabulary You Must Know

ACT Writing: 15 Tips to Raise Your Essay Score

How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League

How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA

How to Write an Amazing College Essay

What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For?

Is the ACT easier than the SAT? A Comprehensive Guide

Should you retake your SAT or ACT?

When should you take the SAT or ACT?

Stay Informed

Get the latest articles and test prep tips!

Looking for Graduate School Test Prep?

Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here:

GRE Online Prep Blog

GMAT Online Prep Blog

TOEFL Online Prep Blog

Holly R. "I am absolutely overjoyed and cannot thank you enough for helping me!”

• Essay Samples
• College Essay
• Writing Tools
• Writing guide

Creative samples from the experts

↑ Return to Essay Samples

Definition Essay: Happiness

Happiness. It is not measurable, profitable, nor tradable. Yet, above all else in the world, it is what people seek. They want to have happiness, and want to know they have a lot of it. But happiness, like air or water, is a hard thing to grasp in one’s hand. It is intangible. So how does one know if they have it? Is it just a feeling? And if someone does not feel happy, how can they go about achieving that feeling?

Happiness is not measured by material wealth. A new car or television, a waterskiing boat or a three-level house does not equate to joyful feelings. They are status symbols, surely, and ones that make others assume a person is happy, but they do not guarantee a happy life. The clichéd phrase, “money can’t buy happiness,” is heard often… because it is true. People who have wealth can be unhappy, just as the poor can be living on cloud nine. Possessions can be gained and lost, and with that comes fear. And fear rarely leads to happiness.

So if it isn’t ‘stuff’ that achieves happiness, then what can? Well, goals can. People need to have a sense of purpose. It is no coincidence that Peanuts creator Charles Schultz died a week after ending his famous comic strip. Without a purpose, he was lost. But people that have a sense of purpose in their life often have a feeling of satisfaction about them. They sense they were put on this planet for a reason. To each person, this purpose can be different. Maybe they were meant to teach. Maybe they were meant to mother. Maybe they were meant to learn. And goals can be small things, like taking an extra moment each day to breathe. But having progress in life, a feeling of forward motion, can make people feel happy.

But taking that forward motion too far can be a bad thing. Success at the expense of everything else, for example, leads to the opposite of happiness. Life requires balance. And people that understand that there is a balance to work and play, strife and joy, are more in tune with the universe and, therefore, better able to achieve happiness. Life with a dose of humor is more pleasant. Comedians, compared to any other profession, live the longest because they understand that laughter adds the spice to life, and makes daily progress worth the minor tribulations.

So people can be happy if they have something to strive for and something to laugh about. But is that it? Can people with goals and a sense of humor still be unhappy? Well, yes. After all, the final key to happiness is the decision to actually be happy. Human nature can see negative energy anywhere. People can fixate on problems instead of solutions. So at the end of the day, “happiness depends upon ourselves.” (Aristotle). As Lincoln said, “Most folks are as happy as they make up their minds to be.”

Being happy with who you are and what you have, is a decision that has to be consciously made. Goals can help lead to happiness. Finding laughter in life is important. But at the end of the day, a person needs to make a choice about happiness. They need to agree they want it, deserve it, and have it.

Follow Us on Social Media

Get more free essays

Send via email

Most useful resources for students:.

• Free Essays Download
• Writing Tools List
• Proofreading Services
• Universities Rating

Contributors Bio

Find more useful services for students

Free plagiarism check, professional editing, online tutoring, free grammar check.

Home — Essay Samples — Life — Feeling — Discussion on Whether Success is More Important than Happiness

Why Happiness is More Important than Success

• Categories: Feeling Happiness Success

About this sample

Words: 667 |

Published: Jan 29, 2019

Words: 667 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Happiness is more important than Success (essay)

Works cited.

• Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). The How of Happiness: A Scientific Approach to Getting the Life You Want. Penguin Press.
• Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being. Free Press.
• Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Oishi, S. (2018). Advances and open questions in the science of subjective well-being. Collabra: Psychology, 4(1), 15.
• Diener, E., & Chan, M. Y. (2011). Happy people live longer: Subjective well-being contributes to health and longevity. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-being, 3(1), 1-43.
• Newman, D. B., Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2014). Leisure and subjective well-being: A model of psychological mechanisms as mediating factors. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(3), 555-578.
• Kesebir, S., & Diener, E. (2008). In pursuit of happiness : Empirical answers to philosophical questions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(2), 117-125.
• Pressman, S. D., & Cohen, S. (2005). Does positive affect influence health?. Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 925-971.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Hedonia, eudaimonia, and well-being: An introduction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(1), 1-11.
• Huppert, F. A. (2009). Psychological well-being: Evidence regarding its causes and consequences. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-being, 1(2), 137-164.
• Veenhoven, R. (2015). Happiness in Nations: Subjective appreciation of life in 56 nations 1946-2013. Springer.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

• Expert in: Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 927 words

4.5 pages / 2031 words

3.5 pages / 1506 words

2 pages / 1030 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

In the unforgiving austerity of the Wyoming plains, two men, liberated from the confines of society, find love in a time and place where their passion has dire consequences. In the short story “Brokeback Mountain” by Annie [...]

Influencing the Eight Dimensions of Wellness to some element of every day existence can beautify intellectual and physical wellbeing for people with mental and moreover substance utilize scatters. Wellness is being in extremely [...]

According to this article psychology can be said to be the study of mind and behavior in the way of thinking, imaging and feeling. Thinking can be said as the action of one using hi/her mind to get thoughts. After the thinking [...]

Fear is one of the most general emotions that we as humans encounter in life. As children develop over time, their fear does too. Many people experience fear daily, whether it is a severe anxiety, or being afraid of something [...]

What do you do when your heart says yes but your head says no. The heart refers to emotional decision making, a strong feeling, such as love, joy, anger, hate, or fear that helps you make a decision. While the head refers to [...]

The novel "The Remains of the Day" by Kazuo Ishiguro offers a profound exploration of the multifaceted concept of dignity. The central character, a fastidious butler named Stevens, is resolute in his pursuit of becoming an [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

What is an Argumentative Essay? How to Write It (With Examples)

We define an argumentative essay as a type of essay that presents arguments about both sides of an issue. The purpose is to convince the reader to accept a particular viewpoint or action. In an argumentative essay, the writer takes a stance on a controversial or debatable topic and supports their position with evidence, reasoning, and examples. The essay should also address counterarguments, demonstrating a thorough understanding of the topic.

Table of Contents

• What is an argumentative essay?  
• Argumentative essay structure 
• Argumentative essay outline 
• Types of argument claims 

How to write an argumentative essay?

• Argumentative essay writing tips 
• Good argumentative essay example 

How to write a good thesis

• How to Write an Argumentative Essay with Paperpal? 

Frequently Asked Questions

What is an argumentative essay.

An argumentative essay is a type of writing that presents a coherent and logical analysis of a specific topic. 1 The goal is to convince the reader to accept the writer’s point of view or opinion on a particular issue. Here are the key elements of an argumentative essay: 

• Thesis Statement : The central claim or argument that the essay aims to prove. 
• Introduction : Provides background information and introduces the thesis statement. 
• Body Paragraphs : Each paragraph addresses a specific aspect of the argument, presents evidence, and may include counter arguments. 

Articulate your thesis statement better with Paperpal. Start writing now!

• Evidence : Supports the main argument with relevant facts, examples, statistics, or expert opinions. 
• Counterarguments : Anticipates and addresses opposing viewpoints to strengthen the overall argument. 
• Conclusion : Summarizes the main points, reinforces the thesis, and may suggest implications or actions. 

Argumentative essay structure

Aristotelian, Rogerian, and Toulmin are three distinct approaches to argumentative essay structures, each with its principles and methods. 2 The choice depends on the purpose and nature of the topic. Here’s an overview of each type of argumentative essay format.

Have a looming deadline for your argumentative essay? Write 2x faster with Paperpal – Start now!  

Argumentative essay outline

An argumentative essay presents a specific claim or argument and supports it with evidence and reasoning. Here’s an outline for an argumentative essay, along with examples for each section: 3  

1.  Introduction : 

• Hook : Start with a compelling statement, question, or anecdote to grab the reader’s attention. 

Example: “Did you know that plastic pollution is threatening marine life at an alarming rate?” 

• Background information : Provide brief context about the issue. 

Example: “Plastic pollution has become a global environmental concern, with millions of tons of plastic waste entering our oceans yearly.” 

• Thesis statement : Clearly state your main argument or position. 

Example: “We must take immediate action to reduce plastic usage and implement more sustainable alternatives to protect our marine ecosystem.” 

2.  Body Paragraphs : 

• Topic sentence : Introduce the main idea of each paragraph. 

Example: “The first step towards addressing the plastic pollution crisis is reducing single-use plastic consumption.” 

• Evidence/Support : Provide evidence, facts, statistics, or examples that support your argument. 

Example: “Research shows that plastic straws alone contribute to millions of tons of plastic waste annually, and many marine animals suffer from ingestion or entanglement.” 

• Counterargument/Refutation : Acknowledge and refute opposing viewpoints. 

Example: “Some argue that banning plastic straws is inconvenient for consumers, but the long-term environmental benefits far outweigh the temporary inconvenience.” 

• Transition : Connect each paragraph to the next. 

Example: “Having addressed the issue of single-use plastics, the focus must now shift to promoting sustainable alternatives.” 

3.  Counterargument Paragraph : 

• Acknowledgement of opposing views : Recognize alternative perspectives on the issue. 

Example: “While some may argue that individual actions cannot significantly impact global plastic pollution, the cumulative effect of collective efforts must be considered.” 

• Counterargument and rebuttal : Present and refute the main counterargument. 

Example: “However, individual actions, when multiplied across millions of people, can substantially reduce plastic waste. Small changes in behavior, such as using reusable bags and containers, can have a significant positive impact.” 

4.  Conclusion : 

• Restatement of thesis : Summarize your main argument. 

Example: “In conclusion, adopting sustainable practices and reducing single-use plastic is crucial for preserving our oceans and marine life.” 

• Call to action : Encourage the reader to take specific steps or consider the argument’s implications. 

Example: “It is our responsibility to make environmentally conscious choices and advocate for policies that prioritize the health of our planet. By collectively embracing sustainable alternatives, we can contribute to a cleaner and healthier future.” 

Types of argument claims

A claim is a statement or proposition a writer puts forward with evidence to persuade the reader. 4 Here are some common types of argument claims, along with examples: 

• Fact Claims : These claims assert that something is true or false and can often be verified through evidence.  Example: “Water boils at 100°C at sea level.”
• Value Claims : Value claims express judgments about the worth or morality of something, often based on personal beliefs or societal values. Example: “Organic farming is more ethical than conventional farming.” 
• Policy Claims : Policy claims propose a course of action or argue for a specific policy, law, or regulation change.  Example: “Schools should adopt a year-round education system to improve student learning outcomes.” 
• Cause and Effect Claims : These claims argue that one event or condition leads to another, establishing a cause-and-effect relationship.  Example: “Excessive use of social media is a leading cause of increased feelings of loneliness among young adults.” 
• Definition Claims : Definition claims assert the meaning or classification of a concept or term.  Example: “Artificial intelligence can be defined as machines exhibiting human-like cognitive functions.” 
• Comparative Claims : Comparative claims assert that one thing is better or worse than another in certain respects.  Example: “Online education is more cost-effective than traditional classroom learning.” 
• Evaluation Claims : Evaluation claims assess the quality, significance, or effectiveness of something based on specific criteria.  Example: “The new healthcare policy is more effective in providing affordable healthcare to all citizens.” 

Understanding these argument claims can help writers construct more persuasive and well-supported arguments tailored to the specific nature of the claim.  

If you’re wondering how to start an argumentative essay, here’s a step-by-step guide to help you with the argumentative essay format and writing process.

• Choose a Topic: Select a topic that you are passionate about or interested in. Ensure that the topic is debatable and has two or more sides.
• Define Your Position: Clearly state your stance on the issue. Consider opposing viewpoints and be ready to counter them.
• Conduct Research: Gather relevant information from credible sources, such as books, articles, and academic journals. Take notes on key points and supporting evidence.
• Create a Thesis Statement: Develop a concise and clear thesis statement that outlines your main argument. Convey your position on the issue and provide a roadmap for the essay.
• Outline Your Argumentative Essay: Organize your ideas logically by creating an outline. Include an introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Each body paragraph should focus on a single point that supports your thesis.
• Write the Introduction: Start with a hook to grab the reader’s attention (a quote, a question, a surprising fact). Provide background information on the topic. Present your thesis statement at the end of the introduction.
• Develop Body Paragraphs: Begin each paragraph with a clear topic sentence that relates to the thesis. Support your points with evidence and examples. Address counterarguments and refute them to strengthen your position. Ensure smooth transitions between paragraphs.
• Address Counterarguments: Acknowledge and respond to opposing viewpoints. Anticipate objections and provide evidence to counter them.
• Write the Conclusion: Summarize the main points of your argumentative essay. Reinforce the significance of your argument. End with a call to action, a prediction, or a thought-provoking statement.
• Revise, Edit, and Share: Review your essay for clarity, coherence, and consistency. Check for grammatical and spelling errors. Share your essay with peers, friends, or instructors for constructive feedback.
• Finalize Your Argumentative Essay: Make final edits based on feedback received. Ensure that your essay follows the required formatting and citation style.

Struggling to start your argumentative essay? Paperpal can help – try now!   

Argumentative essay writing tips

Here are eight strategies to craft a compelling argumentative essay: 

• Choose a Clear and Controversial Topic : Select a topic that sparks debate and has opposing viewpoints. A clear and controversial issue provides a solid foundation for a strong argument. 
• Conduct Thorough Research : Gather relevant information from reputable sources to support your argument. Use a variety of sources, such as academic journals, books, reputable websites, and expert opinions, to strengthen your position. 
• Create a Strong Thesis Statement : Clearly articulate your main argument in a concise thesis statement. Your thesis should convey your stance on the issue and provide a roadmap for the reader to follow your argument. 
• Develop a Logical Structure : Organize your essay with a clear introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. Each paragraph should focus on a specific point of evidence that contributes to your overall argument. Ensure a logical flow from one point to the next. 
• Provide Strong Evidence : Support your claims with solid evidence. Use facts, statistics, examples, and expert opinions to support your arguments. Be sure to cite your sources appropriately to maintain credibility. 
• Address Counterarguments : Acknowledge opposing viewpoints and counterarguments. Addressing and refuting alternative perspectives strengthens your essay and demonstrates a thorough understanding of the issue. Be mindful of maintaining a respectful tone even when discussing opposing views. 
• Use Persuasive Language : Employ persuasive language to make your points effectively. Avoid emotional appeals without supporting evidence and strive for a respectful and professional tone. 
• Craft a Compelling Conclusion : Summarize your main points, restate your thesis, and leave a lasting impression in your conclusion. Encourage readers to consider the implications of your argument and potentially take action. 

Good argumentative essay example

Let’s consider a sample of argumentative essay on how social media enhances connectivity:

In the digital age, social media has emerged as a powerful tool that transcends geographical boundaries, connecting individuals from diverse backgrounds and providing a platform for an array of voices to be heard. While critics argue that social media fosters division and amplifies negativity, it is essential to recognize the positive aspects of this digital revolution and how it enhances connectivity by providing a platform for diverse voices to flourish. One of the primary benefits of social media is its ability to facilitate instant communication and connection across the globe. Platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram break down geographical barriers, enabling people to establish and maintain relationships regardless of physical location and fostering a sense of global community. Furthermore, social media has transformed how people stay connected with friends and family. Whether separated by miles or time zones, social media ensures that relationships remain dynamic and relevant, contributing to a more interconnected world. Moreover, social media has played a pivotal role in giving voice to social justice movements and marginalized communities. Movements such as #BlackLivesMatter, #MeToo, and #ClimateStrike have gained momentum through social media, allowing individuals to share their stories and advocate for change on a global scale. This digital activism can shape public opinion and hold institutions accountable. Social media platforms provide a dynamic space for open dialogue and discourse. Users can engage in discussions, share information, and challenge each other’s perspectives, fostering a culture of critical thinking. This open exchange of ideas contributes to a more informed and enlightened society where individuals can broaden their horizons and develop a nuanced understanding of complex issues. While criticisms of social media abound, it is crucial to recognize its positive impact on connectivity and the amplification of diverse voices. Social media transcends physical and cultural barriers, connecting people across the globe and providing a platform for marginalized voices to be heard. By fostering open dialogue and facilitating the exchange of ideas, social media contributes to a more interconnected and empowered society. Embracing the positive aspects of social media allows us to harness its potential for positive change and collective growth.

• Clearly Define Your Thesis Statement:   Your thesis statement is the core of your argumentative essay. Clearly articulate your main argument or position on the issue. Avoid vague or general statements.  
• Provide Strong Supporting Evidence:   Back up your thesis with solid evidence from reliable sources and examples. This can include facts, statistics, expert opinions, anecdotes, or real-life examples. Make sure your evidence is relevant to your argument, as it impacts the overall persuasiveness of your thesis.  
• Anticipate Counterarguments and Address Them:   Acknowledge and address opposing viewpoints to strengthen credibility. This also shows that you engage critically with the topic rather than presenting a one-sided argument. 

How to Write an Argumentative Essay with Paperpal?

Writing a winning argumentative essay not only showcases your ability to critically analyze a topic but also demonstrates your skill in persuasively presenting your stance backed by evidence. Achieving this level of writing excellence can be time-consuming. This is where Paperpal, your AI academic writing assistant, steps in to revolutionize the way you approach argumentative essays. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to use Paperpal to write your essay: 

• Sign Up or Log In: Begin by creating an account or logging into paperpal.com .  
• Navigate to Paperpal Copilot: Once logged in, proceed to the Templates section from the side navigation bar.  
• Generate an essay outline: Under Templates, click on the ‘Outline’ tab and choose ‘Essay’ from the options and provide your topic to generate an outline.  
• Develop your essay: Use this structured outline as a guide to flesh out your essay. If you encounter any roadblocks, click on Brainstorm and get subject-specific assistance, ensuring you stay on track. 
• Refine your writing: To elevate the academic tone of your essay, select a paragraph and use the ‘Make Academic’ feature under the ‘Rewrite’ tab, ensuring your argumentative essay resonates with an academic audience. 
• Final Touches: Make your argumentative essay submission ready with Paperpal’s language, grammar, consistency and plagiarism checks, and improve your chances of acceptance.  

Paperpal not only simplifies the essay writing process but also ensures your argumentative essay is persuasive, well-structured, and academically rigorous. Sign up today and transform how you write argumentative essays. 

The length of an argumentative essay can vary, but it typically falls within the range of 1,000 to 2,500 words. However, the specific requirements may depend on the guidelines provided.

You might write an argumentative essay when:  1. You want to convince others of the validity of your position.  2. There is a controversial or debatable issue that requires discussion.  3. You need to present evidence and logical reasoning to support your claims.  4. You want to explore and critically analyze different perspectives on a topic. 

Argumentative Essay:  Purpose : An argumentative essay aims to persuade the reader to accept or agree with a specific point of view or argument.  Structure : It follows a clear structure with an introduction, thesis statement, body paragraphs presenting arguments and evidence, counterarguments and refutations, and a conclusion.  Tone : The tone is formal and relies on logical reasoning, evidence, and critical analysis.    Narrative/Descriptive Essay:  Purpose : These aim to tell a story or describe an experience, while a descriptive essay focuses on creating a vivid picture of a person, place, or thing.  Structure : They may have a more flexible structure. They often include an engaging introduction, a well-developed body that builds the story or description, and a conclusion.  Tone : The tone is more personal and expressive to evoke emotions or provide sensory details. 

• Gladd, J. (2020). Tips for Writing Academic Persuasive Essays.  Write What Matters . 
• Nimehchisalem, V. (2018). Pyramid of argumentation: Towards an integrated model for teaching and assessing ESL writing.  Language & Communication ,  5 (2), 185-200. 
• Press, B. (2022).  Argumentative Essays: A Step-by-Step Guide . Broadview Press. 
• Rieke, R. D., Sillars, M. O., & Peterson, T. R. (2005).  Argumentation and critical decision making . Pearson/Allyn & Bacon. 

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• Empirical Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Academics 
• How to Write a Scientific Paper in 10 Steps 
• What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples)
• Life Sciences Papers: 9 Tips for Authors Writing in Biological Sciences

Make Your Research Paper Error-Free with Paperpal’s Online Spell Checker 

The do’s & don’ts of using generative ai tools ethically in academia, you may also like, what are journal guidelines on using generative ai..., types of plagiarism and 6 tips to avoid..., how to write an essay introduction (with examples)..., similarity checks: the author’s guide to plagiarism and..., what is a master’s thesis: a guide for..., should you use ai tools like chatgpt for..., what are the benefits of generative ai for..., how to avoid plagiarism tips and advice for..., plagiarism checkers vs. ai content detection: navigating the..., plagiarism prevention: why you need a plagiarism check....

University of Notre Dame

Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews

• Home ›
• Reviews ›

Happy Lives and the Highest Good: an essay on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics

Lear, Gabriel Richardson, Happy Lives and the Highest Good: an essay on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics , Princeton University Press, 2004, 256pp, $35.00 (hbk), ISBN 069114668.

Reviewed by Julia Annas, University of Arizona

Most of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics discusses the life of moral virtue, exercised in accordance with practical reasoning, a life taken in the opening passages to be necessary for happiness or eudaimonia , though not sufficient, since some measure of external goods is also required. This is the position regarded as Aristotelian in ancient ethical debate throughout the following period. Our text of the Nicomachean Ethics , however, ends with a passage urging that a life of human happiness lies in contemplation or study ( theoria ) of the highest objects of the intellect.

Can we resolve this puzzle without examining what kind of text our Nicomachean Ethics is? Were the passages we read as Book I and Book X even intended to form part of the same philosophical work? Here we find a range of responses, at one extreme of which is Jonathan Barnes, who in his discussion of the ancient transmission of Aristotle’s works, puts the point with characteristic force: ‘[O]ur EN is an absurdity, surely put together by a desperate scribe or an unscrupulous bookseller and not united by an author or an editor’. 1 Gabriel Richardson Lear assumes that the Nicomachean Ethics is a literary unity; she regards it as containing a progressive argument (p 146) entitling her, for example, to use passages in Book X to illuminate the earlier discussion of to kalon and suggesting that the reason Aristotle is not more informative in the earlier passage is that ‘he is not fully in the position to do so’ until Book X. 2 This puts her at or near the opposite extreme from Barnes, but she nowhere defends her assumptions about the text, and explicitly (p 5) lays aside the relationship of the Nicomachea n to the Eudemian version. Given the very different interpretative assumptions that scholars make about the text, it would have been helpful to have had serious discussion of the literary problems our text offers.

Lear uses Aristotle’s other works to interpret crucial parts of his views on happiness, taking the Nicomachean Ethics to be understood properly only in the context of Aristotle’s physical and metaphysical works, rather than as a self-standing work. She also at several places suggests interesting deep affinities between Aristotle and Plato. This gives her a distinctive approach to the much-fought-over discussion of our final end in the opening passages of the Ethics . She joins the currently growing number of scholars finding Aristotle’s final end to be monistic, rather than inclusivist. Her account of Book I argues that the inclusivist approach is wrong because for Aristotle our telos should be taken to be the ‘technical’ (p 3) notion we find in the Physics and biological works: a normative standard for the performance of an activity. The human telos will thus not be what puts an end to desire but will rather be the goal appropriate to our nature and essence, something which determines the success and value of human activities. Given this account of our telos , we find that when an end is for the sake of another end, this must mean ‘at least that the higher ends provide the criteria of success for the subordinate ones’ (p 17). Lower ends are given their value by their role in contributing to the higher ends. Since happiness is the ‘most final’ end, we are led to an account of our highest end as monistic, with all other ends subordinate to success in achieving it.

Lear follows through the apparently drastic result that there appears to be no place in this conception for what she calls ‘mid-level ends’, ends choiceworthy for themselves and also for their contribution to our final end. She ingeniously finds such a place via the notion of ‘approximation’: ends such as virtuous activity can be choiceworthy for their own sakes and also by virtue of approximating the activity constituting our final end. This notion of approximation is also taken from the physical and biological works, including the way the Prime Mover functions as a final cause and the way that the reproduction of animals approximates the activity of the Prime Mover, at De Anima II 4.

Approximation gives us a way in which a lower end can be related to a higher one that is neither instrumental nor constitutive, and this paves the way for an ingenious solution to the problem of mid-level ends on a monistic interpretation. Morally virtuous activity approximates contemplation, according to Lear, and thus we can reconcile taking contemplation to be our monistic final end with the fact that most of the Ethics is devoted to studying practical reasoning in the exercise of moral virtue. Our final end is contemplation, but the exercise of moral virtue is choiceworthy for its own sake, since it is an approximation of contemplation.

Readers may be worried that, as Lear admits, ‘Aristotle never explicitly says that excellent practical reasoning is good because its essence is defined with reference to wise contemplation’ (p 90). The second half of the book attempts to meet these worries. In Chapter 5 she argues that theoretical and practical reasoning are both to be understood as aiming at truth in different ways, such as precision, in terms of which theoretical reasoning is superior. This is the most speculative part of the book, and, although the ideas are suggestive and interesting, much remains unclear in the claims that Aristotle is talking about ‘living truthfully’ (p 99) and attaining theoretical and practical truthfulness. Lear is clearer in her account of the moral virtues (she deals with courage, temperance and greateness of soul), in a way elucidating how their practice might be understood as an approximation of theoretical contemplation. She focuses on the fine or kalon as the object of virtuous action, giving all virtuous activity an object which is an object of practice determined as what it is by a conception of what is objectively good for humans; this is what she claims as the basis for the way the fine is elsewhere said to be the principle of order, symmetry and boundedness. Each moral choice thus shows that the moral agent has some conception of human flourishing; since this is in fact contemplation, ‘morally virtuous actions will be fine and worth choosing for their own sakes because they are appropriate to the philosopher, whether the virtuous agent understands this or not’. Courageous actions, for example, express a commitment to ‘the excellent rational use of a leisurely citizen’s life’ (p 149, 159); the citizen soldier thinks death in battle worth it because of his commitment as a citizen to the common life of the city; and this in turn is worth it because it allows for leisure, whose best use is contemplation. Only the philosopher will have full understanding of the point of virtuous actions, and this enables Lear in her final chapter to avoid the usual ‘competition’ between the active life and the life of contemplation, since doing everything for the sake of contemplation emerges from a deeper understanding of moral virtue rather than philosophers’ self-interested modification of it.

Lear is quite explicit that the soldier dying on the battlefield may not realize that ‘the exercise of courage approximates contemplation by being structurally similar to it, insofar as it is an exercise of practical reason and truthfulness’ (p 161); only philosophers will understand that. The same is true of any exercise of practical reasoning in virtue: the courageous, the temperate and those with greatness of soul need not understand that what they do is done for the sake of contemplation (though to be virtuous it has to be done for the sake of the fine, something which requires understanding the nature of practical reasoning and its proper aims). Most of us most of the time, even if we make progress in virtue, are thus missing an understanding of what ultimately makes our actions valuable. Lear seems to think that this result is not so strange when we bear in mind that the exercise of practical reason is choiceworthy for itself in being an approximation of theoretical reasoning. But problems remain which Lear’s discussion stimulates without settling.

One is the question of the audience. Lear makes casual reference to Aristotle’s audience ‘who have been raised in fine habits’ (e.g., p 121). On Lear’s view the audience for the Ethics will radically fail to understand it if they attend to it alone. They will understand it only if they come equipped with knowledge of Aristotle’s physical and metaphysical works, and prepared to interpret the work from the beginning in the light of ideas which are expressed only at the end—only if, that is, they come equipped with Lear’s own interpretative batteries. Now this is certainly possible: the fact that the Ethics does not contain the crucial notions in Lear’s interpretation does not mean that we can understand everything in it by studying it alone. Nonetheless, the distance between Lear’s interpretation and interpretations which treat the discussion of moral virtue as self-standing rather than radically underdescribed suggests the need for some attention to the question of how the Ethics was intended to be read, and by whom. These are interestingly different problems from the ones usually thought to arise from the fact that Book X turns up in our Nicomachean Ethics , but they remain problems nonetheless.

The book is rewarding for its close study of several of Aristotle’s most vexed passages in an accessible and imaginative way; particularly worthwhile are the discussions of self-sufficiency (bringing in the related passages from Plato’s Philebus ), the kalon and ‘greatness of soul’. The book is most likely to convince of its main theses those who share its substantial methodological assumptions, and it would have been helpful to have had explicit discussion of these. The book will also be valuable in furthering examination of deep similarities between Aristotle’s ethical thought and that of Plato, which I have not had the scope to examine here.

1 Barnes adds in a footnote: ‘That our EN is not a unity is beyond controversy—the existence of two treatments of pleasure is enough to prove the fact. The only questions concern who invented our text, and when, and from what materials, and for what motives.’ ( p 58-9 of Jonathan Barnes, ‘Roman Aristotle,’ in Jonathan Barnes and Miriam Griffin (eds), Philosophia Togata II:Plato and Aristotle at Rome, Oxford University Press 1997, pp 1-69.)

2 She also claims (apparently on the basis of her overall interpretation) that Book VI has a ‘protreptic’ structure (pp 93-4).

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Student Opinion

310 Prompts for Argumentative Writing

Questions on everything from mental health and sports to video games and dating. Which ones inspire you to take a stand?

By Natalie Proulx

Does social media harm young people’s mental health? Do video games deserve the bad rap they often get? Should parents track their children? Who is the greatest athlete of all time?

Every school day, we publish new questions for students based on the news of the day, including prompts, like these, that inspire persuasive writing.

Below, we’ve rounded up over 300 of those argumentative prompts, organized by topic, all in one place. They cover everything from parenting and schools to music and social media. Each one, drawn from our Student Opinion column , links to a free New York Times article as well as additional subquestions that can help you think more deeply about it.

You can use these prompts however you like, whether to inspire an entry for our new Open Letter Contest , to hone your persuasive writing skills or simply to share your opinions on the issues of today. So scroll through the list below and see which ones inspire you to take a stand.

If you enjoy these questions, know that you can find all of our argumentative writing prompts, as they publish, here . Students 13 and up from anywhere in the world are invited to comment.

Argumentative Prompt Topics

Technology and social media, college, work and money, health and relationships, gender and race, arts and entertainment, parenting and childhood, government and politics, animals, science and time.

Social Media

1. Does Social Media Harm Young People’s Mental Health? 2. How Much Should Speech Be Moderated on Social Media? 3. Should the United States Ban TikTok? 4. How Young Is Too Young to Use Social Media? 5. Should Kids Be Social Media Influencers? 6. What Should Be Done to Protect Children Online? 7. Should There Be Separate Social Media Apps for Children? 8. Are You a Fan of ‘School Accounts’ on Social Media? 9. Will Social Media Help or Hurt Your College and Career Goals? 10. Is It Ever OK to Use Strangers as Content for Social Media?

Phones and Devices

11. Should More Teenagers Ditch Their Smartphones? 12. Should the Adults in Your Life Be Worried by How Much You Use Your Phone? 13. Should Phones Ever Be a Part of Family or Holiday Gatherings? 14. What Are Your Texting Dos and Don’ts? 15. Does Grammar Still Matter in the Age of Twitter? 16. Is Your Phone Love Hurting Your Relationships? 17. Should Texting While Driving Be Treated Like Drunken Driving? 18. How Young Is Too Young for an Apple Watch?

The Internet

19. Do Memes Make the Internet a Better Place? 20. How Excited Are You About the Metaverse? 21. Should Websites Force Users to Prove How Old They Are? 22. What Is the Best Way to Stop Abusive Language Online? 23. How Do You Feel About Cancel Culture? 24. Does Online Public Shaming Prevent Us From Being Able to Grow and Change? 25. Do You Think Online Conspiracy Theories Can Be Dangerous? 26. Does Technology Make Us More Alone?

School Discipline and Attendance

27. Should Schools Ban Cellphones? 28. How Should Schools Hold Students Accountable for Hurting Others? 29. What Are Your Thoughts on Uniforms and Strict Dress Codes? 30. Should Schools Test Their Students for Nicotine and Drug Use? 31. How Can Schools Engage Students Who Are at Risk of Dropping Out? 32. Should Students Be Allowed to Miss School for Mental Health Reasons? 33. Should Your School Day Start Later? 34. Should There Still Be Snow Days? 35. Do Kids Need Recess? 36. Should Students Be Punished for Not Having Lunch Money?

School Quality and Effectiveness

37. How Do You Think American Education Could Be Improved? 38. Do Schools Need to Do More to Hold Students Accountable? 39. Are Straight A’s Always a Good Thing? 40. Should Students Have the Same Teachers Year After Year? 41. Do Teachers Assign Too Much Homework? 42. Should We Get Rid of Homework? 43. Should We Eliminate Gifted and Talented Programs? 44. Is It Time to Get Rid of Timed Tests? 45. What Role Should Textbooks Play in Education? 46. How Should Senior Year in High School Be Spent? 47. Does Your School Need More Money? 48. Do School Employees Deserve More Respect — and Pay? 49. Should Public Preschool Be a Right for All Children?

Teaching and Learning

50. Do You Think We Need to Change the Way Math Is Taught? 51. Should Financial Literacy Be a Required Course in School? 52. Should Schools Teach Students Kitchen and Household Skills? 53. Do We Need Better Music Education? 54. What Are the Most Important Things Students Should Learn in School? 55. What Is the Purpose of Teaching U.S. History? 56. Do Schools Need to Do More to Support Visual Thinkers? 57. Is School a Place for Self-Expression? 58. Should Media Literacy Be a Required Course in School? 59. Can Empathy Be Taught? Should Schools Try to Help Us Feel One Another’s Pain? 60. Should Schools Teach You How to Be Happy? 61. Should All Schools Teach Cursive? 62. Should Kids Still Learn to Tell Time? 63. How Important Is Knowing a Foreign Language

Technology in School

64. How Should Schools Respond to ChatGPT? 65. Does Learning to Be a Good Writer Still Matter in the Age of A.I.? 66. Is Online Learning Effective? 67. Should Students Be Monitored When Taking Online Tests? 68. Should Schools Be Able to Discipline Students for What They Say on Social Media? 69. Can Social Media Be a Tool for Learning and Growth in Schools? 70. Should Facial Recognition Technology Be Used in Schools? 71. Is Live-Streaming Classrooms a Good Idea? 72. Should Teachers and Professors Ban Student Use of Laptops in Class? 73. Are the Web Filters at Your School Too Restrictive?

Education Politics

74. Do You Feel Your School and Teachers Welcome Both Conservative and Liberal Points of View? 75. Should Students Learn About Climate Change in School? 76. Should Teachers Provide Trigger Warnings for ‘Traumatic Content’? 77. Should Teachers Be Allowed to Wear Political Symbols? 78. What Do You Think About Efforts to Ban Books From School Libraries? 79. What Is Your Reaction to the Growing Fight Over What Young People Can Read? 80. What Do You Think About the Controversy Surrounding the New A.P. Course on African American Studies? 81. Should Schools or Employers Be Allowed to Tell People How They Should Wear Their Hair? 82. Does Prayer Have Any Place in Public Schools? 83. Should Schools Be Allowed to Censor Student Newspapers?

College Admissions

84. Should Colleges Consider Standardized Tests in Admissions? 85. Should Students Let ChatGPT Help Them Write Their College Essays? 86. What Is Your Reaction to the End of Race-Based Affirmative Action in College Admissions? 87. Are Early-Decision Programs Unfair? Should Colleges Do Away With Them? 88. Is the College Admissions Process Fair? 89. How Much Do You Think It Matters Where You Go to College? 90. Should Everyone Go to College? 91. Should College Be Free? 92. Is Student Debt Worth It? 93. Should High Schools Post Their Annual College Lists?

Campus Life

94. What Should Free Speech Look Like on Campus? 95. Should Greek Life on College Campuses Come to an End? 96. Should Universities Work to Curtail Student Drinking? 97. How Should the Problem of Sexual Assault on Campuses Be Addressed? 98. Are Lavish Amenities on College Campuses Useful or Frivolous? 99. Should ‘Despised Dissenters’ Be Allowed to Speak on College Campuses? 100. Should Emotional Support Animals Be Allowed on College Campuses?

Jobs and Careers

101. Is High School a Good Time to Train for a Career? 102. Is There Such a Thing as a ‘Useless’ College Major? 103. Should All High School Students Have Part-Time Jobs? 104. Should National Service Be Required for All Young Americans? 105. Is It OK to Use Family Connections to Get a Job?

Money and Business

106. Do You Think the American Dream Is Real? 107. Should All Young People Learn How to Invest in the Stock Market? 108. Should We All Go Cashless? 109. When Should You Tip? 110. Should We End the Practice of Tipping? 111. Are You a Crypto Optimist or Skeptic? 112. Do Celebrities and Influencers Make You Want to Buy What They’re Selling? 113. Is $1 Billion Too Much Money for Any One Person to Have? 114. Are C.E.O.s Paid Too Much? 115. Is It Immoral to Increase the Price of Goods During a Crisis? 116. What Should Stores Do With Unsold Goods? 117. Is There a ‘Right Way’ to Be a Tourist? 118. Who Should We Honor on Our Money?

Mental Health

119. Is Teen Mental Health in a State of Crisis? 120. ‘Love-Bombing.’ ‘Gaslighting.’ ‘Victim.’ Is ‘Trauma Talk’ Overused? 121. Does Achieving Success Always Include Being Happy? 122. Is Struggle Essential to Happiness? 123. Should Schools Teach Mindfulness? 124. How Can We Bring an End to the ‘Epidemic of Loneliness’? 125. Does Every Country Need a ‘Loneliness Minister’? 126. What Ideas Do You Have to Bring Your Community Closer Together? 127. Are Emotional-Support Animals a Scam? 128. Is It OK to Laugh During Dark Times?

Dating and Relationships

129. Who Should Pay for Dates? 130. Do Marriage Proposals Still Have a Place in Today’s Society? 131. Should Your Significant Other Be Your Best Friend? 132. How Do You Think Technology Affects Dating?

Physical Health

133. Should Governments Do More to Discourage People From Smoking and Vaping? 134. How Should Adults Talk to Kids About Drugs? 135. Can Laziness Be a Good Thing? 136. Should There Be Requirements for Teens Who Want to Ride E-Bikes? 137. What Advice Should Parents and Counselors Give Teenagers About Sexting? 138. Should All Children Be Vaccinated? 139. Do We Worry Too Much About Germs?

140. Is It Becoming More Acceptable for Men and Boys to Cry? 141. Is It Harder for Men and Boys to Make and Keep Friends? 142. Should Award Shows Eliminate Gendered Categories? 143. Should There Be More Gender Options on Identification Documents? 144. Justice Ginsburg Fought for Gender Equality. How Close Are We to Achieving That Goal? 145. What Should #MeToo Mean for Teenage Boys? 146. What Is Hard About Being a Boy? 147. Should There Be More Boy Dolls? 148. Is Single-Sex Education Still Useful? 149. Are Beauty Pageants Still Relevant? 150. Should Period Products Be Free? 151. What Are Your Thoughts on Last Names? 152. What Rules Should Apply to Transgender Athletes When They Compete? 153. What Is Your Reaction to the Recent Wave of Legislation That Seeks to Regulate the Lives of Transgender Youths? 154. What Do You Wish Lawmakers Knew About How Anti-L.G.B.T.Q. Legislation Affects Teenagers?

Identity, Race and Ethnicity

155. How Should Schools Respond to Racist Jokes? 156. How Should Parents Teach Their Children About Race and Racism? 157. What Is Your Reaction to Efforts to Limit Teaching on Race in Schools? 158. How Should Racial Slurs in Literature Be Handled in the Classroom? 159. Should Confederate Statues Be Removed or Remain in Place? 160. Should We Rename Schools Named for Historical Figures With Ties to Racism, Sexism or Slavery? 161. How Should We Remember the Problematic Actions of the Nation’s Founders? 162. Does the United States Owe Reparations to the Descendants of Enslaved People? 163. What Can History Teach Us About Resilience? 164. Should All Americans Receive Anti-Bias Education? 165. Is Fear of ‘The Other’ Poisoning Public Life? 166. What Stereotypical Characters Make You Cringe? 167. When Talking About Identity, How Much Do Words Matter? 168. How Useful Is It to Be Multilingual?

TV and Movies

169. Is True Crime As a Form of Entertainment Ethical? 170. Should Old TV Shows Be Brought Back? 171. Does Reality TV Deserve Its Bad Rap? 172. How Closely Should Actors’ Identities Reflect the Roles They Play? 173. In the Age of Digital Streaming, Are Movie Theaters Still Relevant? 174. Do We Need More Female Superheroes? 175. Is Hollywood Becoming More Diverse? 176. When Does Lying in Comedy Cross a Line? 177. How Do You Feel About ‘Nepotism Babies’?

Music and Video Games

178. Will A.I. Replace Pop Stars? 179. If Two Songs Sound Alike, Is It Stealing? 180. Should Musicians Be Allowed to Copy or Borrow From Other Artists? 181. How Do You Feel About Censored Music? 182. What Are the Greatest Songs of All Time? 183. Do Video Games Deserve the Bad Rap They Often Get? 184. Should There Be Limits on How Much Time Young People Spend Playing Video Games? 185. Should More Parents Play Video Games With Their Kids?

186. Are A.I.-Generated Pictures Art? 187. What Work of Art Should Your Friends Fall in Love With? 188. If Artwork Offends People, Should It Be Removed? 189. Should Museums Return Looted Artifacts to Their Countries of Origin? 190. Should Art Come With Trigger Warnings? 191. Is the Digital Era Improving or Ruining the Experience of Art? 192. Are Museums Still Important in the Digital Age? 193. Can You Separate Art From the Artist? 194. Are There Subjects That Should Be Off-Limits to Artists, or to Certain Artists in Particular? 195. Should Graffiti Be Protected?

Books and Literature

196. Is Listening to a Book Just as Good as Reading It? 197. Should Classic Children’s Books Be Updated for Today’s Young Readers? 198. Should White Writers Translate a Black Author’s Work? 199. Is There Any Benefit to Reading Books You Hate? 200. Should Libraries Get Rid of Late Fees?

201. What’s the Best — and Worst — Part of Being a Sports Fan? 202. Who Is the GOAT? 203. Do Women’s Sports Deserve More Attention? 204. What Should Be Done About the Gender Pay Gap in Sports? 205. Should Girls and Boys Sports Teams Compete in the Same League? 206. Should More Sports Be Coed? 207. College Athletes Can Now Be Paid. But Not All of Them Are Seeing Money. Is That Fair? 208. Should High School-Age Basketball Players Be Able to Get Paid? 209. Are Some Youth Sports Too Intense? 210. Are Youth Sports Too Competitive? 211. Is It Bad Sportsmanship to Run Up the Score in Youth Sports? 212. Is It Ethical to Be a Football Fan? 213. Does the N.F.L. Have a Race Problem? 214. What New Rules Would Improve Your Favorite Sport? 215. What Sports Deserve More Hype? 216. How Should We Punish Sports Cheaters? 217. Should Technology in Sports Be Limited? 218. Does Better Sports Equipment Unfairly Improve Athletic Ability? 219. Is It Offensive for Sports Teams and Their Fans to Use Native American Names, Imagery and Gestures? 220. Is It Selfish to Pursue Risky Sports Like Extreme Mountain Climbing? 221. Should Cheerleading Be an Olympic Sport?

Related Writing Prompt

222. Should Parents Ever Be Held Responsible for the Harmful Actions of Their Children? 223. Where Is the Line Between Helping a Child Become More Resilient and Pushing Them Too Hard? 224. Should Parents Give Children More Responsibility at Younger Ages? 225. Should Parents Tell Children the Truth About Santa? 226. Should Parents Weigh in on Their Kids’ Dating Lives? 227. Should Parents Track Their Children? 228. How Should Parents Support a Student Who Has Fallen Behind in School? 229. Do Parents Ever Cross a Line by Helping Too Much With Schoolwork? 230. What’s the Best Way to Discipline Children? 231. What Are Your Thoughts on ‘Snowplow Parents’? 232. Should Stay-at-Home Parents Be Paid? 233. Should Parents Bribe Their Children?

Childhood and Growing Up

234. Is It Harder to Grow Up in the 21st Century Than It Was in the Past? 235. Is Childhood Today Over-Supervised? 236. When Do You Become an Adult? 237. Who Should Decide Whether a Teenager Can Get a Tattoo or Piercing? 238. Do We Give Children Too Many Trophies? 239. What Can Older Generations Learn From Gen Z? 240. What Is the Worst Toy Ever?

Legislation and Policy

241. Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished? 242. Should Marijuana Be Legal? 243. Should the United States Decriminalize the Possession of Drugs? 244. What Is Your Reaction to the State of Abortion Rights? 245. Should the Government Cancel Student Debt? 246. Should Public Transit Be Free? 247. Should There Be More Public Restrooms? 248. Should the U.S. Be Doing More to Prevent Child Poverty? 249. Should the Government Provide a Guaranteed Income for Families With Children? 250. Should Law Enforcement Be Able to Use DNA Data From Genealogy Websites for Criminal Investigations?

Gun Violence

251. Are You Concerned About Violence in America? 252. How Should Americans Deal With the Problem of Gun Violence? 253. What Should Lawmakers Do About Guns and Gun Violence? 254. Should the U.S. Ban Military-Style Semiautomatic Weapons? 255. Should Teachers Be Armed With Guns?

Voting and Elections

256. How Much Faith Do You Have in the U.S. Political System? 257. Is the Electoral College a Problem? Does It Need to Be Fixed? 258. Does Everyone Have a Responsibility to Vote? 259. Should We All Be Able to Vote by Mail? 260. Should There Be a Minimum Voting Age? 261. Should the Voting Age Be Lowered to 16? 262. Should Ex-Felons Have the Right to Vote? 263. Are Presidential Debates Helpful to Voters? Or Should They Be Scrapped?

Freedoms and Rights

264. How Important Is Freedom of the Press? 265. Why Does the Right to Protest Matter? 266. Does the U.S. Constitution Need an Equal Rights Amendment? 267. Do You Care Who Sits on the Supreme Court? Should We Care? 268. Should You Have a Right to Be Rude? 269. Should Prisons Offer Incarcerated People Education Opportunities?

Civic Participation

270. Are You Optimistic About the State of the World? 271. If You Could Take On One Problem Facing Our World, What Would It Be? 272. If You Were Mayor, What Problems Facing Your Community Would You Tackle? 273. Do You Think Teenagers Can Make a Difference in the World? 274. Do You Think It Is Important for Teenagers to Participate in Political Activism? 275. Is Your Generation Doing Its Part to Strengthen Our Democracy? 276. How Is Your Generation Changing Politics? 277. Why Is It Important for People With Different Political Beliefs to Talk to Each Other? 278. Are We Being Bad Citizens If We Don’t Keep Up With the News? 279. Why Do Bystanders Sometimes Fail to Help When They See Someone in Danger? 280. When Is It OK to Be a Snitch? 281. Should Reporters Ever Help the People They Are Covering? 282. Should Celebrities Weigh In on Politics? 283. Should Athletes Speak Out On Social and Political Issues? 284. Should Corporations Take Political Stands? 285. What Do You Think the Role of the First Lady — or First Spouse — Should Be Today?

286. Is Animal Testing Ever Justified? 287. What Is Our Responsibility to Lab Animals? 288. What Are Your Thoughts About Hunting Animals? 289. Should We Be Concerned With Where We Get Our Pets? 290. What Do You Think of Pet Weddings? 291. Is It Wrong to Focus on Animal Welfare When Humans Are Suffering? 292. Should We Bring Back Animals From Extinction? 293. Are Zoos Immoral? 294. Do Bugs Deserve More Respect?

Environment and Science

295. What Role Should Young People Play in the Fight Against Climate Change? 296. Should We Be More Optimistic About Efforts to Combat Climate Change? 297. How Far Is Too Far in the Fight Against Climate Change? 298. Should Plastic Bags Be Banned Everywhere? 299. Is It Ethical to Create Genetically Edited Humans? 300. Should We Still Be Sending Astronauts to Space? 301. Do You Think Pluto Should Be a Planet? 302. Should We Treat Robots Like People?

Time and Seasons

303. What Is the Best Month of the Year? What Is the Worst? 304. Would Life Be Better Without Time Zones? 305. Do You Think It Is Time to Get Rid of Daylight Saving Time? 306. When Do Holiday Decorations Go From Festive to Excessive? 307. Should We Rethink Thanksgiving? 308. When Does a Halloween Costume Cross the Line? 309. Should School Be a Place to Celebrate Halloween? 310. Should the Week Be Four Days Instead of Five?

Students 13 and older in the United States and Britain, and 16 and older elsewhere, are invited to comment. All comments are moderated by the Learning Network staff, but please keep in mind that once your comment is accepted, it will be made public and may appear in print.

Find more Student Opinion questions here. Teachers, check out this guide to learn how you can incorporate these prompts into your classroom.

Natalie Proulx joined The Learning Network as a staff editor in 2017 after working as an English language arts teacher and curriculum writer. More about Natalie Proulx

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

Court papers: argument over littering led to machete attack outside Little Caesars

WATERTOWN, New York (WWNY) - It began with an argument over littering and ended with a machete attack that sent two people to the hospital. We’re talking about Tuesday’s stabbing outside a pizza shop in Watertown.

With his hands cuffed behind his back and his head held high, Shayquan Bullocks was led by Watertown police into city court Wednesday morning. The 18-year-old Watertown High School student was arraigned on assault and weapon possession charges and ordered held without bail in the Jefferson County Jail.

His court appearance comes less than 24 hours after he allegedly attacked two people with a machete outside the Little Caesars pizza restaurant on State Street. Court documents identify the victims as 31-year-old Katrina Dusharm and her fiancé 30-year-old Josh Larkins.

According to the papers, the couple and a friend, Josh Ortlieb, first laid eyes on Bullocks at the Stewarts shop on Coffeen Street on Tuesday. The documents say this group of three, while in a white pickup truck, saw Bullocks drop some trash and yelled out at him, “Hey, scumbag, pick up your trash.”

Papers say Bullocks yelled back, “Make me,” and crossed the street.

Later on, Bullocks, now allegedly armed with a machete, spotted the trio at the Little Caesars drive-thru.

“That’s where the victims were - inside of the truck. The verbal altercation ensued, and they got out of the vehicle and that’s when the physical altercation happened,” said Det. Lt. Jason Badalato, Watertown Police Department.

Police reports say Dusharm got out of the pickup truck after some verbal back and forth with Bullocks.

Dusharm told police that she got out and punched Bullocks in the face.

She said, “All I saw was a black object hit me in the head and in the right hand.”

That black object was a machete, police say.

According to police, Dusharm suffered a deep cut to her hand, damaging a tendon, and also a cut on her head that required staples.

While this was going on, police say Larkins got out of the truck to help his fiancée.

Police say Larkins put his hands on Bullocks but ran away as soon as he saw the machete.

Bullocks allegedly chased Larkins and caught him on the sidewalk of State Street, where he struck him in the face with the machete. Court papers say Larkins lost one of his eyes. His family though says that’s not the case, but Larkins did sustain eye injuries.

Ortlieb told police when he saw his friends get attacked, he got a torque wrench out of the pickup and chased Bullocks with it until police arrived on the scene.

Copyright 2024 WWNY. All rights reserved.

Motorcyclist dies in crash on Interstate 781

Video shows aftermath of Watertown stabbing, suspect identified

Watertown stabbing suspect arraigned; we learn more about alleged victims’ injuries

Jefferson County appoints new deputy administrator

Latest news.

Highlights & scores: College lacrosse & high school baseball

Northpole bingo: A weekly tradition for many

Send It To 7 Pics of the Week: Scenic shots across the region

Seasonably cooler through Easter weekend

Fort drum soldier dies in motorcycle crash.