3

The question is really simple, but at the same time really deep. Why do we seek for a life that would make us happy?

Why for example wouldn't we want to be sad? Or to be neither happy nor sad? Why do we want to have pleasure?

user8578
  • 39
  • 1
  • 2
    Our brains reward us with dopamine when we do things that favor our reproductive success. Maybe you would respond by asking "why do we like dopamine?", but this is, at least, a reduction of your question to neuroscience and philosophy of mind. – Tim kinsella Jul 26 '14 at 02:15
  • 2
    Also, here's a marginal note that may or may not be illuminating: Can you come up with a non-circular definition of "pleasure" which is better than "that which is sought after"? – Tim kinsella Jul 26 '14 at 02:27
  • It's cultural and economic. If you're at the survival level, you don't worry about being happy, just about getting something to eat. It's Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Since most of us are posting from relatively well-off locations, we see a lot of happiness-striving around us. If we were in a refugee camp in Somalia we wouldn't see so much self-actualization going on. Or Internet chatting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs – user4894 Jul 26 '14 at 03:08
  • This is the same question I posted [here](http://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/14769/why-does-the-average-mind-act-to-fulfill-his-desires). – Hakim Jul 26 '14 at 10:25
  • We seek change. – Asphir Dom Jul 26 '14 at 15:43
  • The question "why _should_ we want to be happy?" is a philosophical question, but your question is about human behavior, i.e. belongs to psychology. – user132181 Jul 26 '14 at 16:19
  • This question appears to be off-topic because as formulated answers would come from the fields of cognitive science or psychology, not philosophy. – Rex Kerr Jul 27 '14 at 05:18
  • @RexKerr it has nothing to do with stuff you mentioned. Will translate for you like this - Why there is pleasure in the universe? What is relation between pleasure and sufferings? Is pleasure more important than sufferings? And so so so on. Still want to delegate this matter to miserable in neuroscience? – Asphir Dom Jul 27 '14 at 23:41
  • @AsphirDom - Yes, those are all psychology / cog sci questions now (maybe with some evolutionary biology and neuroscience thrown in). Critically, they are all addressable _empirically_ now. – Rex Kerr Jul 28 '14 at 04:13
  • As asked, this question can't be answered without appealing to opinion. @user8578, can you define what you mean by "happiness." Even then, it'd probably be too broad. – James Kingsbery Jul 28 '14 at 15:15
  • @RexKerr They will never be addressed empirically, because of qualia. If you think they will you did not understand fully what qualia is. Fully. – Asphir Dom Jul 31 '14 at 23:21
  • 1
    @AsphirDom - I am certain that I do not understand fully what qualia are, but I wonder who could possibly justify a claim that they did understand it fully? (I can envision strategies that Vitalists used, but we all know how well those worked out, hm?) – Rex Kerr Aug 01 '14 at 00:23
  • If you wonder you assume there is a right answer/method/idea/process. There are people who understood it fully, even if that fully means better than everybody else. Do not assume there are no trailblazers. – Asphir Dom Aug 02 '14 at 14:26

0 Answers0