Votes : 0

Happiness: A Delightful Foretaste of Eternity

Giovanni Cucci, SJ- La Civiltà Cattolica - Thu, May 25th 2023

Happiness
A universal experience that eludes definition

Happiness is hard to define precisely. It has a vast array of synonyms with slightly different meanings that can take us in different directions (wellbeing, satisfaction, gratification, pleasure, joy, contentment). At the same time, people of all ages and cultures are familiar with it; happiness is understood all over the world. Those who live outside of their native country and know at least two languages give similar answers on respective questionnaires, even if the idioms differ greatly (say, English and Chinese, for example). The same situation is found in countries where many languages are spoken. For example, in Switzerland the answers to questions posed in Italian, French or German show no significant differences.1 Culture or language makes no difference.

Another common element shown is that happiness is not something that we can make with our own hands; it is not at our service. It can only be embraced when it appears at the most unexpected moment. This is why happiness has been likened to a butterfly. It flees when we chase it, only to alight on us when we are calmly seated. Because of its fleeting nature, the ancients called happiness eudaimonia, the work of a “good demon”: it is something superior to us – we are not its measure – but we can recognize and embrace it.

Aristotle identified happiness with contemplation because, in this activity, we participate in the life that is proper to God. For the Greek philosopher, the joy that derived from contemplation could not be likened to any other experience of which we are capable: “Such a life will be superior to the human condition: in fact, it is not in as much as we are human that we will live this way, but in as much as that which is divine is present in us.”2

Every activity is a way of reaching this fullness, the true motor that constantly accompanies us and allows us to feel alive, fulfilled. Ignatius of Loyola called this final destination “the feeling and enjoyment of things interiorly” (Spiritual Exercises, n.2).

 

 

The contemplative dimension of happiness

It is important not to be equivocal in using this term, as if it were reserved to a small community of hermits or as if it encouraged passivity at the cost of action. Contemplation does not lessen or diminish activity, but brings it to fullness, giving an element of joy and beauty to what has been accomplished. The same Karl Marx who forcefully criticized the contemplative dimension of philosophizing dedicated a few words to a future society without class or alienation using terminology tied to the fullness and gratuity of existence: “In the communist society, where each person does not have an exclusive sphere of activity but can perfect themselves in any area to their liking, society regulates general production and so makes it possible for me to do this today, and something else tomorrow, in the morning go hunting and in the afternoon fishing, in the evening raise animals, after lunch criticize. All as I desire. And this without becoming either a hunter or a fisherman, a pastor or a critic.”3 Nevertheless, Marx theorized about a society deprived of contemplative spaces and focused solely on production, a society that revealed itself as inhuman.

Contemplation is not opposed to action but is, rather, its highest expression, allowing us to be fully alive. The psychologist A. Maslow calls these moments “peak–experiences”, when it is as if time stopped, existence is perceived in its beauty, and the Absolute makes its entrance, hitting the subject. One experiences a profound joy, surprise and amazement, together with a sense of gratitude for the gift unexpectedly received. Following this, a person becomes more tolerant, capable of forgiving, of empathy and knows how to better respond to suffering and difficulty.4 The term “peak–experiences” takes in an extremely varied phenomenological range of happenings: poetry, literary inspiration, works of art, obtaining an excellent result, a sports record, a mystical state. Even one’s own profession could be lived not merely as an instrument for survival or for making money, but as something excellent in which to experience some form of fullness.

Contemplation is not a moment of isolation but is the fullness of communication and relation. Let us consider the splendid description of the experience of Augustine and his mother Monica at Ostia.5 Whoever experiences such moments does not have the impression of being lifeless but, on the contrary, considers them among the most intense of their lives.

Contemplation as described above is therefore closer to happiness. Happiness speaks to us of the Infinite as the final goal of our quest for fullness: “Our intellect, furthermore, extends to the infinite in understanding; and a sign of this is that, given any finite quantity, our intellect can think of a greater one. But this ordering of the intellect toward the infinite would be in vain if no infinite reality existed to be thought of” (Summa contra Gentiles, I. cap. 43). This fullness can be lived in a fragmentary manner, as if in a mirror, as St. Paul would say. As Aristotle noted, we are dealing with something brief and intermittent. Happiness can be full and total only after death: “In that state of beatitude, the human mind will be united to God through a single, continuous and eternal operation” (Summa Theol., I–II, q. 3, a. 2, ad 4um; see also Summa contra Gent., III, capp. 25; 37; 39; 48).

All of this is in line with the concept of “virtue” found in the ancient thought that St. Thomas followed. He considered it as an anticipated form of beatitude (see Summa Theol., I–II, q. 5, a. 5), an excellence experienced that allows one to live in fullness and to enjoy what one does.6 Those who live a full (happy) existence not only live well but also, in general, live longer. In research conducted on 180 religious women between the ages of 20 and 30, 75 per cent of those who expressed satisfaction had a median life span of more than 80 years, while only 35 percent of those who considered themselves unhappy reached the same age. The awareness of living well, of being satisfied with one’s own life has an effect on health and longevity, because it strengthens immune defenses and favors resilience, the capacity to actively confront difficulties.7

The disappearance of happiness

The Declaration of Independence of the United States of America ratifies the search for happiness as an inalienable human right for the first time, in a juridical form.8  But, when one tries to set out, in black and white, a right or a value, it is because it is no longer a habitual part of the people’s imagination: “Happiness seems a bit like love: if you have to ask yourself if you are in love or not, most likely, you aren’t.”9  The modern mind has sought to make happiness a right available to everyone; in this way, it has progressively grown further away from its horizon, even speculative, to the point of disappearing. Such a topic, in fact, did not find itself at home among those schools of thought that probed the human psyche with scientific rigor. For Freud, the particular characteristic of civilization is precisely the renunciation of happiness in order to obtain security.10

Modern philosophy continued this exclusion for, as opposed to the ancient models, it did not appear to be interested in happiness, considering it a vain illusion. As Fulvia de Luise and Giuseppe Farinetti note in introducing their research on this theme: “If we have to define the place of happiness in contemporary culture, we find ourselves seriously hampered. In the ethical–political sphere, the concept appears to merge into its powerful synonyms, pleasure and interests, while the obsolete nature of the passions and of grand collective values suggests an attitude of quiet acceptance of unhappiness on the part of the majority.”11

If happiness is in relation to the “good demon” and to the desire for the eternal, it is understandable that its role appears marginal in the development of modern thought, which is always more interested in how much it can supersede the verifiably empirical. The abandonment of the transcendent perspective carries with it the disappearance of themes that are essentially related to it, such as the fullness of life, spirituality, beauty, revealing the ever greater unease, the unhealthy vision of the human person, reduced to being a programmable machine. Such a perspective was notably expressed in the 18th century, in the French Encyclopedie article on “Philosophers”: “The philosopher … is a clock that winds itself from time to time. In this way, philosophers avoid those things which could cause feelings that are unhelpful for well–being and for being rational.”12

What has happened since has shown the failure of this project. Man, even if a philosopher, cannot wind himself up, and is not capable of giving himself happiness on earth. The growing amount of knowledge and possibilities available, of which the Encyclopedia made itself the loudspeaker, has not increased our wellbeing. Western societies have made great strides in the past 50 years in many aspects: longevity, life expectancy, food availability, medical treatment, access to education, freedom of movement, a diffusion of rights.

Yet despite all of this, the percentage of perceived unhappiness has risen notably. In the past 50 years, depression has grown tenfold; if, at one time, the first episode of depression happened around the age of 30, now it appears as early as 13. The increase in personal wealth has not made people happier than before, and yet, the race for economic wellbeing remains an uncontested mantra, deaf to any contradiction. 13

Happiness and sadness

Another of the reasons it seems difficult to speak about happiness and the possibility of obtaining it, lies in the efforts to eliminate its mirror image, sadness.14 This was the wish of the author of the article in the Encyclopedia cited above. Instead, sadness and happiness are united and the loss of one brings about the disappearance of the other.

The lesson that comes from science fiction in this area is particularly significant. Take, for example the novel, “Brave New World” by A. Huxley. In this novel, the writer imagines a world where technology allows the realization of any desire, an extraordinary abundance of goods, capable of guaranteeing wellbeing. Nevertheless, there has not been a growth in happiness: the increased tenor of life is paid for by the suppression of variety in personal characteristics, bringing about a dictatorship of technology. To the governor/dictator of the “Brave New World,” who has substituted surrogates for feelings in order to eliminate every possible glitch, Savage responds: “But I love the inconveniences.” “We don’t”, said the Controller. “We prefer to do things comfortably.” “But I don’t want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin.” “In fact,” said Mustapha Mond, “you’re claiming the right to be unhappy.” “All right then,” said Savage defiantly, “I’m claiming the right to be unhappy.”15

In the same way, R. Nozick, a political philosopher, has imagined the creation of a machine capable of giving pleasurable sensations upon request. And yet, instead of feeling joy, “hooking oneself up to the machine is a kind of suicide […]. There is no true contact with any more profound reality, in that it can simulate the experience. The machine does not satisfy our desire to be in a certain way.”16 A manufactured pleasurable situation ends by extinguishing the joy of living.

In the same perspective, one can consider the numerous utopian proposals for a perfect political, social and administrative society created on the basis of merely practical criteria, lacking in idealism.17 Utopia speaks of an opening, of indetermination that is antithetical to mere programming, allowing the human being to realize the highest possibilities. It is not by chance that the word “utopia” has both a positive meaning (“good–place”) and a negative one (“place that does not exist”), and Thomas More’s vocabulary speaks of the city of Utopia in indeterminate terms, as something that is not available but at the same time animates the search for the perfect place. The city of Utopia in the past was called Abraxa (“not bathed in rain”); and the river that runs through it is called Anyder (“river without water”); the capital is called Amaurot (“unknown and obscure”); the supreme judge is called Ademus (“he who has no people”). The tension toward a perfect society should always be understood in the negative, as a tension, not as something that can be translated into a precise and immediate design; it is not something that can be had once and for all.18

The search for merely material wellbeing, other than annihilating those characteristics most proper to the human being, undervalues the problematic foundations of life, that cannot have a technical “final solution.” Meaningful in this regard is Benedict XVI’s response to a book by Odifreddi, Caro papa ti scrivo, where the so–called “impertinent mathematician” proposes the substitution of a hypothetic scientific religion for religion: “Your religion of mathematics leaves three fundamental themes of human existence unconsidered: freedom, love and evil. I am amazed that you, with only a nod, eliminate freedom that has been and remains the most important value of the modern age. In your book, love does not appear; similarly, there is no information on evil. Whatever neurobiology may or may not say about freedom, in the real drama of our history, it is present as a determining reality and must be taken into consideration. But your mathematical religion does not know anything about evil. A religion that neglects these fundamental questions remains hollow.”19

The return of happiness

Happiness has only recently been considered worthy of note again: those who made it the object of their studies have noted how it was attributable to the fundamental elements of being, such as creativity, joy of living, the quality and depth of relationships, the capacity to successfully confront stressful situations (resilience), self–esteem, but also health, rest, appetite, and cultivating interests. The first systematic study in this sense only appears in 2004, undertaken by Christopher Peterson and Martin Seligman, two scholars of the so–called “positive psychology” movement. Reviewing the literature in this field, especially religious and philosophical studies, the two scholars set out some points of strength – they note 24 such points – that are capable of making existence more beautiful and the person more stable, reinforcing character. In the ancient world, the term “character” (ethike) was also the original meaning of the philosophical discipline called “ethics.”

In line with classical philosophical reflection, Peterson and Seligman place first those virtues explored by Aristotle and Thomas: wisdom, courage, love, justice, temperance and transcendence.20 Over time, these are the qualities cultivated by the person, thanks to training: strongly affective relationships, community life and a healthy and harmonious development. Children who grow in the context of a stable and strongly affective marriage, have clear advantages from the point of view of cognition, at school, in attentiveness, in learning and interests, together with the capacity to live with their companions in a respectful and non–violent way.21

The communitarian dimension of happiness

Among the principal characteristics of happiness one must remember, above all, love and the possibility of living in stable and long–term affective relationships, thanks to the presence of strong reference communities, starting with families and religious communities. In questioning groups and persons satisfied with their lives, certain constant characteristics emerged: relationships in family, the economy, profession, friends, health and then, values and freedom.22

Even in this regard, however, one must note in the West a growing individualism that is never really challenged. The crumbling of the sense of belonging to a community leads one to evaluate a failure, an obstacle or a sense of limitation as something catastrophic that makes life no longer worth living. The significant increase of suicides among the young seems to be tied to this global interior vision that lacks points of reference beyond one’s own subjective feeling: “Given that the large and benevolent institutions (religion, nations and families) do not have value today, personal failures appear to be catastrophic […] When, on the other hand, larger institutions direct life, any lack of personal success appears to last less time and to be less pervasive. In the measure in which today it is difficult for young people to believe in religion, fulfill their responsibilities to their country or be part of a larger, stable family, it is equally difficult for them to give meaning to their lives. The self is a meager terrain in which to search for the meaning of life.”23 Hence the impoverishment of what R. Putnam refers to as “social capital,”24 that is, the network of relationships and interests that form the basis of community life and allow for the expression of the highest potentialities and, most importantly, the ability to transmit them to future generations.

Here we see a growing solitude and the tendency to identify oneself with a single role (most often with one’s profession), which alone cannot provide a fullness to life and, if it undergoes a crisis, risks devastating the person’s entire existence. Umberto Eco was right to recognize how heightened individualism necessarily brings one to think of happiness as an illusory mirage: “The idea of happiness always makes us think of our own personal happiness, rarely that of the human race; rather, often, we are induced to worry very little about the happiness of others in order to pursue our own. … This idea of happiness pervades the world of advertising and consumption, where every proposal appears like a call to a happy life, the cream to tone the face, the detergent that finally removes all stains, the sofa at half price, the digestive to drink after the storm, the meat in the can around which a happy family gathers, the inexpensive and beautiful car and that tampon that allows you to get into the elevator without worrying about what other people think. Rarely do we think about happiness when we vote or when we send a child to school, but only when we buy useless things, and think in that way to have satisfied our right to the pursuit of happiness.”25

Reflecting on happiness brings into discussion some fundamental axioms of modern society: wealth, individualism, the race for success, gain. The communitarian dimension of happiness impedes its evaluation in terms of personal property or the consumption of goods. The relational and affective dimension is indispensable for happiness, exactly because it belongs to the category of gratitude, of the “priceless” (P. Ricoeur)26: when it tends toward commercialization (as in sexuality reduced to a mere commodity), it perverts itself and becomes a reason for malaise.

Societies which are more “primitive” from a technological perspective, but more solid and healthy from a human perspective, do not perceive the “uneasiness in civilization” revealed by Freud. The Amish community residing just a few kilometers from Philadelphia registers depression in ten times fewer residents than in the city.27 The same situation emerges from a study of behavior among the tribes of New Guinea: in those populations, the phenomenology of depression is completely absent. The reasons for this absence are, above all, due to social cooperation and the strength of affective bonds. The sense of community is a strong protection in the face of the difficulties of life.28

“There is more joy in giving than in receiving”

The reflection on happiness proposes once again ancient and ignored truths. The fullness of life is obtained when it is not sought directly, that is, when we forget ourselves and our own problems and turn toward others, with gratuitousness. It is one of the most important lessons of altruism: “They say that Warden Duffy (a legendary figure in the prison of San Quentin) stated that the best way to help a man is to allow him to help you. People need to feel needed.”29 Personal difficulties are not forgotten this way but the fact of feeling important for someone else gives space to a different attitude in the face of life, one that is more proactive, less victimized, experiencing a kind of unedited fullness of life.

“There is more joy in giving than in receiving” (Acts 20:35). The graciousness implicit in this act invites the other to open himself and to give the best of himself. The paradox of the gift expresses the paradox of happiness that is encountered many times: it can only be something extra, an add–on. When you give someone a gift, you experience a satisfaction that cannot be likened to any material gain: the joy of giving is unlike any other.

Kierkegaard noted in this regard: “The door to happiness opens toward the outside; anyone who tries to force it open in the opposite direction ends up closing it more and more.”30 The more one seeks to own happiness, the more it escapes and becomes unreachable. It is the parable of our times: we are too worried about ourselves and our own wellbeing, discovering ourselves to be ever sadder and less capable of living. As in the conquering of Jericho (see Joshua 6:1–22), happiness comes when we are busy doing other things that capture the heart; happiness overtakes us, as an added extra, as a free gift.


1.Cfr R. Veenhoven, “Freedom and happiness: A comparative study in 46 nations in the early 1990s”, in E. Diener – E. M. Suh (eds), Culture and subjective well–being, Cambridge (MA), MIT Press, 2000, 257–288. From the philosophical point of view, we can examine the definition given by E. Berti: “Happiness consists in the full realization of the self, of one’s own capacities, of the dimension of being human, both spiritual and material, both individual and social.” (E. Berti, “Il problema dell’etica oggi: Nietzsche o Aristotele?”, in Id., Nuovi studi aristotelici, IV/2. L’influenza di Aristotele. Eta moderna e contemporanea, Brescia, Morcelliana, 2010, 202).

2.Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, l.X,7,1177 b 26–27.

3.K. Marx–F. Engels, L’ideologia tedesca, Rome, Editori Riuniti, 1972, I. 24.

4.Cfr. A. Maslow, Religions, Values, and Peak–Experiences, Columbus, Ohio State University Press, 1964, 59.

5.“[W]e raising ourselves up with a more glowing affection toward the ‘Self-same’ did by degrees pass through all things bodily, even the very heaven where sun and moon and stars shine upon the earth; we were soaring higher yet, by inward musing, and discourse, and admiring of Your works; and we came to our own minds, and went beyond them, that we might arrive at that region of never–failing plenty, where You feed Israel for ever with the food of truth, and where life is the Wisdom by whom all these things are made, and what have been, and what shall be (Augustine, Confessions, I. IX, 10, 24).

6.These characteristics of fullness can be exemplified in the way I. Yalon, in an autobiographical novel, describes his own work: “Fortunate is the one who loves his own work. Ernest certainly felt himself fortunate. More than fortunate. Blessed. He was a man who had found his vocation, who could say, ‘I perfectly express myself; I am at the peak of my talents, my interests and my passions.’ Ernest was not religious but, every morning when he opened his date book of appointments and saw the names of the eight or nine persons who were dear to him with whom he would spend his day, he was overcome with a feeling that could only have been defined in a religious term. In those moments he felt the deepest desire to give thanks – to someone, to something – for having guided him to understanding his true vocation” (Sul letino di Freud, Milan, Neri Pozza, 2015, 7).

7.Cfr D. Danner – D. Snowdon – W. Friesen, “Positive emotions in early life and longevity: findings from the nun study”, in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 80 (2001) 804–813; C. D. Ryff – B. H. Singer, “The role of emotion on pathways to positive health”, in R. J. Davidson – K. R. Scherer – H. H. Goldsmith (eds), Handbook of affective sciences, New York, Oxford University Press, 2003, 1083–1104.

8.“We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal: that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights: that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” (Declaration of Independence of the United States of America, July 4, 1776).

9.D. Nettle, Felicita. I segreti dietro al tuo sorriso, Florence, Giunti, 2007, 17.

10.S. Freud, Il disagio della civilta, in Id., Opere, X, Turin, Boringhieri, 1978, 602.

11.F. De Luise – G. Farinetti, Storia della felicita. Gli antichi e i moderni, Turin, Einaudi, 2001, XI.

12.Article “Philosophe”, in Encyclopedie, ou dictionnaire raisonne des sciences, des arts et des metiers, XII, 1765.

13.Cfr. P. Wickramarantne, et Al., “Age, period and cohort effects on the risk of major depression: results from five United States communities”, in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 42 (1989) 333–343; P.M. Lewinsohn, “Age–cohort changes in the lifetime occurrence of depression and other mental disorders”, in Journal of Abnormal Psychology 102 (1993) 110–120; R. Layard, Felicita. La nuova scienza del benessere commune, Milan, Rizzoli, 2005, 52.

14.Cfr G. Cucci, “Sadness: the important teachings of this feeling” in Civ. Catt. 2017 I 133–146.

15.A. Huxley, Brave New World, Milan, Mondadori, 1971, 135.

16.R. Nozick, Anarchia, stato e utopia, Milan, il Saggiatore, 2008, 64; see also G. Samek Lodovici, L’utilita del bene: Jeremy Bentham, l’utilitarismo e il consequenzialismo, Milan, Vita e Pensiero, 2004, 206.

17.The conclusion of Utopia is significant, in referring to the rulers of the time: “These ignoble and evil men, once they were divided among themselves, with insatiable longing, that which would have been sufficient for all, how many are far from the happiness of the utopians?” (T. More, Utopia. The perfect state, or the island that is not).

18.Cfr. T. More, Utopia…cit., 26–31; V. Melchiorre, La coscienza utopica, Milan, Vita e Pensiero, 1970, 7–21.

19.www.repubblica.it/la–repubblica–delle–idee/societa/2013/09/24/news/lettera_ratzinger_a_odifreddi–67140416

20.Cfr N. Park – Ch . Peterson – M. Seligman, “Strengths of character and well–being”, in Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 23 (2004) 603–619, at 605 ff.; Ch. Peterson – M. Seligman, Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification, Washington, American Psychological Association, 2004, 31.

21.Cfr I. Boniwell, La scienza della felicita. Introduzione alla psicologia positiva, Bologna, il Mulino, 2016, 123; M. Seligman, Authentic Happiness: Using the New Positive Psychology to Realize Your Potential for Lasting Fulfillment, New York, The Free Press, 2002, 188.

22.Cfr. R. Layard, Felicita…, cit., 84.

23.M. Seligman, Imparare l’ottimismo, Florence, Giunti, 2015, 370 ff.

24.R. Putnam, Bowling alone: the Collapse and Revival of American Community, New York, Simon & Schuster, 2000, 332; Cfr Id, Better Together: Restoring the American Community, ivi, 2003; G. Samek Lodovici, La felicita del bene, Milan, Vita e Pensiero, 2007, 183.

25.U. Eco, “Il diritto alla felicita”, L’Espresso, 26 March 2014.

26.See P. Ricoeur, Percorsi del riconoscimento, Milan, Cortina, 2005, 272; G. Salvini, “Il malessere nella societa del benessere”, in Civ. Catt. 2006 II 332–344.

27.Cfr J. Egeland – A. Hostetter, “Amish Study, I: Affective disorders among the Amish 1976–1980”, in American Journal of Psychiatry 140 (1983) 56–61. 28. 29.

28.E. Schieffelin, “The cultural analysis of depressive affect: an example from New Guinea”, in A. Kleinman – B. Good (eds), Culture and depression: Studies in the anthropology and cross–cultural psychiatry of affect and disorder, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1985, 101–133.

29.I. Yalom, Teoria e pratica della psicoterapia di gruppo, Turin, Boringhieri, 1997, 30. For further reading, see G. Cucci, Altruismo e gratuita: I due polmoni della vita, Assisi (Pg), Cittadella, 2015.

30.S. Kierkegaard, “Aut–aut” in Id., Opere, Florence, Sansoni, 1972, 10.

share :
tags icon tags :
comments icon Without comments

Comments

write comment
Please enter the letters as they are shown in the image above.