good thesis on happiness

189 Happiness Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

😊 key points to use to write an outstanding happiness essay, 🏆 best happiness topic ideas & essay examples, 📌 most interesting happiness topics to write about, ⭐ simple & easy happiness essay titles, 👍 good research topics about happiness, 💡 interesting topics to write about happiness, ❓ research questions about happiness.

Writing a happiness essay may seem easy at first, but many students fail to achieve a high grade because their responses are too general. To avoid falling in this trap, read this post and take note of the key points to write about.

The Meaning of Happiness

The word “happiness” means various things to various people, and it would be a good idea to explore this topic in your paper. To get some perspectives, you could ask your friends or family members what happiness is to them. Alternatively, browse sample essays on happiness online. Once you’ve done your research, consider the following:

• What does happiness mean to you?
• Do you think that you are happy where you are now? Why or why not?
• Is achieving happiness essential to do you, or do you think that one can be satisfied with life without being truly happy?

The Importance of Happiness

This is probably among the most important happiness essay titles because there is a lot to talk about here. You would likely be surprised to find out that not all people view happiness as a crucial goal in life. In fact, most people live their days without considering whether or not they are happy. These are a few questions that you could think about:

• Why is happiness more important to some people than to others?
• Should a person strive to be happy? Why or why not?
• What is the influence of happiness on a person’s mind and body?

Sources of Happiness

The third point you could cover in your paper is the relationship between happiness and achievements. People often believe that they will be happy when they achieve certain things and their life.

Some examples are starting a profitable business, marrying their loved one, having kids, and traveling the world. If you want to examine the correlation between happiness and other factors, these questions should give you some ideas:

• Is happiness influenced by life circumstances and events? If so, how?
• Why do you think some people never become happy, even after achieving what they’ve always wanted?
• What external factor plays a key role in your happiness? Why do you think that is?

Happiness and Money

The link between happiness and money is possibly one of the most popular happiness essay ideas and titles.

Many people think that wealth has a direct influence on happiness, but others disagree. You could explore this theme in your paper using the following questions to guide your thoughts:

• In your opinion, can a person to buy happiness? If so, how?
• Why do you think people often associate happiness with wealth? If money is the key to happiness, why are there so many wealthy people who are unhappy?
• Do you believe that true happiness is possible without financial success? Why or why not?

Regardless of what you choose to write about, be sure to maintain a good essay structure throughout your paper. To assist you with this, create a detailed outline and stick to it while writing.

Start your paper with a happiness essay hook, a sentence to draw the reader’s attention to your work. Support your thoughts with relevant examples or research where applicable.

Finally, make sure to close off your paper with a happiness essay conclusion. If you want to learn more about essay structure, browse our website – we also have a good selection of essay topics and other useful materials!

• What Is Happiness Essay 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.
• Can Money Buy You Happiness? First of all, given that happiness is related to the satisfaction of personal needs, there is also a need to consider the essential need of human life such as housing, medicine, and food.
• I Don’t Believe Money Can Buy Happiness This shows that as much as money is essential in acquisition and satisfaction of our needs, it does not guarantee our happiness by its own and other aspects of life have to be incorporated to […]
• World Happiness Index and Its Six Factors This variable allows the researchers to evaluate the status of the economy since it is the estimation of the value of all products and services a company creates.
• Connection Between Money and Happiness Critical analysis of money-happiness relationship shows that socioeconomic factors determine the happiness of an individual; therefore, it is quite unsatisfactory to attribute money as the only factor and determinant of happiness.
• Money, Happiness and Relationship Between Them The research conducted in the different countries during which people were asked how satisfied they were with their lives clearly indicated the existence of a non-linear relationship between the amount of money and the size […]
• Happiness and Morality This paper will look at the meaning of happiness and morality, the relationship between morality and happiness and why many philosophers hold that in order to be happy, one has to be moral.
• Goals of the Life: Personal Experience of Responsibility for Life and Happiness I have a lot of goals in my life and do all my best to realize them in my life. The best way to achieve your goal is to make a plan of steps to […]
• The Psychology of Happiness The psychology of happiness is closely related to philosophy, as the science of happiness is based on three major theories, namely “the emotional state theory, the life satisfaction theory, and hedonism”. As far as happiness […]
• Does Money Buy Happiness? Billions of people in all parts of the world sacrifice their ambitions and subconscious tensions on the altar of profitability and higher incomes. Yet, the opportunity costs of pursuing more money can be extremely high.
• The Key to Happiness and Satisfaction with Life For example, in the documentary ‘Happiness,’ the hunters and gatherers of Namibia in Africa were found to be having a high happiness index.
• Is Happiness the Beginning or the End? Jamie Anderson’s “Is Happiness the Beginning or the End?” discusses the view on happiness in the American cultural consciousness and the perceived ideological conflict regarding the specificities of its nature.
• Painfulness and Happiness of Childbirth The second stage is associated with the child’s passage through the birth canal; it begins after the complete opening of the cervix and ends with the birth of a child.
• Discussion: Can Money Buy Happiness? Reason Two: Second, people are psychologically predisposed to wanting more than they have, so the richer people are, the less feasible it is to satisfy their demands.
• Money and Happiness in Poor and Wealthy Societies Comprehending the motivations for pursuing money and happiness is the key to understanding this correlation. The Easterlin paradox summed this view by showing that income had a direct correlation with happiness.
• Psychology of Happiness in the World Psychology of happiness touches on various fields of social and cultural life and seeks to interfere with the lives of individuals for improving their talents and endowing their normal existence with greater meaning.
• Acts of Kindness and Happiness in Human Life The research at hand is aimed to prove that, to boost happiness through receiving positive emotions, a person should commit more actions that can be referred to as acts of kindness.
• Life as a Human’s Struggle for Happiness He said he was eager to get his degree and live his life to the fullest. After a while, Ali understood that the answer to his question was life.
• Consumerism and Happiness To the surprise of Luedicke and Giesler, “The more goods produced and consumed in the society the higher the growth rate of the economy”.
• How Is the “Greatest Happiness Principle” Supposed to Be Useful in Determining What I Ought to Do? Therefore, the main idea of the greatest happiness principle is to make sure that more people are satisfied, however, the volume of the satisfaction is not discussed as well as the level of harm caused […]
• Concept of Happiness in the Workplace The task of every employee is to find a way to work in harmony with their personal values and build successful relationships with colleagues and managers.
• Positive Psychology: The Science of Happiness Positive psychology is a science of positive features of the life of a human being, including happiness, welfare, and prosperity. According to him, happiness is freedom from pain in the body and a disturbance in […]
• Social Media in Enhancing Social Relationships and Happiness Social media and technology assist to foster and maintain relationships where the people live in different geographical regions. There is a major concern that social media and technology poses a threat to the traditional fabric […]
• Philosophy Issue: Truth vs. Happiness The only way the truth will be concealed and still lead to happiness is when the truth is substituted with a lie.
• Happiness: Common and Personal Criteria Since the emergence of the term happiness in the times of Plato and Aristotle, the topic of happiness, its philosophical meaning, and its application to the real world became a case of many discussions.
• Happiness: Personal View and Suggestions For an individual to increase his or her level of happiness, it is necessary to be aware of the things that make him or her happy.
• Ways to Ensure Happiness at Work For employers to gain a high amount of trust from their workers, they have to believe that their workers have the organization’s best interest and that their actions are driven to better their services.
• Happiness and Success as a Life Meaning I find meaning in my life when I help people that I encounter in my life. This means that life, when a person follows the Christian rules, is full of spirituality and thus meaning.
• Money, Happiness and Satisfaction With Life Nonetheless, the previously mentioned examples should be used to remind us that money alone is not a guarantee of happiness, satisfaction with life, and good health.
• This I Believe: Happiness Is a Choice I know that I can choose to be happy. I was ashamed and worried that he would know I took it.
• American Literature: Happiness Is Only Real When Shared This implies that he had started valuing the presence of other people in his life and the aversions that he had towards his parents started to wither after realizing that he had to share his […]
• Sigmund Freud’s Ideas of Happiness One of these means, and the only one that Freud seems to feel provides any sense of satisfaction as to why happiness cannot be obtained, is found in the realm of religion.
• Thomas Jefferson’s Goals: Life, Liberty and Happiness Prior to the writing of this phrase, the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness were not acknowledged by the political systems of the day.
• Pursuit of Happiness Film Analysis Thus, while the film centers on the theme of “pursuit of happiness,” this paper shows that the film distorts the concept of happiness to represent the orientation of earthly goods through which our reality revolves […]
• Technology Fails to Deliver Happiness With the advancements in information technology and the massive use of the internet, communication has become quite effective as people can connect when they are in different countries around the world, at any time.
• Happiness and Its Social Psychological Aspects The well being of an individual is very critical to performance and several meaning of life to that particular individual. Several researchers have studied aspects like obedience, intervention of bystander, behavior and altruism as being […]
• Bhutan’s Concept of Gross National Happiness The concept of GNH in Bhutan emphasizes the need for gauging the progress of this country from the perspective of its population’s degree of happiness.
• True Happiness by St. Augustine Augustine put emphasis on one’s soul and spiritual connection with God to be happy rather than material goods and body.St. I concur with this idea and believe that in seeking happiness, one should prioritize what […]
• Moral Virtue and Its Relation to Happiness Furthermore, Aristotle believed that moral virtue is the primary means to happiness and the most important of all things that are really good for people.
• Happiness in Mills’ Utilitarianism Theory Mill further supports his claim by explaining that the justice sentiment is based on utility and that the existence of rights is due to human happiness. The freedom from pain involving health issues and other […]
• Aristotle’s Understanding of Happiness If happiness is “wholeness”, then for a person to become happy, it is necessary to become “whole”. Thus, all a person has to do to become whole is lower goods.
• Happiness: Cuddy’s vs. Dowthwaite’s Articles Comparison Although Cuddy and Dowthwaite have different perspectives on the matter, they both concur that it is natural for individuals not always to be happy.
• Aristotle’s Concept of Happiness Aristotle’s concept of happiness is an expression of virtue that is similar to the flow state, happiness is a combination of the baseline level where basic needs are fulfilled and a broader area managed by […]
• The Happy Planet Index of Long-Term Happiness The Happy Planet Index contributes to answering the issue, “Is it possible to live happy lives without harming the environment?” The relationship between happiness and ecological footprints can be clearly understood by interpreting the data […]
• Environmental Injustice Impeding Health and Happiness The authors note that there is a constant flow of the white population to the areas most protected from flooding and the displacement of the black population from there.
• Leadership for Happiness in Workplaces The relationship between the leaders and the workforce determines how the employees react and perceive the decisions made by the management.
• Thoughts on Stress Management and Happiness Although she has all her financial needs met overwhelmingly, her failure to proceed with her studies and get employment makes her feel unsatisfied.
• Study of the Happiness Index Parameters Thus, the chronological data allow us to evaluate not only the countries among themselves according to this criterion but also to provide the dynamics of the change in the happiness index within the country.
• Panama: Economics and Happiness As a result, Panama is regarded a highly inflationary country; however, Panama can profit from the U.S.dollar’s resilience as the foundation of the world banking markets.
• Happiness Areas and Goals in Personal Life The point that most of the global population leads a life of acting contributes significantly to the loss of happiness. That is why one of my goals to achieve the second area of happiness involved […]
• Aristotle’s View of Ethics and Happiness Aristotle guarantees that to find the human great, we should recognize the capacity of an individual. He set forth the thought that joy is a delight in magnificence and great.
• Changing a Client’s Life From a Mess to Happiness In the beginning, I disclosed these details to make the woman’s physical portrait.”She averages one meal per day”: The woman has a great risk of problems with gastritis due to the lack of vitamins and […]
• Happiness in Arts: Happiness Through Virtue This way, the premise of the Marble statue resembles that of the portrait of Antisthenes, namely, that happiness is the greatest good and it can be attained by nurturing goodness.
• Exegetical Paper on Aristotle: Meaning of Happiness It is in the balance, according to Aristotle, that the completeness of the human personality lies, and only through balance can a person find true self-satisfaction.
• Create Happiness Organization: Marketing Donor organizations, which are going to buy the Create Happiness Organization’s cards and card devices in order to use them for discounts and making bargains.
• Self-Happiness and Its Impact on Romantic Relationships This boosts self-happiness and contributes to the general success of a romantic relationship. Self-happiness is vital in maintaining relationships and the overall connection between partners for relationship success.
• Happiness: The Best Way to Achieve and Prolong It If a person can combine work and rest, lives a healthy life, and has time for hobbies and family, they will be able to attain lasting happiness.
• Stay-Home Moms and Full-Time Working Mothers: Indicators of Happiness In some parts of the world, it’s considered well that a woman is working, but mostly in eastern countries, women are preferred to stay at home at look after their houses and children.
• How Can Humans Find Happiness? Generally, evaluating the facts, it can be said that Aristotle’s concept of happiness is authentic, and happiness for a number of people is truly in acquiring knowledge, but this is not always true as there […]
• Mental Health: Happiness and Social Interaction It is quite curious to observe the way parents are teaching their children to be kind and good to others and right after the lesson they express quite negative feelings to a family member who […]
• Happiness and Deviant Behaviour in “Happiness” Movie In this manner, he was able to connect to Joy Jordan who happened to be the sister of Trish, the wife of his psychiatrist.
• Changed Views of Happiness: Context and Aim of the Definition The truest happiness arrives through the task of a person’s highest function: the utilization of the coherent rule of mind. The first one is “The universal run of individuals and the crudest,” which identifies happiness […]
• Influence of Television on People’s Happiness The idea of mass culture influencing the development of society is closely connected with a concept of a need to be happy.
• The Role of Employee Happiness in the Productivity Among Government Employees The national UAE Program of Happiness features a set of three initiatives: Happiness in policies, programmes and services of all government entities and work environments; Promotion of values of positivity and happiness as a lifestyle […]
• Effects of Gambling on Happiness: Research in the Nursing Homes The objective of the study was to determine whether the elderly in the nursing homes would prefer the introduction of gambling as a happiness stimulant.
• Innocence and Experience: How Social Opinions Shape Our Perception of Happiness Although there does not seem to be any similarity between the two poems, they both show the contrast between experience and innocence.”Advice to My Son” is the advice of an experienced father to a son […]
• Women’s Quest to Attain Happiness in Literature Thus, our definition of the most important difference between the characters of Janie and Emma will sound as follows: whereas, Janie never ceased to be a woman in both: the physiological and psychological context of […]
• Roots and Fruits of Happiness The instinct of a researcher is to find demographic patterns in the trend of the variable. A possible hypothesis for clarifying our understanding of the relationship between happiness and close relationships could be: “People feel […]
• How Much Emphasis Should One Place on Personal Happiness or Fulfillment? The aim of the paper is to explore the main tenets of utilitarianism and happiness, apply them to personal vision of happiness and compare it to Aristotle’s notion of happiness and ideal life.
• Cultivating Happiness for Different People Though one of her daughters was born with Down’s syndrome, the lady is really happy to have her and she does not regret a moment in her life.
• Psychology: Happiness from a Personal Viewpoint Because of my ability to see the good in people, I think I am more inclined to want to do things that will help them, and these times I have done this have appeared in […]
• Aristotle and His Definition of Happiness The best taste a person can have in his life is happiness because of success. But in my point of view, happiness is the main feeling that comes from the success of any useful act […]
• Workplace Happiness Definition Several sources were used in this research of workplace happiness that helps define the concept in question and develop an understanding of elements that contribute to it.
• Happiness at the Workplace in the UAE The primary approach that should be taken by the governmental entities of the UAE to improve the happiness of their employees should be focused on creating an appropriate environment.
• Psychology of Happiness and Effect on Human Health The main characteristics of the impact of feelings on human health are the rapid pulse and palpitations, the dilatation of pupils, and changes in the skin.
• Personal Happiness and Perspectives on Emotions As a result, special attention should be paid to the differences that people may have while developing their viewpoints about happiness and other forms of emotions.
• Happiness in the United States If applied to the U.S.situation with citizen happiness, the methods of classification, cause and effect analysis, and comparison indicate the need for innovative and effective measures for the promotion of social support.
• Hurricane Katrina Survivors’ Happiness Factors The paper is dedicated to the study of factors influencing the happiness of women, whose lives were affected by the Katrina Hurricane, one and four years after the hurricane.
• Happiness: Health, Marriage, and Success In this paper, I will examine the issue of happiness by scrutinizing it through the lenses of health, marriage, and success the three components that previously appeared to me to be necessary for an individual […]
• The Architecture of Sustainable Happiness The feeling of happiness and the intention to change it were measured before and after the participants listened to the music.
• Bhutanese Views on Happiness and Subjective Wellbeing The purpose of this task is to explore Bhutanese views on happiness as a form of positive psychology that depicts national progress.
• Happiness vs. Production in the Workplace I think that good leader has to clarify the possible levels of the job performance of their employees to understand what kind of work may be expected when goals can be achieved, and what rewards […]
• John Stuart Mill’s Happiness Philosophy Consequently, the outcome of a course of action that is on the course of being undertaken or is to be undertaken lies in the value of the outcome.
• Touchpoints for Improved Happiness Index in the UAE The study is aimed at establishing the critical success factors in quality management of service delivery charter in the UAE government institutions. Research question: What is the impact of the UAE government’s touchpoints in improving […]
• Emirati Happiness in National Agenda and Vision 2030 Using evidence from the existing literature, this report argues that the examination of touchpoints will help promote the objective of making the UAE the happiest nation across the world.
• Touchpoints in UAE Government’s Happiness Initiatives This paper aims at conducting a literature review on the concept of touchpoints with the objective of developing a sound argument regarding the extent to which they can effectively help the UAE to achieve remarkable […]
• Happiness Without Money in Sociology and Psychology The tendency’s mechanics are simple – being in the possession of any substantial sum of money increases a person’s chance to secure a dominant status within the society, which in turn will result in strengthening […]
• The Meaning of Happiness On the other hand, another study found that the birth of a child is associated with the loss of spousal love, and the decrease in the total level of happiness is stated to be the […]
• Volunteering Effects on Happiness Taking that into consideration, it is necessary to pay an increased attention to the effect that volunteering and all the people connected to it produce on representatives of one of the social groups whose opportunities […]
• David Leonhardt: May Be Money Does Buy Happiness After All The case study of Japanese citizens that support Easterlin paradox do not factor in the confounding psychological effects of the Second World War on the entire population and the country.
• Happiness and Its Influence on Decision-Making The strength of this paper is that it explores not only the meaning of the word but also the results of its offered revision, including the reconsideration of the importance of the phenomenon of competition, […]
• Philosophy Terms: Justice, Happiness, Power and Virtue Socrates argues that autocratic leadership is an important structure of ensuring that the rule of law is followed and that the common good of all societal members is enhanced.
• Money and Happiness Connection – Philosophy Based on measures of happiness and household income, these economists have claimed that money, in this case, economic development, has a significant impact on happiness.
• Does Intelligence Predict Happiness? Overall, this concept can be described as the ability of a person to apply cognitive skills while using various types of information.
• The Definition of Happiness For example, Aristotle’s work raises questions such as, “What is the purpose of human life?”, “What is happiness?” and “Why do people do the things they do?” On the other hand, Plato’s text raises questions […]
• Relationships of Social Class and Happiness In the United States, for instance, the gap between the rich and the poor has been on the rise and the government seems to be doing very little to curb the sad realities of the […]
• Psychological Research: Money Can Buy Happiness In the article, the author has given enough evidence to prove that money can be used to buy happiness. Based on the evidence presented in the article, it is obvious that proper utilization of money […]
• Mill’s Greatest Happiness Principles: A Practical Guide to the Theory of Life In the given question, Mill draws the line between the moral principles and the human mind. Hence, Mill questions the link between the moral and the ethical.
• Importance of Training Mind to Find Happiness and Meaning of Life According to Buddhist thinking, mind training “…is training in stability in order to “reveal the mystery” of the ultimate nature of reality, our own and that of other phenomena”.
• Can Aristotle’s Theory of Happiness Be Achieved by Applying Friedman’s Ideas of Corporate Social Responsibilities? According to Aristotle, politics is the master of all arts since it is concerned with the end in itself. This is a central argument to the ideas of Aristotle and underscores his idea that politics […]
• Happiness Meaning and Theories This essay aims to analyze Happiness, what makes happiness special to people, the meaning of it and the essence of it. The second happiness is a general consensus about the goodness of your life at […]
• Secular Worldview: Attaining Earthly Happiness It is a form of religious worldview in which man is the overall measure that is; man is the ultimate judge of truth and also evaluates the values which are to be followed.
• Happiness: Philosophical Description Serenity of mind to Gertrude is found by accepting things that are beyond her control and seeking the strength and courage to change things that can be changed like cloth the naked, feed the hungry, […]
• Essence of Happiness of Indira’s Life According to Plato’s and Aristotle’s Views on Education She finds her inspiration in the languages and other subjects and, obviously, the girl knows that education is the best solution of solving a number of problems and difficulties that she may face during the […]
• Happiness is not always fun These words show what the movie is all about, the fluctuations that accompany the pursuit and maintenance of happiness. This close connection of the movie to the viewer facilitates the general acceptance of the intellectual […]
• In the Pursuit of Liberty and Happiness: How the Life of Mohammad Yunus Continue to Impact the World By any standards, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States can be termed as two of the most fundamental and enduring documents in the Nation’s history due to the very fact […]
• Aristotle’s Ideas on Civic Relationships: Happiness, the Virtues, Deliberation, Justice, and Friendship On building trust at work, employers are required to give minimum supervision to the employees in an effort to make the latter feel a sense of belonging and responsibility.
• Influence on Happiness of Gender, Education Level and the Number of Children According to Easterlin, the number of children a family has is inversely proportional to the level of happiness the family will enjoy; this shows that the higher the number of children, the less happy the […]
• Gender, Education Level and the Number of Children Influencing Perception on Happiness It is also found out that the increase in the number of children leads to lack of love in the family and later leads to decline in the degree of happiness.
• Well-Being as a Happiness Definitions Michael Marmot in his book The Status Syndrome: How Social Standing Affects Our Health and Longevity tries to justify happiness from a social perspective.
• How Aristotle Views Happiness Aristotle notes that “the attainment of the good for one man alone is, to be sure, a source of satisfaction; yet to secure it for a nation and for states is nobler and more divine”.
• My Relationship with Time and Its Effect on Happiness Eventually, I think that it is necessary to use time correctly, to sleep well and to work in the most productive hours.
• The idea of Happiness Although Weiner shows that trusting the leadership is a source of happiness by contrasting Bhutan with the people of Medova, one can still argue that so long as the leadership provides the required security, be […]
• Edwin Arlington Robinson: Money and Happiness in “Richard Cory” It is evident that money cannot guarantee happiness in one’s life due to the uncertainties that surround each one of us.
• Emotions of anger and happiness The emotion of anger is usually considered to be negative and it can lead to various negative consequences. On the other hand, the emotion of happiness is positive and it has numerous benefits to our […]
• Which is Basic in Ethics: Happiness or Obligation Logically, the basic element in any pursuit is the end itself; consequently, the task here is to determine the element that stands out as the end as opposed to means to something else.
• The Beggar King and the Secret of Happiness – Folks and Fairy Tales “What seems like a blessing may be a curse. What seems like a curse may be a blessing”.
• The Beggar King and the Secret of Happiness The following essay is concerned with the book’ The Beggar King and the Secret of Happiness’ by Joel Ben Izzy. Joel Ben’s story,’ The Beggar King and the Secret of Happiness’ resonates in my life.
• Pursuit of Happiness by Women in Modern Day America Civil rights are what citizens in a democratic country are entitled to and they include rights such as the right to vote, right to equal treatment and opportunities, the right to life and the right […]
• Breaking the Stereotype: Why Urban Aboriginals Score Highly on Happiness Measures
• Electing Happiness: Does Happiness Effect Voting and Do Elections Affect Happiness
• Freedom, Justice, and the Pursuit of Happiness
• Individual and Contextual Factors of Happiness and Life Satisfaction in a Low Middle Income Country
• Technology and Its Effects on Satisfaction in Society
• Neural and Genetic Correlates of the Social Sharing of Happiness
• Emotional Intelligence as Mediator Between Need for Relatedness, Happiness, and Flourishing
• Serotonin the Happiness Hormone and Effect on Neurotransmitters
• Defining Happiness Through Metaphorical Expressions, a Person’s Behavior, and Its Relation to Success
• Cultural Capital and Happiness: Why the Rich Are Happier
• Relationship Between Spiritual Well-Being and Happiness
• Finding Happiness in Homosexuality, Overcoming Rejection, Identity, and Desire
• Measuring Happiness: From Fluctuating Satisfaction to Authentic, Durable Happiness
• Income and Happiness: Earning and Spending as Sources of Discontent
• Adaptation Amidst Prosperity and Adversity: Insights From Happiness Studies From Around the World
• Modern Ritualism for Finding Peace & Happiness & Living With Meaning
• Aristotle’s Eudaimonia: Are Pleasure and Happiness the Final Goals in Life
• Beauty and Equality: The Key Elements to the Pursuit of Happiness
• Collective Happiness: Labor Union Membership and Life Satisfaction
• Law, Sustainability, and the Pursuit of Happiness
• Against Positive Thinking: Uncertainty as to the Secret of Happiness
• Age and the Pursuit of Happiness Among Immigrants
• Happiness and Its Correlation With Marriage, Earnings, and Age
• Poor and Distressed, but Happy: Situational and Cultural Moderators of the Relationship Between Wealth and Happiness
• Job Satisfaction and Family Happiness: The Part-Time Work Problem
• Migrants, Health, and Happiness: Evidence That Health Assessments Travel With Migrants and Predict Well-Being
• Adult Happiness and Prior Traumatic Victimization in and Out of the Household
• Happiness and Growth the World Over: Time Series Evidence on the Happiness-Income Paradox
• Economic Growth Evens Out Happiness: Evidence From Six Surveys
• Children, Spousal Love, and Happiness: An Economic Analysis
• Our Relationship With God as the Pathway Toward Happiness
• Parenthood and Happiness: Direct and Indirect Impacts of Parenthood on Happiness
• Gender and Well-Being Around the World: Some Insights From the Economics of Happiness
• National Happiness and Genetic Distance: A Cautious Exploration
• Basic Needs and Wealth as Independent Determinants of Happiness
• Money and Happiness: Problems Understanding Its Dynamic Relationship
• Buddhism: Happiness and the Four Noble Truths
• Nicomachean Ethics and Reasons Role in Happiness and Virtue
• Commitment Beyond Self and Adolescence: The Issue of Happiness
• Absolute Income, Relative Income, and Happiness
• Does Economic Prosperity Bring About a Happier Society?
• What Does Sociology Bring to the Study of Happiness?
• What Affects Happiness: Absolute Income, Relative Income, or Expected Income?
• What’s Special About Happiness as a Social Indicator?
• What the Buddha Taught – Fundamental Principles Ensuring Human Happiness
• What Are the Relationship of Inequality, Happiness, and Relative Concerns?
• How Does Happiness Mediate the Organizational Virtuousness and Affective Commitment Relationship?
• What Are Happiness and Success?
• What Is Happiness? What Makes Life Happy?
• How Can People Find Happiness?
• What Are the Main Factors for Achieving Happiness?
• How Can Happiness Improve Productivity?
• Does Government Ideology Affect Personal Happiness?
• Happy for How Long? How Social Capital and Economic Growth Relate to Happiness Over Time
• How Do Gender and Age Effect Happiness?
• How the Economy and Institutions Affect Happiness?
• What Are the Differences Between Happiness and Self-Esteem?
• What Role Does Government Play in Human Happiness?
• What Can Economists Learn From Happiness?
• How Much Does Money Matter? Estimating the Causal Effects of Income on Happiness
• What Do Happiness Indices Tell Us About Life?
• How Can Enduring Happiness Arise From Friendship?
• Money Cannot Buy Happiness: What Are Your Views?
• What Can Happiness Research Tell Us About Altruism?
• Why We’re Happier When We’re Older?
• Happiness Explained: What Human Flourishing Is and How We Can Promote It?
• Why Happiness Eludes the Modern Woman?
• How Does the Economic Crisis Influence Adolescents’ Happiness?
• Do Fulfilling Desires Lead To Happiness?
• How Does Happiness Relate to Economic Behaviour?
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, February 27). 189 Happiness Essay Topic Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/happiness-essay-examples/

"189 Happiness Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 27 Feb. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/happiness-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2024) '189 Happiness Essay Topic Ideas & Examples'. 27 February.

IvyPanda . 2024. "189 Happiness Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." February 27, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/happiness-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "189 Happiness Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." February 27, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/happiness-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "189 Happiness Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." February 27, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/happiness-essay-examples/.

• Positive Psychology Titles
• Cognitive Development Essay Ideas
• Developmental Psychology Essay Ideas
• Equality Topics
• Childhood Essay Topics
• Friendship Essay Ideas
• Kindness Research Ideas
• Psychology Questions
• Success Ideas
• Cultural Identity Research Topics
• Virtue Essay Ideas
• Conflict Resolution Essay Topics
• Freedom Topics
• Dreaming Essay Titles
• Human Development Research Ideas

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.

Essays About Happiness: 5 Essay Examples and 6 Writing Prompts

Being happy and content is essential to living a successful life. If you are writing essays about happiness, start by reading our helpful guide.

Whenever we feel positive emotions rushing through our heads, chances are we are feeling happy. Happiness is what you feel when you enter the house, the smell of your favorite food being cooked or when you finally save up enough money to buy something you’ve wanted. It is an undeniably magical feeling. 

Happiness can do wonders for your productivity and well-being; when you are happy, you are more energetic, optimistic, and motivated. So it is, without a doubt, important. However, do not become caught up in trying to be happy, as this may lead to worse problems. Instead, allow yourself to feel your emotions; be authentic, even if that means feeling a little more negative.

5 Top Essay Examples

1. causes of happiness by otis curtis, 2. how to be happy by tara parker-pope, 3. reflections on ‘happiness’ by shahzada sultan.

• 4.  Happiness is Overrated by John Gorman

5. Toxic positivity by Suhani Mahajan

6 prompts for essays about happiness, 1. why is it important to be happy, 2. what is happiness to you, 3. the role of material things in happiness, 4. how does happiness make you more productive, 5. is true happiness achievable, 6. happiness vs. truth.

“If you don’t feel good about yourself you will have a similarly negative attitude towards others and education is one way of having good self-esteem, as it helps you to live life successfully and happily. Education is one way of getting that dream job and education is an essential cog in the wheel to living comfortably and happily. One English survey that included over 15,000 participants revealed that 81 percent of people who had achieved a good level of education had a high level of life satisfaction.”

Based on personal beliefs and research, Curtis’ essay describes different contributing causes to people’s happiness. These include a loving, stable family and good health. Interestingly, there is a positive correlation between education level and happiness, as Curtis cites statistics showing that education leads to high self-esteem, which can make you happier. 

“Socratic questioning is the process of challenging and changing irrational thoughts. Studies show that this method can reduce depression symptoms. The goal is to get you from a negative mindset (“I’m a failure.”) to a more positive one (“I’ve had a lot of success in my career. This is just one setback that doesn’t reflect on me. I can learn from it and be better.”)”

Parker-Pope writes about the different factors of happiness and how to practice mindfulness and positivity in this guide. She gives tips such as doing breathing exercises, moving around more, and spending time in places and with people that make you happy. Most importantly, however, she reminds readers that negative thoughts should not be repressed. Instead, we should accept them but challenge that mindset.

“Happiness is our choice of not leaving our mind and soul at the mercy of the sways of excitement. Happiness cannot eliminate sorrow, suffering, pain or death from the scheme of things, but it can help keep fear, anxiety, sadness, hopelessness, pessimism and other fathers of unhappiness at bay.”

Sultan discusses what happiness means to her personally. It provides an escape from all the dreariness and lousy news of daily life, not eliminating negative thoughts but keeping them at a distance, even just for a moment. She writes that to be happy; we should not base our happiness on the outcomes of our actions. We cannot control the world around us, so we should not link our happiness to it. If something doesn’t go our way, that is just how the world works. It is useless to be sad over what we cannot control.

4.   Happiness is Overrated by John Gorman

“Our souls do float across the sea of life, taking on water as they go, sinking ever so slightly — perhaps even imperceptibly — into despair. But our souls are not the bucket. Happiness itself is. And it’s the bucket we use to pour water out our souls and keep us afloat. What we really need is peace. Peace patches the holes in our souls and stops the leaking. Once we have peace, we will no longer need to seek happiness.”

In his essay, Gorman reflects on how he stopped trying to chase happiness and instead focused on finding peace in life. He writes that we are often so desperate looking for happiness that our lives become complicated, chaotic, and even depressing at times. He wants readers to do what they are passionate about and be their authentic selves; that way, they will find true happiness. You might also be interested in these essays about courage .

“That’s the mindset most of us have. Half of toxic positivity is just the suppression of 200% acceptable feelings such as anger, fear, sadness, confusion, and more. Any combination of such feelings is deemed “negative.” Honestly, mix ‘em up and serve them to me in a cocktail, eh? (Fine, fine, a mocktail. I reserve my right to one of those little umbrellas though.)

But by closing ourselves off to anything but positivity, we’re experiencing the same effects as being emotionally numb. Why are we doing this to ourselves?”

Mahajan writes about the phenomenon known as “toxic positivity” in which everyone is expected to be happy with their lives. It trivializes people’s misfortunes and sufferings, telling them to be happy with what they have instead. Mahajan opposes this, believing that everyone’s feelings are valid. She writes that it’s okay to be sad or angry at times, and the stigma around “negative feelings” should be erased. When we force ourselves to be happy, we may feel emotionally numb or even sad, the exact opposite of being happy. 

Many would say that happiness aids you in many aspects of your life. Based on personal experience and research, discuss the importance of being happy. Give a few benefits or advantages of happiness. These can include physical, mental, and psychological benefits, as well as anything else you can think of. 

Happiness means different things to different people and may come from various sources. In your essay, you can also explain how you define happiness. Reflect on this feeling and write about what makes you happy and why. Explain in detail for a more convincing essay; be sure to describe what you are writing about well. 

Happiness has a myriad of causes, many of which are material. Research the extent to which material possessions can make one happy, and write your essay about whether or not material things can truly make us happy. Consider the question, “Can money buy happiness?” Evaluate the extent to which it can or cannot, depending on your stance.  

Happiness has often been associated with a higher level of productivity. In your essay, look into the link between these two. In particular, discuss the mental and chemical effects of happiness. Since this topic is rooted in research and statistics, vet your sources carefully: only use the most credible sources for an accurate essay.

In their essays, many, including Gorman and Mahajan, seem to hold a more critical view of happiness. Our world is full of suffering and despair, so some ask: “Can we truly be happy on this earth?” Reflect on this question and make the argument for your position. Be sure to provide evidence from your own experiences and those of others. 

In dystopian stories, authorities often restrict people’s knowledge to keep them happy. We are seeing this even today, with some governments withholding crucial information to keep the population satisfied or stable. Write about whether you believe what they are doing is defensible or not, and provide evidence to support your point. 

For help with this topic, read our guide explaining “what is persuasive writing ?”

For help picking your next essay topic, check out our top essay topics about love .

Martin is an avid writer specializing in editing and proofreading. He also enjoys literary analysis and writing about food and travel.

View all posts

• 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

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Perspect Med Educ
• v.12(1); 2023
• PMC10253238

What about Happiness? A Critical Narrative Review with Implications for Medical Education

Fabienne schwitz.

1 Cardiologist and medical educator, Department of Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, Medical Sciences Building, Suit 102A, London, Canada

2 Department of Cardiology, Inselspital Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, CH 3010 Bern, Switzerland

Jacqueline Torti

3 Department of Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, Medical Sciences Building, Suit 102A, London, Canada

Lorelei Lingard

Introduction:.

Despite abundant scholarship and improvement initiatives, the problem of physician wellbeing persists. One reason might be conceptual: the idea of ‘happiness’ is rare in this work. To explore how it might influence the conversation about physician wellbeing in medical education, we conducted a critical narrative review asking: ‘How does happiness feature in the medical education literature on physician wellbeing at work?’ and ‘How is happiness conceptualized outside medicine?’

Following current methodological standards for critical narrative review as well as the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles, we conducted a structured search in health research, humanities and social sciences, a grey literature search, and consultation with experts. After screening and selection, content analysis was performed.

Of 401 identified records, 23 were included. Concepts of happiness from the fields of psychology (flow, synthetic happiness, mindfulness, flourishing), organizational behaviour (job satisfaction, happy-productive worker thesis, engagement), economics (happiness industry, status treadmill), and sociology (contentment, tyranny of positivity, coercive happiness) were identified. The medical education records exclusively drew on psychological concepts of happiness.

Discussion and Conclusion:

This critical narrative review introduces a variety of conceptualizations of happiness from diverse disciplinary origins. Only four medical education papers were identified, all drawing from positive psychology which orients us to treat happiness as individual, objective, and necessarily good. This may constrain both our understanding of the problem of physician wellbeing and our imagined solutions. Organizational, economical and sociological conceptualizations of happiness can usefully expand the conversation about physician wellbeing at work.

Introduction

For more than 30 years, we have been discussing the issue of physician wellbeing at work. Scholarship on physician wellbeing and related concepts such as life satisfaction and wellness has: analysed contributors and impacts of burnout [ 1 , 2 , 3 ], identified health problems among physicians and potential solutions [ 1 , 4 , 5 ], explored wellness and the pursuit of balance [ 6 , 7 , 8 ], and implemented interventions to improve resilience among physicians [ 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ]. This scholarship has informed a movement to improve wellbeing in medical education and medicine [ 13 , 14 ]. Main dimensions of this movement are: changing of organizational strategies [ 1 , 12 ], promoting the wellbeing of physicians in training through faculty development [ 13 , 15 ] and systematic strengthening of individual factors [ 1 , 12 , 15 ].

Despite this wealth of scholarship and improvement initiatives, the problem of physician wellbeing seems to have improved very little [ 15 ]. Data from the Association of American Medical Colleges Graduation Questionnaire and Year 2 Questionnaire from 2016 to 2019 show no sign of improvements among medical students despite targeted efforts [ 16 , 17 ]. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education also surveys residents and faculty annually, but changes to wellbeing in recent years are challenging to analyze due to a change in the structure of the questionnaire and the onset of the pandemic. What is clear is that mental illness and suicide among doctors has increased [ 18 ], supported by data highlighting high rates of mental health symptoms among physicians [ 19 ]. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic appears to have worsened the situation. Its potential impact on the mental wellbeing of health workers has been studied [ 20 ], with consistent reports of stress, anxiety and depressive symptoms among healthcare professionals [ 21 ]. Thus, the question of why physician wellbeing efforts are unsuccessful is particularly pressing.

One reason might be conceptual. Amid the suite of concepts around which physician wellbeing work has formed, the notion of ‘happiness’ does not strongly feature. Happiness is a richly theorized construct in other domains. It is used for a number of different constructs [ 22 , 23 ], and a distinction between affective wellbeing and eudaimonia or eudaimonic wellbeing (meaning and purpose of life) has been recognised since antiquity [ 22 ]. While the two conditions, wellbeing and happiness, are related (or even perhaps conflated) in the literature, their relationship is not clear. This review arises from our assumption that the term ‘happiness’ may carry additional, distinctive meanings that could influence the conversation about physician wellbeing in medical education. Other scholars have had similar ideas: e.g., Alan Peterkin has noted that ‘pleasure and happiness are neglected in our training and in our work’ [ 24 ]. Thus, we conducted a critical narrative review guided by two questions: ‘How does happiness feature in the medical education literature on physician wellbeing?’ and ‘How is happiness conceptualized outside medicine?’ We aim to describe whether and how happiness features in medical education, how the construct of happiness is understood in other select domains, and how we might adopt understandings from other domains to enrich the scholarship of physician wellbeing at work going forward.

This critical narrative review followed the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) procedure [ 25 ] and was also informed by Kahlke’s work [ 26 ]. Our goal has been to explore a wide-ranging literature and to be deliberately selective in highlighting works that allow us to achieve the key contribution of a narrative review: deepened understanding that advances the scholarly conversation [ 27 ].

Our review began with the question ‘How does happiness feature in the medical education literature on physician wellbeing?’ ‘Happiness’ is a broad and multifaceted concept, one which a single review would struggle to comprehensively capture; given our interest in physician happiness at work, we used the term “workplace happiness” to focus our inquiry. We conducted a structured literature search in the medical literature for ‘workplace happiness AND physicians’ in the databases PubMed, CINHAL and PsycINFO with librarian assistance. In the screening process, we excluded records that contained the term ‘happiness’ (or derivatives such as ‘happy’) in passing, without definition or conceptualization. For example, one article mentioned that 52% of pathologists are ‘happy’ with their job but did not describe how happiness was understood [ 28 ].

Having identified the records in medical education, our next step was a humanities and social sciences literature search to address the second question, ‘How is the term happiness used outside medicine?’ We searched using purposeful combinations of ‘workplace happiness’ and ‘happiness’ in Web of Science, Embase and Scopus. Searches in the grey literature covered a broad spectrum from Google Scholar to TED Talks. Discussion with experts from psychology, sociology, philosophy, women studies and medical education helped us identify relevant sources. We did not use synonyms for happiness in our search, as our intent was not a full exploration of the conceptualization of happiness but rather an understanding of how these disciplines use the term happiness.

The authors judged the sufficiency of our database on two levels. First, we sought to represent a range of disciplines in which happiness is theorized. Because our structured search returned sources from sociology, psychology, economics and organizational behaviour, these became the focus of our results. Critical narrative review involves compiling a selective rather than comprehensive set of records; we judged this range of disciplines sufficient to provide useful insights on which to base future research. The second point of sufficiency relates to how many and which records from each discipline are necessary to represent key notions around happiness. Rather than setting a threshold for a specific number of records, the authors instead considered whether the records offered a sufficiently robust description of the concept. As we analysed selected records, we judged them sufficient once we could explain the concept and recognize redundancies in additional records. Where we could not make this judgment, we sought additional records. Overall, we justified the choice of literature based on its ability to support a description of different conceptualizations of happiness that could advance our thinking on the topic in medical education. This process is the essence of rigour in critical narrative reviews [ 26 ].

Screening and selection were shaped by the orientations of our research team members. Our group includes a senior medical education researcher with disciplinary roots in the humanities, an early career medical education researcher with roots in public health and health promotion, and a cardiology educator completing a masters in medical education. We brought to the review different degrees of familiarity and comfort with the disciplines we were searching: for instance, we were all familiar with medical education scholarship, but two of us were also familiar with scholarship and vocabulary from social sciences, psychology and organizational behaviour, while none of us were familiar with economics scholarship. This invariably influenced our insights and enthusiasms for particular concepts retrieved in our search, but together we endeavoured to address all retrieved records with the same attention and support each other to interpret those we were less familiar with.

After screening and selection of records for both the focused medical education search and the broader, multi-discipline search, content analysis was done to enhance the trustworthiness of the study. Content analysis offered a way to arrange the data systematically into distinct categories, including definitions and conceptualizations of happiness, disciplinary origin of ideas, connections and similarities, and differences or tensions. Concept mapping enabled us to visualize the relationships among these categories, and informed our interpretation of these relationships.

Our searches retrieved 401 records. After abstract and title screening, 28 were selected for full-text review, of which 13 were included. An additional 10 were included from hand-searching and grey literature for a total of 23. Our focused medical education search yielded 4 records. Our second, broader search yielded records from psychology (8), organizational behavior (6), economics (2) and sociology (3). While such disciplinary categories are necessarily simplifications, we use them in the following sections as organizing structures to highlight disciplinary patterns in how the records characterize happiness ( Figure 1 : Disciplinary patterns in the characterization of happiness). Because our analysis of the medical education records showed that this scholarship exclusively employed psychological concepts, we have included these records (which address our first research question) in that section. Because of the small number of medical education records, the bulk of our results address our second research question. Terminologies vary and are used interchangeably in this literature (Cromby cited in Frawley) [ 29 ]; however, for consistency we deliberately use the term ‘happiness’ except when quoting from a record that uses another term.

Disciplinary patterns in the characterization of happiness.

Happiness as a psychological concept

Psychological concepts of happiness have in common a predominantly individual approach. In this section, we highlight four psychological concepts that have particular relevance in the context of physician wellbeing at work, including those that have already been taken up in medical education.

The first concept is flow theory [ 30 ], which states that you need a flow feeling – a state of ideal balance between challenges and abilities—to be happy. Flow is a state of being focused; having a sense of ecstasy, inner clarity and serenity; knowing that an activity is doable; feeling timelessness and intrinsic motivation [ 31 ]. Flow tends to occur at work more than in leisure time [ 32 ]: e.g., a musician could reach a flow state during a concert. The concept of flow has its origin in positive psychology. The initial study about flow theory by psychologist Csíkszentmihályi included surgeons, and the concept of flow has been taken up in medical education in a paper about enhancing career enjoyment, performance and workplace happiness [ 33 , 34 ]. This work supported flow through training in individual interventions such as coaching, psychological skills training, mental skills training or stress management training [ 33 ]. While supporting flow in health care is recognized to require supplementary system-level interventions, such as increasing time for patient care, minimizing administrative tasks, and promoting constructive learning environments, scholarship at the system level is less common [ 33 , 35 ].

The second concept from positive psychology is synthetic happiness. The term was coined by Daniel Gilbert in a 2004 TED Talk, although his subsequent writings do not use it. Contrasted with ‘natural happiness’ which is what we feel when we get what we want, ‘synthetic happiness is what we make when we do not get what we want’ [ 36 ]. A term coined by Harvard psychologist Daniel Gilbert, synthetic happiness acts like a psychological immune system, to ‘[strike] a balance that allows us to feel good enough to cope with our situation but bad enough to do something about it’ [ 36 , 37 ]. We convince ourselves that we have is what we would have chosen anyway. For instance, clinical clerkship students acknowledge what they like or dislike about each specialty as they rotate through them, but during residency their choice is already made, so they are likely to convince themselves that they are happy with it. Synthetic happiness helps us to find a way to like what we have. However, synthetic is not ‘false’; Gilbert argues that ‘synthetic Happiness is as real and enduring as the natural happiness’ [ 36 ], suggesting it could have implications for being happy in an imperfect workplace.

Finally, two related concepts from positive psychology occurred in our records: flourishing and mindfulness [ 38 , 39 ]. Flourishing draws on the metaphor of flower growth, and refers to a lifestyle determined by optimal living, mastering life’s tasks, kindness, personal growth, and resilience. Five pillars are required: positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment [ 40 ]. These factors form the basic precondition for a life of profound fulfilment. Mindfulness is described as a mental state achieved by focusing one’s awareness. While it shares features with flourishing, it is the practice of non-judgmental attention in the moment. Only one record used mindfulness as part of a suite of interventions to ‘increase happiness’ 4 ; the others did not articulate increased happiness as an explicit goal of mindfulness.

Happiness as an organizational concept

Organizational approaches to happiness arise from the premise that individuals spend most of their adult lives working. As such, happiness in the workplace is a key component of overall happiness in life. In this section, we highlight key concepts in our records that were associated with happiness at work, including job satisfaction, productivity, and employee engagement.

A common idea in the organizational literature about happiness is ‘job satisfaction’. Components of job satisfaction that contribute to employee happiness include aspects at the transient, individual (employee) and organizational or collective level [ 41 , 42 ]. Transient-level contributions to workplace happiness include momentary affect, emotion at work and flow state [ 43 ]. Employee-level contributions to workplace happiness include job security, meaningful work, positive relationships with coworkers, recognition, autonomy and engagement [ 44 ]. The organizational aspects that contribute to workplace happiness include opportunities for growth, compensation, job flexibility, a positive work environment, work-life balance, and organizational culture [ 44 ]. Both the employer (leader) and the individual (follower) play a strong role in shaping organizational aspects that contribute to happiness through constructive dissensus [ 45 ]. Constructive dissensus refers to a mutual understanding between leaders and followers, including shared beliefs and values, leading to improved quality of life at work. Interventions aimed at improving workplace happiness should be multi-faceted and focus both on improving individual happiness as well as the organizational aspects to enhance job performance and employee retention [ 45 ].

The happy-productive worker thesis states that all things being equal, happy workers perform better than those who are less happy. This idea has been the holy grail of management and organizational psychology research for two decades. With roots in positive psychology, the happy-productive worker thesis explicitly focuses on ‘productivity as a consequence of happiness at work’ [ 46 ]. Happiness in this thesis was operationalized by a diversity of constructs (affect, wellbeing, burnout, life satisfaction, growth and purpose), which may explain the inconclusive nature of the empirical literature, which finds that people who are happy in general are more productive, but people who are happy specifically at work are not necessarily so.

‘Engagement’ was a crucial dimension of measuring happiness at work [ 47 ]. Workplace engagement is defined as a persistent affective state that includes how employees express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally at work. The physical aspect of engagement focuses on the energy expended by individuals to perform their job, while the cognitive aspect focuses on employees’ beliefs about their organization and the emotional aspect focuses on how employees feel towards the organization [ 48 ]. Workplace happiness is the ‘positive outcomes at the workplace which are a result of many interlinked factors ranging from employee-work relation within the organization to the end results of efficient production and customer satisfaction’ [ 47 ]. The organizational behavior literature connects engagement to productivity. Describing engagement as having a positive correlation with constructs like organization growth, lower operational costs, lower absenteeism, and decreased intentions to turnover [ 47 ], the organizational literature begins to articulate an economics of happiness which is even more explicit in the economic records we analyzed.

Happiness as an economic concept

Economic approaches to happiness arise from the position that happy workers improve the economy. Therefore, the search for happiness has also become more and more of a business. In this section, we highlight the aspects related to the ‘happiness industry’.

Happiness is a central concept in economics. Global institutions such as the World Bank and the World Health Organization embrace the relationship between subjective happiness and economic wellbeing [ 29 ], and, since 2012, the World Happiness Report has tracked the happiness of countries as a marker of economic health. ‘Happiness economics’ conceives of happiness as an objective, measurable entity, something that can be ‘reduced to calculable units’ [ 29 ]. Happiness is calculated at individual and group levels, with the goal of converting happiness into familiar kinds of economic capital like gross domestic product, consumer spending, and employment rates.

With the rise of the happiness industry, the interaction between happiness and the markets becomes a central concern of economics. As a marketing device, happiness is strategic. Consumer groups must be poised ‘between pleasure and pain’: just happy enough to sustain the idea that products bring happiness and just unhappy enough to feel the need to buy more [ 49 ]. However, economic growth compulsion can have a negative impact on happiness, as consumers are confronted with the agony of choice. Multiple options can only contribute to happiness as long as the number of options is still manageable. Once a certain threshold is reached, additional options do not bring further happiness. And purchasing power is not the solution.

Studies of the relationship between income and happiness suggest that, despite economic growth and increased prosperity, people are not happier. At the same time, however, critical economic scholars warn against extrapolating that poorer means happier (Pender cited in Frawley) [ 29 ], and raise concern that the emphasis on the subjective sensations of the populace can deflect attention from objective realities like insufficient food. Furthermore, the relationship between money and happiness is complex: the ‘status treadmill’ concept captures the notion that it is relative, not absolute, income that can lead to happiness, and we are happier when our relative income is higher than our peers [ 50 ]. In relation to physician happiness at work, these economic concepts suggest a complex, nonlinear relation between physician income and happiness.

Happiness as a social concept

Sociological approaches to happiness arise from the position that the predominantly psychological treatment of happiness fails to attend to the affordances and impediments to happiness that exist at a structural level. In this section, we highlight two concepts – the crisis of contentment and happiness as coercion – that arose in our records.

In the book, Deconstructing Happiness, McKenzie describes a crisis of contentment. They distinguish happiness, which is an individual characteristic, from contentment, which is ‘a collective social project’ [ 51 ] arising from ‘committing to something greater than the self’ [ 51 ]. Contentment is socially defined and motivated, standing in contrast to pleasure-driven, temporary and individual forms of happiness. With this distinction, the author argues that we are currently experiencing a ‘crisis of contentment’ (not of happiness) in modern society. Our lives are ‘filled with an almost unending range of products, services and self-help books that will lead to happiness’ but ‘people do not seem to be as happy as they SHOULD be’ [ 51 ] because individual happiness cannot provide meaning and long-term satisfaction without context. The values and norms of the social world provide this context. Therefore, ‘how the individual is able to positively place him-or herself with regard to social values and norms’ [ 51 ] is the basis of contentment.

The concept of a crisis of contentment moves us away from concerns about the individual’s happiness or lack thereof. Instead, we must be concerned with the social, political and economic factors that shape the relationship between the individual and society [ 51 ]. In particular, we need to critique our expectations of happiness [ 29 ]. Some sociologists have argued that the idea of happiness is part of a widespread ‘tyranny of positivity’ in modernity, pressuring individuals ‘to conform to culturally sanctioned ideals of behavior and disposition’ [ 51 ]. A growing body of work challenges the ‘epistemological fallacy that happiness ‘has’ a kind of essence’ and argues instead that the concept of happiness is a relational construct, gaining meaning from socio-historical context and attendant social norms’ [ 51 ]. Happiness, they argue, is not a neutral concept.

Happiness as coercion is an instance of its lack of neutrality, as argued by critical feminist scholarship. For instance, Sara Ahmed considers happiness as a ‘world-making device’ [ 52 ]: the world is made by prescribing what is appropriate ‘happiness’ based on largely unacknowledged social values and norms. Happiness, then, is an instrument for reorienting the individual toward a common good. Thus, as ‘an idea or aspiration within everyday life’ happiness can lead to ‘forms of coercion …such that one person’s happiness is …made conditional on their willingness to be made happy by the same things as other people’. Happiness, therefore, makes demands on us [ 50 ]. It demands that we accept, with a smile, the social values that have dictated what happiness is. Using the example of ‘happy housewife’ of the 1950s, she argues that this notion of female happiness enforces ‘gendered forms of labour’ and encourages us to consider the possibility of refusing to be happy in the ways that society prescribes. What would it mean instead to ‘claim the freedom to be unhappy’ [ 52 ]?

This critical narrative review has articulated multiple conceptualizations of happiness that could inform the way we approach physician wellbeing at work in medical education. In this section, we provide three main insights about these conceptualizations of happiness and consider their implications for scholarship and improvement efforts related to physician wellbeing in the workplace.

Happiness is not only individual: it is also social

The four medical education papers we analysed that explored physician happiness at work all relied upon concepts of happiness based in positive psychology. And while efforts to promote physician flow and mindfulness at work are valuable, they represent a partial view of the phenomenon due to their focus on the individual. Even in the Canadian Medical Association Journal call to consider ‘Physician health: beyond wellness to happiness’, the emphasis is on personal attributes such as stoicism and perfectionism. However, as McKenzie argued, ‘the individual approach to happiness is both incomplete and inherently flawed’ [ 51 ]. We would argue that we’ll never fully understand physician happiness by exclusively emphasizing individual psychology. We need to also address the relationship between the individual and society by considering the concept of contentment, which requires paying attention to social, political and economic factors. As McKenzie has suggested, with this shift ‘the goal is no longer supporting individual attempts to find happiness, rather [it is] experiencing the ups and downs of life within a meaningful social narrative’ [ 51 ]. Given this, we might ask, what would it mean to have ‘a meaningful social narrative’ for physicians to experience the ups and downs of their work?

A first step might be to normalize these ups and downs and openly discuss how we make sense of them, paying attention to the social, political and economic factors that shape this sense-making. Economics, for instance, is part of this social narrative, but absolute income is less important than relative income [ 50 ]. Attention to such factors might helpfully complicate discussions about the place of physician income in wellbeing at work and draw our attention to questions of the relative value of health professions and medical specialties in inter and intra professional workplaces. Other social factors that matter for a meaningful social narrative of the ups and downs of physician work include ‘a thriving and collaborative group identity’ [ 49 ] which this literature connects to the promise of constructive dissensus. To further explore this promise, scholarship might begin to connect the wellbeing conversation to the conversation about teamwork to understand how the ability to negotiate shared meaning in moments of conflict influences physician contentment.

Individual happiness is not objective, it is subjective

The definition of happiness is multifaceted. Terminologies vary, and there remain no standardised definitions [ 29 ]. But what most terms have in common is that they approach happiness as an objective thing – something we can ‘get’ more or less of. However, our results suggest agreement that happiness is subjective: it is something we perceive and even something we manufacture thanks to our psychological immune system. Knowing that happiness is subjective, unstable, situated – even synthetic – calls into question our insistence on measuring it. Most of the records about physician happiness from medical education were measurement-focused. A critical examination of both our insatiable appetite to measure and the individual measures themselves is necessary if we are to avoid oversimplifying the construct of happiness as we integrate it more fully into medical education. Notwithstanding the question of whether happiness can be measured at all, our results suggest that understanding happiness may have more to do with measuring expectations and interpretations than experiencing happiness. Given this, we might explore the expectations and interpretations medical trainees bring to the profession, how they change over time, and how these changes influence happiness at work.

Happiness is not straightforwardly good; it is also potentially coercive

Critical sociological approaches to happiness draw our attention to the role of happiness as ‘a central pacifying rhetoric and important technolog[y] for the management of subjectivity to ensure … the perpetuation of the existing order of things’ [ 29 ]. Such critiques of happiness remind us that, amid our efforts to promote the happiness of individual physicians, we must also be critically reflexive. We need to ask questions such as: Who defines ‘happiness’ for physicians? What social norms and power relations does that definition serve? Does our conceptualization of physician happiness acknowledge cultural contingencies? We are not suggesting that we should abandon initiatives that seek to improve happiness; however, as we pursue them, we must also ask ourselves how these perpetuate an existing structural and political order that is ‘coercive’, sustaining unacknowledged power relations. To use Ahmed’s term, do we cast as ‘killjoys’ [ 52 ] physicians who refuse to perpetuate the existing order by refusing to be happy-as-prescribed? Do we support physicians to be unhappy in the face of tragedy, or demand that they suppress that emotion and be happy (or at least neutral)? Recognizing that dominant understandings of happiness might disempower some physicians based on culture, gender, race or other minority factors, we should consider whether and how the prevalent conceptualization of happiness takes equality, diversity, inclusion and decolonisation (EDI-D) into account. As Slavin has recognized, ‘wellbeing programming has been a one-size-fits-all approach and has not adequately acknowledged and addressed the additional threats to wellbeing and satisfaction faced by many in our community’ [ 15 ]. To advance the conversation about physician happiness at work, we need to recognize how conventional definitions of physician happiness may be coercive, especially for minorities and equity deserving groups. We should be alert to physician unhappiness as a symptom not a disease – and even, perhaps, as a form of resistance to prescribed narratives.

Limitations

A critical narrative review of happiness is, by design, selective and positioned rather than exhaustive and neutral [ 53 ]. We have chosen to highlight disciplines and concepts of happiness specifically related to our focus on physician happiness in the workplace. Consequently, our review examines the concept of workplace happiness as one important component of happiness in medical education: other aspects of happiness beyond ‘workplace happiness’ are likely relevant but are not captured in this work. We have focused on a subset of disciplines (psychology, sociology, economics, organizational behavior), and we acknowledge that our review of concepts of happiness in each discipline is selective rather than comprehensive: it reflects the records our search returned and there may be other insights about happiness in these disciplines that future work building on our own could explore. Furthermore, the inclusion of additional disciplines would probably enrich and expand the conceptualizations of happiness we have described in this work. A particular gap is the lack of philosophy records captured in our search, which initially surprised us. After consulting with a philosophy scholar, we determined that this was because the terminology in philosophy differs significantly from our search terms. Likely other disciplines, such as religious studies or history, were also outside the scope of our initial search due to differences in terminology for the happiness construct. This is a challenge for any review: reviewers need to decide how far from their original search terms to venture and where to draw the line. For this first narrative review of ‘happiness’ as it relates to physician happiness at work, we decided to remain consistent in our search terms and we therefore acknowledge that our results cannot be comprehensive of all treatments of the concept in all published literature. Finally, our review of included disciplines was not intended to be exhaustive, but to describe some key conceptualizations of happiness as they relate to understanding physician happiness at work. Undoubtedly there is much more to be learned about the history and nuances of each of these fields’ approaches to happiness.

This critical narrative review has revealed that medical education rarely incorporates the concept of happiness in the workplace and, when it does, it draws exclusively from positive psychology. This disciplinary emphasis orients us to treat happiness as individual, objective, and necessarily good. Understanding organizational, economic and social aspects of happiness can usefully expand the conversation about physician wellbeing at work to include the insights that happiness is also social, subjective, and potentially coercive. With such insights, we might imagine different solutions to the persistent problem of physician wellbeing – in fact, we might even redefine the problem itself.

Competing Interests

The authors have no competing interests to declare.

• 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

Psychology of Happiness: A Summary of the Theory & Research

Little did I know the overwhelming depth of this topic! I found myself asking questions – can science explain happiness?

Can happiness be measured? What is happiness, anyway?

Arguably, a lot has been written on the topic of happiness , including on this website. The following provides an exploration of happiness, and, importantly, it provides you with links to further resources on this important topic.

Keep reading to discover a range of topics including the main theories of happiness, and a fascinating look at the neuroscience of happiness, as well as an interesting discussion on topics such as subjective wellbeing (the more scientific term for happiness), what positive psychology has to say about happiness, success and happiness, and more. Hopefully, it will answer some questions about happiness. Please enjoy!

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Happiness & Subjective Wellbeing Exercises for free . These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or your clients identify sources of authentic happiness and strategies to boost wellbeing.

This Article Contains:

A scientific explanation of happiness, a look at the theory and science of happiness, the psychology of happiness, happiness and positive psychology, interesting research and studies, the happiness research institute, the happiness professor, other well-known researchers, articles on success and happiness, 16 most important happiness articles, other recommended journal and scholarly articles (pdf), a take-home message.

What exactly do we mean when we talk about a scientific explanation of happiness? What, in fact, is the science of happiness?

Put very simply, the science of happiness looks at “ what makes happy people happy ” (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018). If you think about it, the subjective nature of happiness makes it incredibly difficult to define and also challenging to measure (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

Let’s look into this further …

In the past

Happiness has been the topic of discussion and debate since the ancient Greek times. Hedonism has a long history (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Science has looked closely at happiness as ‘hedonically’ defined – or, in other words, happiness is the outcome of the pursuit of pleasure over pain (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Aristippus, a Greek philosopher from the 4th century BC claimed happiness was the sum of life’s ‘hedonic’ moments (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Hedonic enjoyment is a state whereby an individual feels relaxed, has a sense of distance from their problems and, can be said to feel ‘happy’ (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Since the days of Aristotle, happiness has been conceptualized as being composed of at least 2 aspects – hedonia (or, pleasure) and eudaimonia (a sense that life is well-lived) (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

In the present

What does science say about this? Well, research has shown that, whilst these two aspects are definitely distinct and that, in ‘happy’ people, both hedonic and eudaimonic components of happiness correspond (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

A study by Kesebir and Diener (2008) report that in happiness surveys , more than 80% of interviewees rated their overall ‘eudaimonic’ life satisfaction as “pretty to very happy” and, at the same time, 80% of people interviewed also rate their current, hedonic ‘mood’ as positive (e.g. giving a rating of 6-7 on a 10-point valence scale, where 5 is ‘hedonically neutral’).

Neuroscientists have made substantial progress into investigating the functional neuroanatomy of pleasure (which, according to Kringelbach and Berridge 2010, makes an important contribution to our experience of happiness and plays a key role in our sense of wellbeing).

Pleasure has, for many years in the discipline of psychology, been closely associated with happiness (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

According to Sigmund Freud (1930), people: ‘ strive after happiness; they want to become happy and to remain so. This endeavor has two sides, a positive and a negative aim. It aims, on the one hand, at an absence of pain and displeasure, and, on the other, at the experiencing of strong feelings of pleasure ’ (p. 76).

Kringelbach and Berridge (2010) argue that the neuroscience of both pleasure and happiness can be found by studying hedonic brain circuits. This is because, according to most modern perspectives, pleasure is an important component of happiness.

Does this provide the opportunity to ‘measure’ happiness, therefore providing a scientific explanation of happiness?

In fact, work of neuroscientists has found that pleasure is not merely a sensation, or thought, but rather an outcome of brain activity in dedicated ‘hedonic systems’ (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

All pleasures, from the most fundamental (food, sexual pleasure) right through to higher-order pleasures (e.g. monetary, medical, and altruistic pleasures) seem to involve the same brain systems (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

Some of the hedonic mechanisms are found deep within the brain (the nucleus accumbens, ventral pallidum, and brainstem) and others are located in the cortex (orbitofrontal, cingulate, medial prefrontal and insular cortices) (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

In the future

It can be said, then, that pleasure activated brain networks are widespread. Despite this exciting finding – a brain network for happiness – Kringelbach and Berridge (2010) say that further research is needed to fully comprehend the functional neuroanatomy of happiness.

As well as the findings from neuroscience supporting an anatomical basis to happiness, another component of a scientific explanation of happiness is the issue of measurement.

Can happiness be measured?

Some individuals argue that maybe happiness should not be the subject of scientific explanation because it is impossible to objectively measure it (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Perhaps, though, as argued by Ed Diener, happiness is subjective. According to Ed Diener, people are happy if they think they are, and each person is the best judge of whether they are, in fact, happy or not (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

He introduced a term to describe this ‘measure’ of happiness: Subjective wellbeing .

Having the measure of subjective wellbeing makes a scientific explanation of happiness possible… by asking questions such as:

• Are you happy?
• How would you rate your happiness on a scale of 1 – 10

Controlled experiments can be devised to determine what can be done to raise/lower these responses.

The Experience Sampling Method (ESM) has been valuable in the assessment of subjective wellbeing. It has been a positive development in the science of happiness.

ESM provides an overall indication of wellbeing over time, based on the total balance of measurement of positive and negative affect at different times (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Diener provided evidence that subjective wellbeing has “construct validity” meaning that, yes, it is measuring something ‘real’! This is because Diener showed that subjective wellbeing is constant over time, is highly correlated with some personality traits and has the capacity to predict future outcomes.

Diener and colleagues suggest that it is possible to measure happiness using valid, reliable methods including using instruments, looking at observable indicators of happiness such as smiling behavior, and objective reports from one’s friends and family (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Nevertheless, many critics have opposed the concept of subjective wellbeing, including psychologist Michael Argyle (2001). Argyle states

“the main weakness of subjective measure is that they are affected by cognitive biases such as the effects of expectation and adaptation so that we don’t know how far to believe the scores”

However, other researchers have developed several well-validated scales for measuring happiness, supporting its’ validity as a scientific construct.

The Steen Happiness Index (Seligman, Steen, Park & Peterson, 2005)

Consists of twenty items. Participants read a series of statements and select the one that best describes how they are at the present time. Items indicate three kinds of ‘happy life’ – the pleasant life, the engaged life, and the meaningful life.

These dimensions will be explored closely very soon!

Subjective Happiness Scale (Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999)

Consists of four items to assess global subjective happiness. The participants read four statements, including ‘In general, I consider myself…’ and the individual then selects an item from 1 to 7 from, for example, ‘not a very happy person’ to ‘a very happy person’.

Test-retest and self-peer correlations have suggested good to excellent reliability, and construct validation studies of convergent and discriminant validity have confirmed the use of this scale to measure the construct of subjective happiness.

Happiness Scale (Fordyce, 1977)

This scale is also referred to as the Emotion Questionnaire as it assesses emotional wellbeing as an indication of perceived happiness. It is comprised of two items. The first is a scale measuring happiness/unhappiness by participants ranking descriptive phrases on a 0 – 10 scale.

The other item making up the test requires participants to give an approximate percentage of time that he/she feels happy, unhappy and neutral. The test has shown to have adequate reliability and validity.

Therefore, evidence from neuroscience, paired with evidence from the measurement of subjective wellbeing, or, happiness, suggest that a scientific explanation of happiness is, in fact, possible.

It is overwhelming to consider what happiness is… where to begin?! Happiness has been the topic of discussion and debate since the ancient Greek times.

In 1973, ‘Psychology Abstracts International’ began listing happiness as an index term (Diener, 1984). However, because happiness is a term that is used widely and frequently, it has various meanings and connotations (Diener, 1984).

The construct of happiness is still evolving, and although challenging to define, it is a construct that can be empirically evaluated through qualitative and quantitative assessment (Delle Fave, Brdar, Freire, Vella-Brodrick & Wissing, 2011). Delle Fave and colleagues (2011) noted that happiness is also an ambiguous term which can have a number of meanings:

• A transient emotion (that is synonymous with joy)
• An experience of fulfillment and accomplishment (characterized by a cognitive evaluation)
• A long-term process of meaning-making and identity development through achieving one’s potential and the pursuit of subjectively relevant goals.

Historically, since the days of Aristotle, happiness has been conceptualized as being composed of at least 2 aspects – hedonia (or, pleasure) and eudaimonia (a sense that a life is well-lived) (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

Research has shown that, whilst these two aspects are definitely distinct, that in ‘happy’ people, both hedonic and eudaimonic components of happiness correspond (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

A study by Kesebir and Diener (2008) report that in happiness surveys, more than 80% of interviewees rated their overall ‘eudaimonic’ life satisfaction as “pretty to very happy” and, at the same time, 80% of the people interviewed also rate their current, hedonic ‘mood’ as positive (e.g. giving a rating of 6-7 on a 10-point valence scale, where 5 is ‘hedonically neutral’).

Moving forward into the modern era, there is some agreement about the aspects that make up theories of happiness. There are, according to Haybron (2003), when looking at theories of happiness, 3 basic views:

• Hedonism – in other words, to be happy is to experience, on the whole, a majority of pleasure. Hedonia.
• Life-satisfaction view – to be happy is to have a favorable attitude about one’s life as a whole, either over its entirety or just over a limited period of time. Eudaimonia.
• Affective state theory – that happiness depends on an individual’s overall emotional state.

Other theories of happiness are so-called ‘hybrid’ theories that combine the life satisfaction theory with other hedonistic or affective-state theories (Haybron, 2003). One of these hybrid theories is the one that is the most widely accepted theory of happiness: subjective wellbeing (Haybron, 2003). Subjective wellbeing is considered to be a more scientific term than happiness.

A closer look at hedonia

Hedonism has a long history (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Science has looked closely at happiness as ‘hedonically’ defined – or, in other words, the pursuit of pleasure over pain (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Aristippus, a Greek philosopher from the 4th century BC claimed happiness was the sum of life’s ‘hedonic’ moments (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Hedonic enjoyment is a state whereby an individual feels relaxed, has a sense of distance from their problems and, can be said to feel ‘happy’ (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Hedonia refers, in simple terms, to the pursuit of pleasure. It was argued by Hobbes that happiness is found in the successful pursuit of our human appetites, and DeSade went on to say that the pursuit of sensation and pleasure is the ultimate goal of life (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

The Utilitarian philosophers, including Bentham, put forth the argument that a good society is one which is developed out of individuals attempting to maximize pleasure and pursue self-interest (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

It should be clarified that hedonia, in respects to happiness, does not have the same meaning as physical hedonism: happiness can come not only from short-term pleasure, but can also arise from achieving goals or other valued outcomes (Ryan & Deci, 2001). So-called hedonic psychologists are of the belief that happiness can include the preferences and pleasures of the mind, as well as the body (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Kahneman (1999) defined hedonic psychology as the study of “what makes experiences and life pleasant and unpleasant” (p. ix). Within the framework of hedonic psychology, the terms wellbeing and hedonism are used interchangeably (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Hedonic psychology explains wellbeing in terms of pleasure versus pain, and it, therefore, becomes the center of much research and also interventions that principally aim to enhance human happiness (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Hedonic psychology has been a focus of the theory of happiness, in part, due to the links between hedonia and other dominant theories. For example, hedonia ties in with behavioral theories of reward and punishment, as well as theories that focus on the cognitive expectations of the outcomes of reward and punishment (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Despite there being a variety of ways to consider the human experience of pleasure/pain, the majority of research in hedonic psychology looks into the assessment of subjective wellbeing. To introduce the term, briefly, subjective wellbeing (or ‘happiness’) consists of three components (Ryan & Deci, 2001):

• Life satisfaction
• The presence of a positive mood
• The absence of a negative mood

Elsewhere in this website, you can read more about eudaimonia and the Aristotelian view of happiness . For the purpose of exploring theories of happiness, I will briefly look at eudaimonia now:

What is eudaimonia? (The life satisfaction view of happiness)

Aristotle argued that, because of man’s unique capacity to reason, pleasure alone cannot achieve happiness – because animals are driven to seek pleasure, and man has greater capacity than animals (The Pursuit of Happiness, 2018).

In striving for happiness, the most important factor is for a person to have ‘complete virtue’ – in other words, to have good moral character (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018).

Eudaimonia was, according to Aristotle, “activity expressing virtue” that will therefore lead to a happy life. Aristotle proposed that happiness was neither virtue, or pleasure, but rather the exercise of virtue.

The argument taken by the Aristotelian view is that happiness, per se, is not the principal criterion of wellbeing (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Proponents of this view see wellbeing as achieved by people living in accordance with the ‘daimon’ (true self). (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Eudaimonic theories of happiness argue that rather than the pursuit of pleasure, happiness is the result of the development of individual strengths and virtues (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

The theory of eudaimonic happiness has its basis in the concept of the self-actualising individual (proposed by Maslow ) and the concept of the ‘fully functioning person’ (Rogers) (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). Many modern scientific explanations of happiness are conducive with the theory of eudaimonic happiness.

For example, Waterman suggested that happiness is enhanced by people acting in accordance with their most deeply held values (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). Waterman also introduced the term ‘personal expressiveness’ to describe the state of authenticity that occurs when people’s activities reflect their values.

The eudaimonic theory of happiness adopts the Self-Determination Theory to conceptualize happiness (Deci & Ryan, 2000). This theory argues that fulfillment in the areas of autonomy and competence will enhance happiness. In other words, this view suggests that subjective wellbeing (i.e. happiness) can be achieved through engaging in eudaimonic pursuits (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Affective state theory

To recap, this theory of happiness proposes that happiness is the result of one’s overall emotional state. Bradburn (1969) put forward the argument that happiness is made up of two separate components that are quite independent and uncorrelated: positive affect and negative affect. According to Bradburn, happiness is a global judgment people make by comparing their negative affect and positive affect (Diener, 1984).

This led to the development of the Affect Balance Scale (Diener, 1984). The Bradburn Affect Balance Scale is a self-report measure of the quality of life. The scale is made up of descriptions of ten mood states (for example, item one is feeling “particularly excited or interested in something”), and the subject reflects upon whether they have been in that mood state during the last week.

A measure of the quality of life, as an indication of happiness, is derived by the sum of the ‘negative’ items are taken away from the sum of the ‘positive’ items (Diener, 1984).

Affect state theory also takes the view that the absence of negative affect is not the same thing as the presence of positive affect (Diener, 1984).

Theories developed by positive psychologists

The discipline of positive psychology has developed some unique theories of happiness. For example, Seligman (2002) introduced the Authentic Happiness theory. This theory is based around the notion that authentic happiness results from a person living according to their ‘signature strengths’ which develop as people become aware of their own personal strengths and take ownership of them (Seligman, 2002).

Another theory of happiness is Csikszentmihalyi’s ‘flow’ theory. Flow may be defined as “ the state of engagement, optimal happiness, and peak experience that occurs when an individual is absorbed in a demanding and intrinsically motivating challenge ” (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008, p. 395). This state of engagement has been proposed to be a pathway to happiness (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Some psychologists suggest that perhaps, in fact, happiness is relative – or, in other words, it is an evaluation of subjective judgments about one’s situations, comparing others’ situations to one’s own or even one’s earlier situations, goals or aspirations (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). This argument has, however, been refuted.

Veenhoven explains that comparison may affect the cognitive or life-satisfaction aspects of happiness, but that the affective component results from hedonic experience (meeting one’s fundamental needs) and is therefore quite separate of any comparisons (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

To summarise these related topics – the scientific explanation of happiness and the theory and science of happiness – there are a number of theories conceptualizing happiness and in keeping with these theories, the term can have slightly different meanings.

Download 3 Free Happiness Exercises (PDF)

These detailed, science-based exercises will equip you or your clients with tools to discover authentic happiness and cultivate subjective well-being.

Download 3 Free Happiness Tools Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

• Email Address *
• Your Expertise * Your expertise Therapy Coaching Education Counseling Business Healthcare Other
• Phone This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Way back in 1929, Walter A. Pitkin wrote ‘ The Psychology of Happiness ’ and in this book, he differentiated between happiness and related emotions including pleasure and enjoyment (Samuel, 2019). He argued that achieving happiness was not merely the result of luck or chance. Since this time, psychologists have continued to try and define happiness.

According to psychology, happiness is about more than simply the experience of a positive mood. In order to describe happiness, psychologists commonly refer to subjective wellbeing (Kesebir & Diener, 2008). In other words, happiness is “ people’s evaluations of their lives and encompasses both cognitive judgments of satisfaction and affective appraisals of moods and emotions ” (Kesebir & Diener, 2008, p. 118).

The psychological inquiry into happiness is important because happiness is not only associated with improved physical health and even longevity, but it is also a priority for people – across the world, happiness has been rated as being more important than other desirable outcomes including living a meaningful life or making a lot of money (Psychology Today, 2019).

There are three ways that psychologists study happiness:

1. Need and goal satisfaction theories

These theories suggest that happiness results from striving to achieve appropriate goals and meeting one’s fundamental human needs (Nelson, Kurtz & Lyubomirsky, in press). Deci and Ryan (2000) for example, proposed Self-determination Theory, which stipulates that wellbeing is achieved when one meets their basic human needs including autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

2. Genetic and personality predisposition theories

These propose that wellbeing is influenced by genes, and is associated with the personality traits of extraversion and neuroticism (Nelson et al., in press). This, in turn, implies that wellbeing does not change much over time.

3. Process/activity theories

Process/activity theories argue that wellbeing may be improved by participating in activities that are engaging and require effort (Nelson et al., in press).

Psychologists ask the question, ‘is it possible to increase one’s happiness?’. Some psychologists claim that making an attempt to enhance happiness is pointless because happiness levels are predetermined and stable over time (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Consistent with this argument is the happiness set point. The happiness set point argues that a person’s state of happiness will be constant over time, regardless of changes in circumstances (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Adapting to environmental changes is termed ‘the hedonic treadmill ’ or ‘homeostatic control’ (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). This notion of adaptation (leading to relatively stable levels of happiness) is supported by findings in research that individuals who may be high in either positive or negative affect (e.g. lottery winners, paralysis victims) demonstrate that their happiness levels revert to their ‘usual’ range after a period of time (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Some psychologists argue that the happiness set point provides evidence that happiness cannot be enhanced (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). There is a perspective taken by some psychologists that happiness is a ‘trait’ or a personal disposition to experience a certain affect.

This perspective suggests that happiness is relatively stable over time, and therefore efforts to increase happiness are futile (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). However, research has shown that although subjective wellbeing may be associated with personality traits (e.g. extraversion), that differences in reports of happiness levels over time suggest that, in fact, happiness is not a trait (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Thus, happiness has been an important area of focus for psychologists. What, then, about the more recent science of happiness…positive psychology?

Positive psychology can be described as a psychology of potential, and what ‘could be’ as compared to what ‘is’ (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). It aims to shift what has historically been the predominant focus of psychology – pathology – to examining the development of positive qualities in individuals and communities (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000).

In other words, Positive Psychology aims to understand and cultivate the factors that put individuals, communities, and societies in a position where they are able to ‘flourish’ (Fredrickson, 2001).

What does it mean to ‘flourish’? Put simply, it is a state of optimal wellbeing (Fredrickson, 2001). Fredrickson (2001) asked the question “ What role do positive emotions play in positive psychology? ”

Well, as it turns out, happiness can be thought of as experiencing predominantly positive emotions , or affective states, rather than negative ones (Tkach & Lyubomirsky, 2006). Thus, positive emotions are a sign of flourishing, or, in other words, happiness (Fredrickson, 2001). Happiness is central to the assumptions of positive psychology.

Seligman (2011) described the PERMA model of flourishing. This model defines psychological wellbeing in terms of 5 domains:

• P ositive emotions
• E ngagement
• R elationships
• A ccomplishment

For more detail on flourishing and how to achieve it, check out our article on Seligman’s PERMA+ model .

Let’s look at some interesting happiness research! In a large random-assignment experiment, Seligman and colleagues (2005) operationalized then evaluated 5 different happiness interventions.

They found that two of the interventions – writing about three good things the person had experienced each day and why they occurred, and using ‘signature strengths’ in a novel way – made people happier, and less depressed up to six months later! Compared to participants who engaged in the intervention, those in the placebo control group returned to the baseline levels of happiness and depression symptoms after just one week!

Lyubomirsky and colleagues (2006) conducted three studies examining the effects of writing, talking and thinking about significant life events – ‘triumphs and defeats’. While the majority of psychological research has focused on the way in which negative life circumstances are processed and managed, this unique study looked at the processing a positive life experience (Lyubomirsky, Sousa & Dickerhoof, 2006). This aspect of the study involved participants reflecting on their happiest day.

The researchers found that when participants thought while ‘replaying’ their happiest moment, it resulted in enhanced personal growth, improvements in general health and physical functioning, as well as lower pain levels, compared to the outcomes if the person was writing while analyzing their happiest moments.

The findings of the study suggest that people should be advised against over-analyzing or trying to make sense of a happy experience. Rather, Lyubomirsky and associates suggest that individuals should feel content in reliving and savoring happy experiences rather than trying to understand their meanings or causes.

Even though the experience of happiness is related to greater wellbeing and psychological health, in fact, some studies have shown that the desire to feel happy in an extreme form, or even simply placing a high value on happiness, can be detrimental in terms of wellbeing. In fact, in a research study by Ford and colleagues (2014), it was found that the emphasis placed upon attaining happiness can present a risk factor for symptoms and even a diagnosis of depression.

In a study of 181 participants, Sheldon et al. (2010) conducted a 6-month longitudinal experiment that sought to increase the happiness levels of those in the ‘treatment’ condition. The treatment group set goals to increase their feelings of autonomy, competence or relatedness in life while the comparison group set out to improve their life experiences.

In fact, it was found that those individuals in the treatment group had sustained increases in happiness (Sheldon et al., 2010). However, this gain lasted only while the individuals were actively engaged with the goals.

Interestingly, those who initially had a positive attitude towards change in happiness experienced greater benefits from the treatment! (Sheldon et al., 2010).

What, do you ask, is the Happiness Research Institute ? Well, it is an independent ‘think tank’ developed to investigate the reasons that some societies are happier than others.

The Happiness Research Institute aims to provide relevant parties with up-to-date information about the origins and effects of happiness, as well as to draw attention to subjective wellbeing as an important area for public policy debate. Furthermore, the Institute aims to improve the quality of life of all people.

The Happiness Research Institute provides knowledge, consultancy, and presentations. An example of the knowledge-building activities carried out by the Institute was that, in 2018, the Happiness Research Institute, in conjunction with the Nordic Council of Ministers compiled a study that was called ‘In the shadow of happiness’.

The study examined the reasons why some people living in Nordic countries are happy whilst others are suffering or struggling. The research also involved an analysis of why some groups within this cluster are struggling more often, and the impact this has on society.

In terms of consultancy, the Happiness Research Institute has also worked with groups including the Danish government, the Minister of State for Happiness in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the city of Goyang in South Korea. The aim of these partnerships is to improve quality of life and wellbeing of citizens.

Presentations by the Happiness Research Institute have taken place globally and featured at more than 1000 international events to share knowledge about what drives happiness, wellbeing, and quality of life.

The Happiness Research Institute analyses the somewhat separate components of the different cognitive, affective and eudaimonic dimensions of happiness, wellbeing and quality of life in order to explore these complex concepts. As previously explained, the cognitive dimension refers to the appraisal of overall life satisfaction, while the affective dimension focuses on the emotions that people experience on a daily basis.

Finally, the eudaimonic dimension looks at Aristotle’s perception of the ‘good life’ and is centered on purpose and meaning.

The reason that the Happiness Research Institute measures happiness is in order to shift policy priorities and therefore try and improve quality of life in societies, that will facilitate, in turn, the achievement of goals such as longevity and productivity. The Institute focuses not on the factors that cannot be changed (i.e. genetics, biology) but rather policies (that can be changed over time) and behavior (that can be changed immediately).

By examining the policies related to overall life satisfaction (i.e. the cognitive dimension of happiness) the Happiness Research Institute can explain 75% of the variance between more than 150 countries which were included in the 2018 World Happiness Report. The Institute also hopes to highlight the overlooked dimension of inequality in wellbeing, and increase the awareness and understanding of this inequality. The Happiness Research Institute is accessible via Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, and Meik Wiking is the CEO.

Professor Paul Dolan was coined ‘the happiness professor’ in The Telegraph in July, 2018. Professor Dolan is the Professor of Behavioural Science at the London School of Economics and Political Science. He is a leading expert in the fields of human behaviour and happiness.

Prof Dolan wrote the best-selling book , Happiness by Design and, more recently, Happy Ever After . His work is centred around two themes:

• The development of measures of happiness and subjective wellbeing that can then be used in policy, and by individuals who are looking to be happier.
• Utilising work from behavioural science that can be used to understand and change individual behaviour, and contribute more to this evidence base.

What would positive psychology be without its founding fathers , and other famous contributors?

Martin Seligman:

Dr. Seligman was born in 1942, and is credited as being the ‘father of Positive Psychology’ (The Pursuit of Happiness, 2018). Seligman suggests that there are three kinds of happiness:

• Pleasure and gratification
• Embodiment of strengths and virtues
• Meaning and purpose

One can remember that, as discussed earlier, happiness – or, subjective wellbeing – had three similar, distinct components like Seligman suggested. In his book , Authentic Happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment , Seligman (2002) says:

‘[Positive Psychology] takes you through the countryside of pleasure and gratification, up into the high country of strength and virtue, and finally to the peaks of lasting fulfillment: meaning and purpose’

Seligman also wrote a book titled Learned Optimism: How to Change Your Mind and Your Life . He is an acclaimed author, and psychologist, also known for his work on ‘learned helplessness’ which has been popular within the discipline of psychology.

Michael W. Fordyce

Fordyce (December 14, 1944 – January 24, 2011) was a pioneer in the subject of happiness research (Friedman, 2013). In 1977, in the journal Social Indicators Research, the Fordyce Happiness Scale was published. In his multitude of research, Fordyce demonstrated that happiness can be measured statistically, and that also, by engaging in ‘volitional behavior’, happiness can also be deliberately increased (Friedman, 2013).

Diener was born in 1946, and is also known as ‘Dr. Happiness’ (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018). He is a leading researcher in the field of positive psychology. Diener is perhaps best known for coming up with the term “subjective wellbeing”, which is the component of happiness that can be empirically measured (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018). Diener believes that happiness has a strong genetic component, and thus is relatively stable. He also developed the Satisfaction with Life Scale.

Sonja Lyubomirsky

Lyubomirsky is a research psychologist who writes the Psychology Today blog titled ‘ The How of Happiness ’ (Sonja Lyubomirsky, 2019). She is a professor and vice chair at the University of California, Riverside. Lyubomirsky is the author of two books : The How of Happiness , and The Myths of Happiness .

Daniel Gilbert

Gilbert, a social psychologist, is also referred to as Professor Happiness at Harvard University (Dreifus, 2008). He is in charge of a laboratory that has been set up to investigate the nature of happiness. Gilbert’s main work centres around the fact that relationships with family and friends, and that the time spent investing in these social relationships contribute more to happiness than material possessions (Dreifus, 2008).

He suggests that more pleasure can be found in experiences, rather than goods or objects – perhaps, he argues, because experiences can be shared with others whereas possessions are generally not shared (Dreifus, 2008).

The psychology of happiness – WOBI

Research has suggested that there might be a causal relationship between positive affect and success … that not only does success bring happiness but, interestingly, that a happy person is more likely to achieve success (Psychology of Happiness, 2019). These three articles provide an account of success and happiness:

• Boehm, J. K., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). Does happiness promote career success? Journal of Career Assessment, 16 , 101–116.
• Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131 , 803–855.
• Uusiautti, S. (2013). On the positive connection between success and happiness. International Journal of Research Studies in Psychology , 1–12.

[Reviewer’s update:

Since this post was originally published, additional research has come out suggesting that the original theory at the heart of Uusiautti’s (2013) research doesn’t seem to hold true. As a replacement, you may want to check out the article by Okabe-Miyamoto et al. (2021), who recently found that increasing the variety of experiences to escape the hedonic treadmill may actually result in smaller boosts in wellbeing – not larger ones.]

In recent times, a wealth of research has been published into the topic of happiness, such as:

• Diener, E., Heintzelman, S. J., Kushlev, K., Tay, L., Wirtz, D., Lutes, L. D., & Shigehiro, O. (2017). Findings all psychologists should know from the new science on subjective well-being. Canadian Psychologist, 58 , 87 – 104
• Oerlemans, W. G. M., & Bakker, A. B. (2018). Motivating job characteristics and happiness at work: A multilevel perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103 , 1230 – 1241.
• Kaufman, M., Goetz, T., Lipnevich, A. A., & Pekrun, R. (2018). Do positive illusions of control foster happiness? Emotion, September 20, no pagination specified .
• Hoffman, J., Gander, F., & Ruch, W. (2018). Exploring differences in well-being across occupation type and skill. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 4 , 290 – 303.
• Piff, P. K., & Moskowitz, J. P. (2018). Wealth, poverty, and happiness: Social class is differentially associated with positive emotions. Emotion, 18 , 902 – 905.
• McGuirk, L., Kuppens, P., Kingston, R., & Bastian, B. (2018). Does a culture of happiness increase rumination over failure? Emotion, 18 , 755 – 764.
• Warr, P. (2018). Self-employment, personal values, and varieties of happiness-unhappiness. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 23 , 388 – 401.
• Liao, K Y-H, & Weng, C-Y. (2018). Gratefulness and subjective well-being: Social connectedness and presence of meaning as mediators. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 65 , 383 – 393.
• Blanke, E. S., Riediger, M., & Brose, A. (2018). Pathways to happiness are multidirectional: Association between state mindfulness and everyday affective experience. Emotion, 18 , 202 – 211.
• Fuochi, G., Veneziani, C. A., & Voci, A. (2018). Differences in the way to conceive happiness relate to different reactions to negative events. Journal of Individual Differences, 39 , 27 – 38.
• Weber, S., & Hagmayer, Y. (2018). Thinking about the Joneses? Decreasing rumination about social comparison increases well-being. European Journal of Health Psychology, 25 , 83 – 95.
• Felsman, P., Verduyn, P., Ayduk, O., & Kross, E. (2017). Being present: Focusing on the present predicts improvements in life satisfaction but not happiness. Emotion, 17 , 1047 – 1051.
• Tamir, M., Schwartz, S. H., Oishi, S., & Kim, M. Y. (2017). The secret to happiness: Feeling good or feeling right? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146 , 1448 – 1459.
• 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 , 165 – 181.
• Chopik, W. J., & O’Brien, E. (2017). Happy you, healthy me? Having a happy partner is independently associated with better health in oneself. Health Psychology, 36 , 21 – 30.
• Gross-Manos, D., & Ben-Arieh, A. (2017). How subjective well-being is associated with material deprivation and social exclusion on Israeli 12-year-olds. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 87 , 274 – 290.

17 Exercises To Increase Happiness and Wellbeing

Add these 17 Happiness & Subjective Well-Being Exercises [PDF] to your toolkit and help others experience greater purpose, meaning, and positive emotions.

Created by Experts. 100% Science-based.

Follow the links below to some intriguing research in PDF form!

• How Do Simple Positive Activities Increase Well-Being? – Sonja Lyubomirsky, Kristin Layous (Access here )
• The How, Why, What, When and Who of Happiness: Mechanisms Underlying the Success of Positive Activity Interventions – Kristin Layous & Sonja Lyubomirsky (Access here )
• Variety is the Spice of Happiness: The Hedonic Adaptation Prevention (HAP) Model – Kennon M. Sheldon, Julia Boehm, Sonja Lyubomirsky (Access here )
• Pursuing happiness: The architecture of sustainable change – Lyubomirsky, S, Sheldon, K M, Schkade, D (Access here )
• A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation – Lyubomirsky, S, Lepper, HS (Access here )
• Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all? – Richard A. Easterlin (Access here )
• Lottery Winners and Accident Victims: Is Happiness Relative? – Philip Brickman, Dan Coates, Ronnie Janoff-Bulman (Access here )

This article provides a snapshot of a huge topic which is, in fact, the overarching focus of positive psychology: happiness. It has been shown that subjective wellbeing is the closest thing to a scientific equivalent to happiness, which can be measured. The main feature of this article is that it has provided a range of resources which you can refer to in the future, including 16 key papers published in the last two years.

So, happiness… an elusive phenomenon, which we all seem to strive for. Hopefully this article has provided an overview of what is, undoubtedly, a very important issue. We all strive to be happier.

What is your understanding of happiness? What do you think makes happy people happy? Do you think that happiness can be measured, or, like some argue, do you think it is purely subjective?

What do you think about the recent articles shared? Please feel free to discuss this interesting topic further! I hope you have claimed some important take-home messages on happiness. Thanks for reading!

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Happiness Exercises for free .

• Argyle, M. (2001). The Psychology of Happiness . Routledge.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry, 11 , 227 – 268.
• Delle Fave, A., Brdar, I., Freire, T., Vella-Brodrick, D., & Wissing, M. P. (2011). The eudaimonic and hedonic components of happiness: Qualitative & quantitative findings. Social Indicators Research, 100 , 185 – 207.
• Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95 , 542 – 575.
• Dreifus, C. (2008). The smiling professor. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/science/22conv.html
• Ford, B. Q., Shallcross, A. J., Mauss, I. B., Floerke, V. A., & Gruber, J. (2014). Desperately seeking happiness: Valuing happiness is associated with symptoms and diagnosis of depression. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 33 , 890 – 905.
• Fordyce, M. W. (1977). Development of a program to increase personal happiness. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 24 , 511 – 521.
• Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology. American Psychologist, 56 , 218 – 226
• Freud, S., & Riviere, J. (1930). Civilization and Its Discontents . New York: J Cape & H Smith.
• Friedman, H. L. (2013). The legacy of a pioneering happiness researcher: Michael W. Fordyce (Dec 14, 1944 – Jan 24, 2011). Journal of Happiness Studies, 14 , 363 – 366
• Happiness (2019). In Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/basics/happiness
• Haybron, D. M. (2003). What do we want from a theory of happiness? Metaphilosophy, 34 , 305 – 329
• Kahneman, D. (1999). Objective happiness. In Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwartz (Eds). USA: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Kesebir, P., & Diener, E. (2008). In pursuit of happiness: Empirical answers to philosophical questions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3 , 117 – 125.
• Kringelbach, M. L., & Berridge, K. C. (2010). The Neuroscience of Happiness and Pleasure. Social Research (New York) , 77, 659 – 678.
• Lyubomirsky, S. (2019). Sonja Lyubomirsky. Retrieved from http://www.sonjalyubomirsky.com/
• Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective well-being: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46 , 137 – 155.
• Lyubomirsky, S., Sousa, L., & Dickerhoof, R. (2006). The costs and benefits of writing, talking, and thinking about life’s triumphs and defeats. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 90, 692 – 708.
• Nelson, S. K., Kurtzy, J. L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (in press). What psychological science knows about happiness . In S. J. Lynn, W. O’Donohue & S. Lilienfeld (Eds.) Better, stronger, wiser: Psychological science and well-being. New York: Sage
• Norrish, J. M., & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2008). Is the study of happiness a worthy scientific pursuit? Social Indicators Research, 87 , 393 – 407.
• Okabe-Miyamoto, K., Margolis, S., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2021). Is variety the spice of happiness? More variety is associated with lower efficacy of positive activity interventions in a sample of over 200,000 happiness seekers.  The Journal of Positive Psychology.
• Psychology of Happiness (2019). Psychologist World. Retrieved from https://www.psychologistworld.com/emotion/psychology-of-happiness-positive-affect
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52 , 141 – 166.
• Samuel, L. R. (2019). The Psychology of Happiness (Circa 1929). Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/psychology-yesterday/201901/the-psychology-happiness-circa-1929
• Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic Happiness: Using the new Positive Psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment . New York, NY: Free Press.
• Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish . New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
• Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive Psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55 , 5 – 14.
• Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60 , 410 – 421
• Sheldon, K. M., Abad, N., Ferguson, Y., Gunz, A., Houser-Marko, L., Nichols, C. P., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2010). Persistent pursuit of need-satisfying goals leads to increased happiness: A 6-month experimental longitudinal study. Motivation and Emotion, 34 , 39 – 48.
• The Pursuit of Happiness (2019). Retrieved from https://www.pursuit-of-happiness.org
• Tkach, C., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006). How do people pursue happiness? Relating personality, happiness-increasing strategies and well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7 , 183 – 225.

Share this article:

Article feedback

What our readers think.

I am impressed by the organization of ideas and materials on happiness. I would be interested to get more materials on happiness if you can supply me, with or refer me to some articles or books.

Hi Mohammad,

Thank you for your kind words and interest in learning more about happiness. I’m glad to hear that you found our resources helpful.

In addition to the article you mentioned, we have a wealth of resources on the psychology of happiness. Here are some additional articles that you may find useful:

– “ The Science of Gratitude: How It Improves Your Health and Happiness “: This article explores the benefits of practicing gratitude, including improved relationships, better physical health, and increased happiness. It also includes practical tips for cultivating gratitude in your daily life. – “ The Power of Positive Self-Talk: How It Can Improve Your Mental Health “: This article explores the benefits of positive self-talk, including increased self-esteem and reduced anxiety. It also provides practical tips for cultivating positive self-talk.

And here are some additional book recommendations on happiness: – “ The How of Happiness: A Scientific Approach to Getting the Life You Want ” by Sonja Lyubomirsky: This book is based on years of scientific research on the psychology of happiness and provides evidence-based strategies for increasing happiness and life satisfaction. – “ Stumbling on Happiness ” by Daniel Gilbert: This book explores the science of happiness and why humans often struggle to predict what will make them happy. Gilbert provides insight into the psychological processes that influence our happiness and offers practical tips for living a more fulfilling life.

Hope this helps! Kind regards, Julia | Community Manager

Were you happy while typing this article? How did you feel throughout the entire writing process?

in precise… PHENOMENAL SNAPSHOT.

Thank you for the snapshot on the concepts and theories of happiness . It is really helpful for my thesis writing.

Nice article, but incomplete . You should have discusses ed neurobiochemistry. How dopamine , endorphins serotonin & oxytocin are invested by nature in happiness circuitry. How have we evolved to incorporate release of these chemicals through daily activities

Thank you for this article. I’m sure that it’ll help me to defining happiness in my research.

This article is a really informative overview of Happiness, the subject that I believe is the most important driver of life advancement. Focusing on happiness and its pursuit as a positive discipline instead of focusing on ailments and pathologies that need to be “treated” or “cured” to find some happiness is the best approach. I recently published my book, “America, The Happy” addressing the pursuit happiness and its role in American life. I would have liked to have found this piece earlier, but I’ll reference it in my next one. Very good work.

Thank you so much for this overview it’s contributing greatly to my research into happiness.

A Happiness ‘Recipe’ In its rudiments a neuro-anatomy of happiness maps positive affective states of attentive arousal and pleasure to neurological processes, respectively the activity of dopamine and opioid systems. These systems can be hijacked by addictive drugs, but I submit that they can also be conjointly activated by simple cognitive protocols detailed below. This is achieved through opioid/dopamine interactions induced from concurrent contingencies that induce relaxation and attentive arousal. This simple, innocuous, and easily falsifiable procedure is in short a ‘recipe’ for happiness that conforms with commonplace notions that happiness is coextensive with a committed and meaningful life. My work is largely based on the latest iteration of incentive or discrepancy-based models of motivation representative of the work of Dr. Kent Berridge of the University of Michigan. Berridge is a renowned bio-behaviorist and neuroscientist who has contributed significantly to the neuroscience of happiness (see link below) and was kind to vet and endorse the little book I have linked below. My explanation and argument are tiered into three parts, for a lay audience (pp.7-52), an expanded academic version (pp.53-86), and a formal journal article published on the topic in the International Journal of Stress Management. The procedure is a variant of mindfulness practice but entails a new definition of mindfulness based on affective neuroscience. Still, all is moot if the procedure is ineffective. A brief summary of my argument In discrepancy models of motivation (or bio-behaviorism), affect is schedule dependent. VR (variable-ratio) schedules of reinforcement or reward (gaming, gambling, creative behavior) are characterized by moment to moment positive act-outcome discrepancy or uncertainty between what is expected and what actually happens, which parallels the release of the neuro-modulator dopamine that is felt a state of attentive arousal, but not pleasure. However, heightened pleasurable affect as well as heightened attentive arousal is also reported while performing under VR schedules, but only when the musculature is in a state of inactivity or relaxation. Relaxation induces the activity of mid-brain opioid systems and is felt as pleasure. Because dopamine and opioid systems can co-activate each other, concurrent contingencies which induce relaxation (mindfulness protocols) and attentive arousal (purposive or meaningful behavior) will result in a significant spike in affective tone as both dopaminergic and opioid activity will be much higher due to their synergistic effects. The procedure to do this, outlined on pp. 47-52, has several important characteristics. Behavior Analytic- no appeal to events outside of objective behavior. Simple – explained in five minutes, and refutable as quickly. Cognitive Behavioral – coheres to CBT principles, and is structured, brief, and rational. Also, as a layman (though academically trained in behavioral psychology, I am an executive for a tech company in New Orleans), I am most curious to see if this procedure is effective. Formal test is not at first necessary, but informal exposure is since the procedure is simple in aspect but possibly very useful in practice. (But again, I may be wrong!) https://www.scribd.com/doc/284056765/The-Book-of-Rest-The-Odd-Psychology-of-Doing-Nothing https://www.scribd.com/doc/121345732/Relaxation-and-Muscular-Tension-A-bio-behavioristic-explanation Berridge, Kringelbach article on the neuro-anatomy of happiness https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3008353/ And Holmes’ Article on Meditation and Rest from ‘The American Psychologist’ https://www.scribd.com/document/291558160/Holmes-Meditation-and-Rest-The-American-Psychologist

I am amazed at no mention of BROADEN AND BUILT THEORY by Barb Frederickson, nor of DR PAUL WONG’S POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 2. Thank you for your amazing work.

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

Embracing JOMO: Finding Joy in Missing Out

We’ve probably all heard of FOMO, or ‘the fear of missing out’. FOMO is the currency of social media platforms, eager to encourage us to [...]

The True Meaning of Hedonism: A Philosophical Perspective

“If it feels good, do it, you only live once”. Hedonists are always up for a good time and believe the pursuit of pleasure and [...]

Happiness Economics: Can Money Buy Happiness?

Do you ever daydream about winning the lottery? After all, it only costs a small amount, a slight risk, with the possibility of a substantial [...]

Read other articles by their category

• Body & Brain (49)
• Coaching & Application (57)
• Compassion (26)
• Counseling (51)
• Emotional Intelligence (24)
• Gratitude (18)
• Grief & Bereavement (21)
• Happiness & SWB (40)
• Meaning & Values (26)
• Meditation (20)
• Mindfulness (45)
• Motivation & Goals (45)
• Optimism & Mindset (34)
• Positive CBT (28)
• Positive Communication (20)
• Positive Education (47)
• Positive Emotions (32)
• Positive Leadership (18)
• Positive Parenting (4)
• Positive Psychology (33)
• Positive Workplace (37)
• Productivity (17)
• Relationships (46)
• Resilience & Coping (36)
• Self Awareness (21)
• Self Esteem (38)
• Strengths & Virtues (32)
• Stress & Burnout Prevention (34)
• Theory & Books (46)
• Therapy Exercises (37)
• Types of Therapy (64)

• Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

3 Happiness Exercises Pack [PDF]

Jung’s Five Pillars of a Good Life

The great Swiss psychoanalyst left us a surprisingly practical guide to being happier.

Want to stay current with Arthur’s writing? Sign up to get an email every time a new column comes out.

I n the world of popular psychology, the work of one giant figure is hard to avoid: Carl Jung, the onetime associate of Sigmund Freud who died more than 60 years ago. If you think you have a complex about something, the Swiss psychiatrist invented that term. Are you an extrovert or an introvert ? Those are his coinages, too. Persona , archetype , synchronicity : Jung, Jung, Jung.

When it comes to happiness, though, Jung can seem a bit of a downer. “‘Happiness,’” he wrote, “is such a remarkable reality that there is nobody who does not long for it.” So far, so good. But he does not leave it there: “And yet there is not a single objective criterion which would prove beyond all doubt that this condition necessarily exists.”

Carl G. Jung: God, the devil, and the human soul

Clearly, this observation should not discourage any serious student of happiness. On the contrary, Jung is stating the manifest truth that we cannot lay hold of any blissful end state of pure happiness, because every human life is bound to involve negative emotions, which in fact arose to alert us to threats and keep us safe. Rather, the objective should be progress—or, in the words of Oprah Winfrey, my co-author on our recent book, Build the Life You Want , “ happierness .”

If Jung was a happiness skeptic in some sense, however, he was by no means a denialist. In 1960, as he neared the end of his long life, Jung shared his own strategy for realizing that goal of progress. Refined with the aid of modern social science, Jung’s precepts might be just what you’re looking for in your life.

J ung believed that making progress toward happiness was built on five pillars.

1. Good physical and mental health Jung believed that getting happier required soundness of mind and body. His thesis is supported by plenty of research. For example, the longest-running study of happiness—the Harvard Study of Adult Development—has shown that four of the biggest predictors of a senior citizen’s well-being are not smoking excessively, drinking alcohol moderately if at all, maintaining a healthy body weight, and exercising. Even more important for well-being is good mental health. Indeed, one study from 2013 showed that poor mental health among Britons, Germans, and Australians predicted nearly two to roughly six times as much misery as poor physical health did.

This raises what might seem like a nitpick with Jung’s contention: Good health practices seem not to raise happiness, but rather to lower un happiness. Today, many emotion researchers have uncovered evidence of a phenomenon that Jung did not conceive of: Negative and positive emotions appear to be separable phenomena and not opposites; well-being requires a focus on each. Furthermore, researchers have identified how activities such as physical exercise can interrupt the cycle of negative emotion during moments of heightened stress, by helping moderate cortisol-hormone levels. I have found in my own work that this helps explain why people with naturally low levels of negative emotion tend to struggle with staying on a regular exercise regimen: They may feel less benefit to their well-being from going to the gym than people naturally higher in negative feelings do.

Arthur C. Brooks: Why so many people are unhappy in retirement

2. Good personal and intimate relations, such as those of marriage, family, and friendships The intertwined notions that close relationships are at the heart of well-being and that cultivating them will reliably increase happiness are unambiguously true. Indeed, of the four best life investments for increasing personal satisfaction, two involve family and friendships (the others are in faith or philosophy, and meaningful work; more on these in a moment). And as for marriage, an institution that has taken a beating over recent decades, more and more evidence is piling up from scholars that being wed makes the majority of people happier than they otherwise would be, as the University of Virginia sociologist Brad Wilcox has argued. This research seemed so conclusive to Wilcox that he titled his recent book, simply, Get Married . Jung himself was married to his wife, Emma, for 52 years, until her death at the age of 73.

The Harvard Study of Adult Development comes to one conclusion more definitively than any other. In the words of my Harvard colleague Robert Waldinger, who has directed the project for nearly two decades, and his co-author, Marc Schulz, “Good relationships keep us healthier and happier. Period .” Waldinger’s predecessor running the study, George Vaillant, was just as unequivocal about the evidence: “Happiness is love. Full stop.”

3. Seeing beauty in art and in nature Jung believed that happiness required one to cultivate an appreciation for beautiful things and experiences. Although this might sound intuitively obvious, the actuality is more complicated.

Long before I focused my scholarly life on happiness, I was dedicated to art and beauty. My earliest memories are of painting with my artist mother; I learned to read music before written language; I made my living as a classical musician from ages 19 to 31. News flash: Artists are generally not the world’s most blissfully satisfied people. In a 1992 study from Britain, researchers found that performing artists reported depression at higher rates than the control group. At some point, I will write a book not on the art of happiness but on the very troublesome happiness of art .

Among nonartists, however, the issue is somewhat simpler and in line with Jung’s thinking. First, a big difference exists between beauty in nature and beauty in art. Specifically, engagement with nature’s beauty is known , across different cultures, to enhance well-being. Second, with aesthetic experience, happiness depends on the artistic mood. For example, experiments have shown that if you listen to happy music on your own, it makes you feel happier; if you listen to sad music while alone, it makes you feel sadder.

Kelly Conaboy: What your favorite personality test says about you

4. A reasonable standard of living and satisfactory work As with physical and mental health, employment and income seem tied more to eliminating unhappiness than to raising happiness. For one thing, scholars have long shown that unemployment is a reliable source of misery: Depressive symptoms typically rise when people, both men and women, are unemployed. This cannot be explained simply by the lack of material and social resources that typically accompanies joblessness; rather, work itself helps protect mental health.

But if we can upgrade “satisfactory work” in Jung’s list to “meaningful work,” then positive gains in happiness do come into play. The two elements that make work meaningful for most people are earned success (a sense of accomplishing something valuable) and service to others . These can be achieved in almost any job.

The relationship between money and happiness is a hotly contested topic; older studies show that well-being tops out at relatively low income levels, but more recent studies show that such contentment continues to rise for much higher incomes. My own assessment of the evidence is that money alone cannot buy happiness, nor can spending money to acquire possessions make one happy; but having the money to pay for experiences with loved ones, to free up time to spend on meaningful activities, and to support good causes does enhance happiness.

5. A philosophical or religious outlook that fosters resilience Jung argued that a good life requires a way of understanding why things happen the way they do, being able to zoom out from the tedious quotidian travails of life, and put events—including inevitable suffering—into perspective. The son of a pastor, Jung was deeply Christian in his worldview, as his own words published many years ago in The Atlantic make clear: “For it is not that ‘God’ is a myth, but that myth is the revelation of a divine life in man.” He did not insist that his spiritual path was the only one—“I do not imagine that in my reflections,” he wrote, “I have uttered a final truth”—and allowed that even a nonreligious, purely philosophical attitude could do. But everyone, he thought, should have some sense of transcendent belief or higher purpose.

Research clearly backs up Jung’s contention. Religious belief has been noted as strongly predictive of finding meaning in life, and spirituality is positively correlated with better mental health; both faith and spiritual practice seem protective against depression. Secular philosophies can provide this benefit as well. Recent papers on Stoicism , for example, have demonstrated that this ancient way of thinking and acting can yield well-being benefits . Many books have been written on the subject, including the psychotherapist Donald Robertson’s Stoicism and the Art of Happiness .

Arthur C. Brooks: What the second-happiest people get right

T aken together , Jung’s ideas about happiness and his five pillars of well-being stand up solidly to modern research findings. I propose this practical seven-point summary:

1. Do not fall prey to seeking pure happiness. Instead, seek lifelong progress toward happierness . 2. Manage as best you can the main sources of misery in your life by attending to your physical and mental health, maintaining employment, and ensuring an adequate income. 3. If you’re earning enough to take care of your principal needs, remember that happiness at work comes not from chasing higher income but from pursuing a sense of accomplishment and service to others. 4. Cultivate deep relationships through marriage, family, and real friendships. Remember that happiness is love. 5. If you have discretionary income left over, use it to invest in your relationships with family and friends. 6. Spend time in nature, surround yourself with beauty that uplifts you, and consume the art and music that nourish your spirit. 7. Find a path of transcendence—one that explains the big picture in life and helps you comprehend suffering and the purpose of your existence.

Beyond the scientific research that supports this strategy, we also have the evidence of its effectiveness in the example of Jung’s life. He made his list to mark his 85th birthday, which was to be the last one he celebrated. By all accounts, he made progress toward happiness over his life, had a long and devoted marriage, died surrounded by the people he loved, and was satisfied that he had used his abilities in a meaningful way that served others. In this world, that sounds pretty good to me.

Happiness Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on happiness.

Happiness is something which we can’t describe in words it can only be felt from someone’s expression of a smile. Likewise, happiness is a signal or identification of good and prosperous life. Happiness is very simple to feel and difficult to describe. Moreover, happiness comes from within and no one can steal your happiness.

Can Money Buy You Happiness?

Every day we see and meet people who look happy from the outside but deep down they are broken and are sad from the inside. For many people, money is the main cause of happiness or grief. But this is not right. Money can buy you food, luxurious house, healthy lifestyle servants, and many more facilities but money can’t buy you happiness.

And if money can buy happiness then the rich would be the happiest person on the earth. But, we see a contrary image of the rich as they are sad, fearful, anxious, stressed, and suffering from various problems.

In addition, they have money still they lack in social life with their family especially their wives and this is the main cause of divorce among them.

Also, due to money, they feel insecurity that everyone is after their money so to safeguard their money and them they hire security. While the condition of the poor is just the opposite. They do not have money but they are happy with and stress-free from these problems.

In addition, they take care of their wife and children and their divorce rate is also very low.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Happiness Comes from Within

As we now know that we can’t buy happiness with money and there is no other shortcut to happiness. It is something that you feel from within.

In addition, true happiness comes from within yourself. Happiness is basically a state of mind.

Moreover, it can only be achieved by being positive and avoiding any negative thought in mind. And if we look at the bright side of ourselves only then we can be happy.

Happiness in a Relationship

People nowadays are not satisfied with their relationship because of their differences and much other reason. But for being happy in a relationship we have to understand that there are some rules or mutual understanding that keeps a relationship healthy and happy.

Firstly, take care of yourself then your partner because if you yourself are not happy then how can you make your partner happy.

Secondly, for a happy and healthy relationship give you partner some time and space. In addition, try to understand their feeling and comfort level because if you don’t understand these things then you won’t be able to properly understand your partner.

Most importantly, take initiative and plan to go out with your partner and family. Besides, if they have plans then go with them.

To conclude, we can say that happiness can only be achieved by having positive thinking and enjoying life. Also, for being happy and keeping the people around us happy we have to develop a healthy relationship with them. Additionally, we also have to give them the proper time.

FAQs about Happiness

Q.1 What is True Happiness? A.1 True happiness means the satisfaction that you find worthy. The long-lasting true happiness comes from life experience, a feeling of purpose, and a positive relationship.

Q.2 Who is happier the rich or the poor and who is more wealthy rich or poor? A.2 The poor are happier then the rich but if we talk about wealth the rich are more wealthy then the poor. Besides, wealth brings insecurity, anxiety and many other problems.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Thesis Statement About Happiness

Thesis statement about happiness.

Happiness is not reduced to the emotional well-being of an organism adapted to its environment. Man must reflect to build his life according to values. He can not neglect his freedom, or his responsibility before the voluntary commitment of his action. Being happy means that man is capable of achieving a balance that overcomes his contradictions and conflicts. If man wants to be happy, he must not forget that happiness is the result of a conquest first over himself and then over a world in which he must take into account not only natural forces, but also other men.

Statements about happiness: the notion of issue

The idea of ​​salvation is a new fashion according to the happiness thesis. We live in a time of great desolation. Loneliness is perceived in the bosom of the considerable cacophony of sciences and techniques that do not fulfill some of our demands: those of happiness, on the one hand, that is, earthly salvation; those of the future, on the other hand, that is, the salvation of the soul.

Is there eternal happiness thesis? And if there is, would we be entitled to it? Here are two questions to which the idea of ​​salvation responds. The idea of ​​salvation was born at the beginning of the Middle Ages: it is about finding again the Garden of Eden, the world before the original sin of which the Bible speaks, the conversation alone with God, which seeks eternal happiness. St. Augustine has theorized a lot about the notion of salvation and his words are surprisingly topical. For a long time Agustín traveled away from God, mainly in the sect of the Manichaeans, for whom there was good on the one hand and evil on the other. The question that arises is the following one: where to find the strength to save oneself when one is a sinner and one lives in an inner world where one is lost and all is abandoned to evil? In line with happiness essay, St. Augustine believes that man’s freedom can not save him, since man is, by nature, separated from God since the original fall. His conception of salvation then leads him to say:

“Look as if you have to find, and when you have found, keep looking.”

Such is salvation, in the Middle Ages as it is in our age: always seek for yourself to be at the disposition of the extraordinary beyond to which you aspire. This conception of salvation is that of a mystic agnostic, a bit like Adso de Melk, the narrator of The Name of the Rose, by Umberto Eco, who ends up losing himself in the divinity, where the pious soul succumbs.

Happiness definition essay: general conditions of happiness

It is easy to list the general conditions of happiness:

• good health
• economic comfort, etc.

However, the agreement is no longer unanimous: although these conditions are more or less indispensable, they can all be presented without us being happy; that is, when trying to define what happiness is, these conditions are necessary but not sufficient. It is obvious that these general conditions are necessary. If a man lives in physical and moral misery, if his freedom and his dignity as a human being are only words, it is even indecent to speak of happiness. But, thesis about happiness is always beyond these general conditions, therefore, they are not enough; happiness is linked to a personal appreciation, a subjective appreciation that varies according to the social condition, the degree of culture, age, etc., and this is the reason why it can be discussed. To say that our idea of ​​happiness has a subjective element does not imply that each of us invents his ideal of happiness: this ideal is constructed according to the forms and criteria that are provided by culture and society: the conception of happiness varies according to the time and the type of society.

It can be noted, following R. Benedict thesis statement on happiness (Échantillos de civilization), two fundamental trends in societies, an Apollonian and another Dionysian. The Apollonian societies see happiness as a lasting state, a balance that is the result of the harmonious meeting of several values ​​that define what is good, beautiful and useful; a state of well-being of the spirit and the body, linked to the appeasement of internal conflicts, to the conquest of a personal balance. Dionysian societies, on the other hand, seek a state of wild happiness, pleasures as diverse as numerous. In the Dionysian societies the pleasures do not seek a definite satiety, their search is infinite. The memory of the intense pleasures that they know is assimilated to a lost paradise, but they do not know in what values ​​to found their future happiness.

When it comes to vast and complex societies, these two tendencies are mixed, although one always predominates. Thus, our contemporary western civilization is committed to a race towards a Dionysian-type happiness – there are many needs that the individual tries vainly to satisfy – but it often tries to appease his discomfort by re-founding the Apollonian values: simple and quiet life, search of an interior balance. Along with this tension between the Dionysian and the Apollonian there are other factors that determine what a society understands as happiness. Historical circumstances are an example of this: during a period of calm, security and abundance, happiness is not considered under the same angle as during periods of war or hardship. In addition, in the same society, the conception of happiness changes according to social classes. Sociology teaches us that there is a threshold of misery below which the individual no longer has any idea of ​​what can be called happiness. This relativity of conceptions about happiness explains, to a large extent, the halo of darkness that surrounds this notion.

Happiness thesis statement linked to time

Happiness is linked to time: it demands stability and continuity. To think that happiness can come to an end is to vitiate the happy moment that we live, with the anguish that it will cease. This temporary character makes it possible to distinguish between happiness and pleasure. Happiness is not pleasure, since the latter indicates the momentary satisfaction of a particular tendency; It remains limited, superficial and ephemeral. Happiness is, on the contrary, the overall tonality of a whole life, at least of a period of this and, paradoxically, it is rare for happiness to be lived as a present that is eternalized. If unhappiness involves retreating oneself and sharpens self-consciousness, the happy man usually lets himself live without being clearly aware of his state, without questioning himself about the nature of his happiness. Proof of the temporal character of thesis on happiness is that it is usually spoken in the past of happy time: we were happy during a period of our life. We contrast the past happiness with the present misfortunes, and our past, decanted by memory, is revalued. And in this past we get new strengths, even new reasons to wait. It is then in the future that we project our happiness. We live the present too passively and neutrally too often. Everyday banality, neither happy nor unhappy, full of monotonous tasks, unfolds under the mode of boredom, of distraction or of waiting. Dragged by the flight of time, rejected in the past, projected in the future, happiness seems, in fact, difficult to grasp.

Seek happiness in a world so upset by injustice and drama may seem selfish. Our own happiness is always linked to the search for the happiness of others. This search helps us to live. In the value of happiness, R. Polin sees one of the “reference poles” of existence. However, the human condition seems very unfavorable to thesis for happiness. Man is a being for death. He is imprisoned by the time that drags him inexorably towards decadence. Man is a limited being in his power, condemned to failure, doubt and dissatisfaction. Man needs the other, but it runs away. Most of these classic themes have been taken up by Christian moralists, to underline the misery of fallen man: although man can seek the oblivion of his misery in “fun”, he cannot find happiness but in salvation.

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

• Essay Database >
• Essays Samples >
• Essay Types >
• Thesis Example

Happiness Theses Samples For Students

22 samples of this type

Do you feel the need to examine some previously written Theses on Happiness before you get down to writing an own piece? In this open-access collection of Happiness Thesis examples, you are given an exciting opportunity to examine meaningful topics, content structuring techniques, text flow, formatting styles, and other academically acclaimed writing practices. Exploiting them while composing your own Happiness Thesis will definitely allow you to finalize the piece faster.

Presenting the finest samples isn't the only way our free essays service can aid students in their writing endeavors – our experts can also create from scratch a fully customized Thesis on Happiness that would make a strong basis for your own academic work.

Example Of Thesis On Exploring The Theme Of Lost Eden In Hemmingways Hills Like White Elephants

The meaning of life thesis examples, gender and women rights thesis examples.

Don't waste your time searching for a sample.

Get your thesis done by professional writers!

Just from $10/page

Jane Austens Pride And Prejudice Thesis Example

Thesis on why students should go for internships, anne bradstreet a look through the works thesis, introduction, good thesis on description and analysis of the issue, introduction and thesis statement, expertly written thesis on leon: the professional movie to follow, about the movie “leon: the professional.".

The movie “Leon: The Professional” was released in 1994. It was the French crime thriller which was later dubbed in the English language. The story revolves around two characters ‘Leon’ a hitman and a 12 years old young girl ‘Mathilda’ who was a depressed child. The characters depict situations where they had gone through different mental stages. This paper analyzes ‘Leon’ and ‘Mathilda’ human behaviors in the film and relates them to psychoanalytical theories developed by theorists, i.e., Jung and Freud.

Describing the behavior of Movie Characters: Leon & Mathilda

Inspiring thesis about death of a salesman, good guiding consumers academic thesis example, how does computer ethics present in people's life theses example, example of falsehood of the american dream in arthur millers death of a salesman thesis, free games of thrones thesis example, good example of thesis on revolution documents, example of play it again, sam thesis, frankenstein thesis, free thesis on the power of love in shakespeare's play twelfth night, examining gender and gender roles through media thesis example, childhood as depicted in three essays thesis, outsiders in tennessee williams play orpheus descending thesis examples, free thesis on creature of cluture.

Never judge culture by one man and never judge a man by popular culture.

- Anonymous

Thesis On My Sister's Keeper Ethical Issues

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

Mindfulness

Why does gardening feel so good, discover the science behind this popular pastime..

Posted April 25, 2024 | Reviewed by Michelle Quirk

• What Is Mindfulness?
• Find a mindfulness-based therapist
• We feel better when we are surrounded by nature.
• Gardening is a mindfulness practice and eases stress levels. 
• Harvesting your own produce from your garden provokes the release of dopamine.

As spring starts to show its true colors, people are running outside to start work in their gardens. I am one of those people. But I didn’t used to be. For years, I resisted all the encouragement toward gardening. I simply thought it was a hobby for others but not for me. I didn’t understand when people said that it made them feel good. I just wasn't that into it. Until, all of a sudden, I had to be.

It started when I swapped my hectic city life for the calm and quiet of country living. I moved into an old converted barn that had a garden that hadn’t been managed for years. I realized I wanted to make the garden my own, so I started pruning, trimming, and tidying things up. Over time, I started putting new things in, too. Before I knew it, I was making borders, adding rows of lavender, and planting flowers. Over time, I got intrigued with the idea of growing something to eat—so I planted fruit trees, raspberry bushes, and a small strawberry patch. This led to the introduction of a vegetable patch. And another. And another. And another. It seemed that I was hooked.

Why the sudden change of heart? Well, in short, because gardening did make me feel good. All those people who had told me this were 100 percent right. Whenever it was a sunny day, I yearned to go outside and put my hands in the soil. I yearned to nurture whatever I had already planted or come up with new ideas on what to plant next. I couldn’t get enough of it. And I still can’t. But why?

The science is here to answer that question.

Getting your hands dirty makes you feel good.

According to research, putting your hands in soil puts you in contact with mood-enhancing soil bacteria called Mycobacterium vaccae . This bacteria triggers the release of serotonin in your brain. Serotonin is a mood-boosting happy chemical that also works as a natural antidepressant and strengthens the immune system.

Harvesting your own produce gives you a high.

Turns out that harvesting your own produce from your own garden provokes the release of dopamine . Dopamine is a hormone released in the reward center of your brain that is tied to a state of bliss. This harvesting dopamine release can be set off simply with the sight or smell of your fresh produce, as well as by the act of picking it. I can personally confirm that taking a bite of it then and there will only add to the bliss.

Focusing on the task at hand breeds contentment.

Putting your sole focus on the gardening in front of you makes you feel content. Being able to fully fixate on the immediate details of gardening reduces rumination and gives you a space to be fully present. This is a mindfulness practice and automatically eases stress levels. This will naturally improve your attention span elsewhere, too, whilst reducing the risk of anxiety and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms.

Nurturing something to grow boosts your self-esteem.

Helping a plant grow is a big feat and should be celebrated. You’re helping Mother Earth with her job whilst also proving to yourself that you’re capable of it. This results in feelings of pride and higher levels of confidence that extend far beyond your gardening efforts.

Physical activity gets your endorphins going.

Planting, pruning, weeding, digging, and raking—if you’ve ever tried them, you know how physical they can be. As such, gardening is a form of physical exercise. Exercise lowers your stress levels and boosts the production of endorphins, your brain’s feel-good neurotransmitters. We all know exercise is good for our bodies and minds—so why not exercise in the natural way gardening encourages you to?

Spending time in nature feels good.

Last but not least, there is the simplest reason of all: Spending time in nature feels good. Countless studies agree on the notion that we feel better when we are surrounded by nature. So why not create your own little nature haven in your garden, balcony, or even an interior corner of your living space? Anything is possible—and you now know it will be well worth it.

C.A. Lowry, J.H. Hollisa, A. de Vriesa, B. Pana, L.R. Brunetb, J.R.F. Huntb, J.F.R. Patonc, E. van Kampena, D.M. Knighta, A.K. Evansa, G.A.W. Rookb and S.L. Lightmana. (2007) “Identification of an immune-responsive mesolimbocortical serotonergic system: Potential role in regulation of emotional behavior.” Neuroscience , 146 (2), pp. 756–772.

Lauriane Suyin Chalmin-Pui, Jenny Roe, Alistair Griffiths, Nina Smyth, Timothy Heaton, Andy Clayden, and Ross Cameron. 2021 “'It made me feel brighter in myself'- The health and well-being impacts of a residential front garden horticultural intervention.” Landscape and Urban Planning , 205 (2021), 103958.

Masashi Soga, Kevin J. Gaston and Yuichi Yamaura (2017). "Gardening is beneficial for health: A meta-analysis." Preventive Medicine Reports , 5 (2017), pp, 92–99.

Susanna Newsonen , MAPP, is a philosopher and writer. Her mission is to spread hope and love, one reader at a time.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Teletherapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• Share full article

How Do We Know What Animals Are Really Feeling?

Animal-welfare science tries to get inside the minds of a huge range of species — in order to help improve their lives.

Credit... Photo Illustration by Zachary Scott

Supported by

By Bill Wasik and Monica Murphy

Bill Wasik is the magazine’s editorial director and Monica Murphy is a veterinarian and writer.

• April 23, 2024

What makes a desert tortoise happy? Before you answer, we should be more specific: We’re talking about a Sonoran desert tortoise, one of a few species of drab, stocky tortoises native to North America’s most arid landscapes. Adapted to the rocky crevices that striate the hills from western Arizona to northern Mexico, this long-lived reptile impassively plods its range, browsing wildflowers, scrub grasses and cactus paddles during the hours when it’s not sheltering from the brutal heat or bitter cold. Sonoran desert tortoises evolved to thrive in an environment so different from what humans find comfortable that we can rarely hope to encounter one during our necessarily short forays — under brimmed hats and layers of sunblock, carrying liters of water and guided by GPS — into their native habitat.

Listen to this article, read by Gabra Zackman

This past November, in a large, carpeted banquet room on the University of Wisconsin’s River Falls campus, hundreds of undergraduate, graduate and veterinary students silently considered the lived experience of a Sonoran desert tortoise. Perhaps nine in 10 of the participants were women, reflecting the current demographics of students drawn to veterinary medicine and other animal-related fields. From 23 universities in the United States and Canada, and one in the Netherlands, they had traveled here to compete in an unusual test of empathy with a wide range of creatures: the Animal Welfare Assessment Contest.

That morning in the banquet room, the academics and experts who organize the contest (under the sponsorship of the American Veterinary Medical Association, the nation’s primary professional society for vets) laid out three different fictional scenarios, each one involving a binary choice: Which animals are better off? One scenario involved groups of laying hens in two different facilities, a family farm versus a more corporate affair. Another involved bison being raised for meat, some in a smaller, more managed operation and others ranging more widely with less hands-on human contact.

Then there were the tortoises. On screens along the room’s outer edge, a series of projected slides laid out two different settings: one, a desert museum exhibiting seven Sonoran specimens together in a large, naturalistically barren outdoor enclosure; the other, a suburban zoo housing a group of four tortoises, segregated by sex, in small indoor and outdoor pens furnished with a variety of tortoise toys and enticements. Into the slides had been packed an exhausting array of detail about the care provided for the tortoises in each facility. Only contestants who had prepared thoroughly for the competition — by researching the nutritional, environmental, social and medical needs of the species in question — would be able to determine which was doing a better job.

“Animal welfare” is sometimes misused as a synonym for “animal rights,” but in practice the two worldviews can sometimes be at cross purposes. From an animal rights perspective, nearly every human use of animals is morally suspect, but animal-welfare thinkers take it as a given that animals of all kinds do exist in human care, for better or worse, and focus on how to treat them as well as possible. In the past half century, an interdisciplinary group of academics, working across veterinary medicine and other animal-focused fields, have been trying to codify what we know about animal care in a body of research referred to as “animal-welfare science.”

The research has unlocked riddles about animal behavior, spurred changes in how livestock are treated and even brought about some advances in how we care for our pets: Studies of domestic cats, for example, have found that “puzzle feeders,” which slow consumption and increase mental and physical effort while eating, can improve their health and even make them friendlier. The discipline has begun to inform policy too, including requirements for scientists receiving federal grants for their animal-based research, regulations governing transport and slaughter of livestock, accreditation standards for zoos and aquariums and guidelines for veterinarians performing euthanasia.

Contest organizers hope to help their students, who might someday go into a range of animal-related jobs — not just as vets but in agribusiness, conservation, government and more — employ data and research to improve every aspect of animal well-being. Americans own an estimated 150 million dogs and cats, and our policies and consumption patterns determine how hundreds of millions of creatures from countless other species will live and die. The Animal Welfare Assessment Contest tries to introduce students to that enormous collective responsibility, and to the complexity of figuring out what each of these animals needs, especially when — as in the case of reptiles living in a shell — their outlook differs radically from our own.

The effort to improve the lives of America’s animals began more than 150 years ago. As it happens, a hundred or so turtles figured in one of the most important events in the early history of animal activism in America. It was May 1866 — the heyday of turtle soup, a dish so beloved at the time that restaurants in New York would take out newspaper ads, or even maintain special outdoor signage, declaring the hour at which the day’s batch would be ready. And so this group of unlucky sea turtles, after being captured by hunters in Florida, was brought to New York upside down on a schooner. To further immobilize them, holes were pierced through their fins with cords run through them.

The turtles would have assumed a tranquil, passive demeanor under such conditions, perhaps making it possible for the ship’s crew to believe that the creatures weren’t suffering. But there is every reason to believe they were. Evolution has equipped the marine turtle for a life afloat, with a large lung capacity filling the space beneath the shell, to enable long dives. When the turtles were on their backs, the weight of their organs would have put pressure on these lungs, forcing their breathing to become deliberate and deep.

The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals started up the month before. Its president and founder, a Manhattan shipbuilding heir named Henry Bergh, spent its early weeks focusing on domestic species — above all, horses, the rough treatment of which in 19th-century streets was the main inspiration for his activism. But when he became aware of these suffering sea turtles for sale at Fulton Market, he decided to extend his campaign to a wildlife species that then barely rated more consideration than a cockroach, if not a cabbage.

Bergh made a case that the infliction of prolonged pain and distress upon sea turtles bound for the soup pot was illegal as well as immoral. As with other “mute servants of mankind” providing labor, locomotion, meat or milk to human beings, the turtle was entitled to be treated with compassion. But when Bergh hauled the ship’s captain in front of a judge, the defense argued (successfully!) that turtles were not even “animals,” but rather a form of fish, and thereby did not qualify under the new animal-cruelty law that Bergh succeeded in passing earlier that year.

Still, the case became a media sensation — and signaled to New Yorkers that Bergh’s campaign on behalf of animals was going to force them to account for the suffering of all animals, not just the ones they already chose to care about.

It’s perhaps no accident that Bergh turned to activism after a failed career as a dramatist. There’s something irreducibly imaginative in considering questions of animal welfare, regardless of how much science we marshal to back up our conclusions. George Angell of Boston, his fellow titan of that founding generation of animal advocates, pirated a 13-year-old British novel called “Black Beauty” and turned it into one of the century’s best-selling books, touting it as “the ‘Uncle Tom’s Cabin’ of the Horse” — though its real innovation was its use of an animal as a first-person narrator, thrusting readers into a working horse’s perspective and forcing them to contemplate how the equines all around them might see the world differently.

But how far does imagination really get us? The philosopher Thomas Nagel famously explored this problem in an essay called “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?” which took up that question only to dramatize the impossibility of answering it to anyone’s satisfaction. “It will not help,” he wrote, “to try to imagine that one has webbing on one’s arms, which enables one to fly around at dusk and dawn catching insects in one’s mouth; that one has very poor vision, and perceives the surrounding world by a system of reflected high-frequency sound signals; and that one spends the day hanging upside down by one’s feet in an attic. Insofar as I can imagine this (which is not very far), it tells me only what it would be like for me to behave as a bat behaves.”

In the case of chelonians like turtles — and their encarapaced brethren, the tortoises — we may know even less about how they experience the world than we do about bats. Take their vision, for example: Among those species that have been studied, scientists have found evidence of broad-spectrum color vision, sometimes including ultraviolet wavelengths invisible to the human eye. And while chelonians can see well beyond their pointed beaks, where edible vegetation or predators may await notice, their brains process these visual signals slowly — a quality of certain animal brains that might, some experts have theorized, result in a sped-up perception of time. (In chelonian eyes, do grasses wave frenetically in the breeze and clouds race across the sky?)

Next to vision, smell is probably the sense turtles and tortoises rely upon most. Their sensitive nasal epithelium, distributed between two chambers, can detect odors diffused in a warm desert breeze or dissolved in a cold ocean current. Chelonian ears are where you’d expect them to be, but buried beneath their scaled reptilian skin. They hear well at low frequencies, even if they don’t register the high notes of twittering birds, humming mosquitoes or the whistling wind. Some chelonians seem to have the power of magnetoreception, which means that somewhere in their anatomy — perhaps their eyes, or their nervous systems, or elsewhere — there are chemicals or structures that allow them to sense the earth’s geomagnetic field and navigate by it.

The chelonian sense of touch presents fewer mysteries. Specialized receptors in the skin and on the shell detect mechanical, temperature and pain stimuli and send messages to the nervous system — just as they do in humans and a wide variety of other species. Recognition of pain, in particular, is considered a primordial sense, essential to the survival of animals on every limb of the evolutionary tree. But even here, there are differences separating species: What does the nervous system do with signals from its nociceptors? Does the desert tortoise withdraw its foot from the scorpion’s tail only reflexively, or does it consciously register the pain of the sting? What suffering does a turtle endure when its shell is struck by the sharp edges of a boat propeller?

As Nagel argued, there is no way to meaningfully narrow the gulch in understanding that exists around “what it is like to be” such a creature. The strategy of animal-welfare science is to patiently use what we can observe about these other kinds of minds — what they choose to eat and to do, how they interact with their environments, how they respond to certain forms of treatment — looking for objective cues to show experts what imagination cannot.

Upstairs from the banquet hall, student competitors nervously milled around carpeted corridors. One by one they were called into conference rooms to face a judge, who sat at a table beside a digital chronograph. In one room, a neatly dressed young woman in owlish glasses took a breath as the display began counting up hundredths of seconds in bright red digits. Catherine LeBlond, a second-year student at Atlantic Veterinary College at Canada’s University of Prince Edward Island, began her presentation about the bison scenario.

She was allowed to refer only to a single 3-by-5 index card, which she had packed with information based on a “summary sheet” of takeaways that she and her teammates worked up together, with key phrases emphasized and sources cited, all of it broken down by category: social behavior (“Bison are a very social species with strong matriarchal divisions”), handling guidelines (“Prods should not be used to move bison unless safety is an issue”), facility design (“Ensure that there is a sufficient number of gates within facilities to slow the animals”), euthanasia (“The recommended euthanasia method of a bison is gunshot”) and more.

LeBlond began by declaring her choice: The wilder facility provided a more humane environment for its animals. She felt it was helping bison “live a more natural life”: The more spacious grounds would support wallowing behavior, she reasoned, and allow the animals to choose their social grouping, an important policy given bisons’ strong sense of social structure. She also praised the operation for enabling bison to avoid “aversive life events,” by using drones, rather than ranchers on horseback, to monitor the animals in the field, and also by slaughtering the animals on-site to avoid the distress they experience in transport. As she ran through her presentation, she took care to hit two important rhetorical notes that judges look for: “granting” some areas in which the other institution excelled and offering positive advice about how it might improve.

One way to think about her reasoning is through the lens of “the five freedoms,” a rubric that animal-welfare thinkers have long embraced to consider all the different obligations that humans have to the animals in their care. They are: 1. the freedom from hunger and thirst; 2. the freedom from discomfort; 3. the freedom from pain, injury or disease; 4. the freedom to express normal behavior; and 5. the freedom from fear and distress. In fact, it was arguably the articulation of these five freedoms — in the Brambell Report, a document put out by a British government committee in 1965 to assess the welfare conditions of the nation’s livestock — that inaugurated the whole field of animal-welfare science.

What made this list of “freedoms” so influential, in retrospect, was that it created a context for other, more targeted thinking about how a species might experience each freedom or its violation. What sort of environment will offer “freedom from discomfort” to a beef steer, on the one hand, and a freedom “to express normal behavior” on the other? Trying to answer such questions in a rigorous way involves considerations of veterinary medicine but also of evolutionary history, behavioral observation, physiology (scientists have begun using proxies like cortisol levels as an indication of animal stress), neuroscience and more.

In her bison presentation, by citing “a more natural life” and avoiding “aversive life events,” LeBlond was emphasizing Freedoms 4 and 5, the freedom to express normal behavior and the freedom from distress. In the scenario about tortoises, though, Freedoms 4 and 5 seemed to be at odds. When LeBlond addressed the judge for that category, she awarded the edge to the zoo — weighing its better health outcomes and stimulating enrichments over the more naturalistic setting at the museum. She zeroed in on the zoo’s visitor program, which gave the tortoises a novel method of choosing whether or not they wanted to interact with humans: Staff put out a transport crate, and over the course of 20 minutes, tortoises could decide to climb into the crate to be taken to the human guests, and later receive a special biscuit for their service.

And she linked this to a behavioral difference, illustrated by a set of charts comparing how readily each set of tortoises moved toward a “novel object” (like an enrichment toy) or a “novel person” in their midst. The numbers showed that the zoo’s tortoises were far more drawn to interactions with people. “This indicates that they have less fear of humans,” LeBlond pointed out, “which could be because they are given a choice about whether or not they get to participate in educational programs, and those that do are positively reinforced with high-value rewards.”

Most of the students followed a similar logic and chose the zoo. The judges, however, disagreed. As one of them explained later at the awards ceremony — at which LeBlond took second place among vet students — the facility may have seemed to be offering their tortoises a consensual choice, but it was more accurate to see it as heavy-handed operant conditioning, which lured them into submitting to human contact with the promise of a biscuit. In scenarios involving domestic animals, a documented comfort around humans is a sign of positive treatment, but when it comes to wild animals, the goal is the opposite: to acclimate them as little to human contact as possible. Another way of putting it is this: Biscuits might make a desert tortoise “happy,” insofar as we can even imagine what that means, but happiness isn’t ultimately what humane treatment is about.

Each year at the contest, competitors are asked to perform one “live” assessment: a situation with real animals in it. This time, the species of choice was the laboratory rat. We joined Kurt Vogel, head of the Animal Welfare Lab at University of Wisconsin-River Falls, on a tour of the scenario that he and a colleague, Brian Greco, had constructed in a warren of rooms a few buildings over from the competition site.

They had brought a great deal of brio to the task. In the first room, where several rats snoozed in containers, Vogel and Greco had left a panoply of welfare infractions for eagle-eyed students to find. One cage was missing a water bottle, while others housed only a single rat, a violation of best practices (rats prefer to be housed in groups). Feed bags sat on the floor with detritus all around, and a note in a lab journal indicated that pest rodents had been observed snacking on it.

In subsequent rooms, the horrors became more baroque. A euthanasia chamber had the wrong size lid on it, and a nearby journal described a rat escaping in the middle of its extermination. Paperwork in an office laid out the nature of the study being performed, which involved prolonged deprivation of food and water, forced swimming and exposure to wet bedding. Diagrams showed that the rats’ brains were being studied through physical implants, and students could see that the operating room was a nightmare, littered with unsterile implements and the researchers’ food trash (the remnants of Vogel’s bagel sandwich, deliberately left behind). None of the abuse was real — Vogel and Greco were even taking care to cycle the rats in and out of the fake scenario, in order to avoid undue stress from the parade of students who came through taking notes.

Happiness isn’t ultimately what humane treatment is about.

Rodents did not always play the role in labs that they do today. In the late 19th century, experiments were carried out on a whole host of species, including a high proportion of dogs — a fact that animal-welfare activists publicized to turn the “vivisection” debate into a political issue, to the point that even some prominent doctors became galvanized to restrict or ban the practice. In the 20th century, as research shifted to carefully bred rats and mice, optimized for predictability and uniformity, animal experimentation receded as an issue in the public discourse. Today animal-welfare advocates struggle to motivate their base on the matter of rodents: the Humane Society’s website illustrates its section on “Taking Suffering Out of Science” (which sits at the very end in its list of the group’s current “fights”) with a picture of a beagle in a cage, despite the fact that roughly 95 percent of all lab mammals are now rats or mice.

Lab rodents are maybe the most vivid example of a species whose suffering is hard to know how to weigh against the benefits it provides us. Studies using rat and mouse models have sought to answer basic scientific questions across diverse fields of inquiry: psychology, physiology, pathology, genetics. Look into any new advance in human health care, and you’re likely to find that it’s built on years of experimentation that consumed the lives of literally thousands of rodents. We may now be on the cusp of innovations that could allow that toll to be radically reduced — by essentially replacing animal models with some combination of virtual simulations and lab-grown tissue and organs — but it’s hard to imagine a world anytime soon where human patients would be subject to therapies that have never been tested on hundreds of animals. No one even reliably counts how many rodents are killed in U.S. labs every year, but the estimates range from 10 million up to more than 100 million.

This question of scale especially haunts the problem of livestock, which is an area where many of the contest’s student competitors will eventually find jobs. America is currently home to roughly 87 million cattle and 75 million pigs: populations that exceed those of dogs and cats in scale, but the welfare of which commands so much less of our moral attention.

When the practice of centralized, industrialized livestock management began in earnest after the Civil War, the treatment of the animals, especially during slaughter, could be barbaric. Pigs were simply hoisted up and their throats cut, and after some point were assumed to be dead enough to dump into boiling water so that the sharp bristles on their skin could be scraped away. There was little doubt that some of them were still conscious at the point that they were plunged into the water, as was reported in a broad exposé in 1880 by The Chicago Tribune: “Not infrequently,” the reporter noted, “a hog reaches the scalding-tub before life is extinct; in fact, they sometimes are very full of life when they reach the point whence they are dumped into the seething tub.”

After 1906, when Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle” exposed the industry’s unsanitary practices, a series of reforms did lead to significant improvements in the lives and deaths of American livestock. Thanks to the Humane Slaughter Act of 1958, federal law now requires that animals be “rendered insensible to pain” before the act of killing; with pigs, this is generally done either with electrocution or by suffocation in a carbon-dioxide chamber, while with cattle, the method of choice is the captive-bolt gun. And since the 1970s, animal-welfare science has led to some considerable reforms. Perhaps the most transformational work has been done by Temple Grandin, the animal behaviorist whose research into how food animals experience and respond to their environment — particularly during transport and slaughter — has changed the way that meat and dairy producers operate.

Still, despite years of promises to end the practice, many sows are still kept almost permanently in 7-feet-by-2-feet “gestation crates,” too small to turn around in. And the rise of concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) has doomed millions of pigs, cattle and chickens to lives spent cheek to jowl in the stench of their own waste — waste that also threatens the health of nearby communities and ecosystems.

At the contest, many attendees were excited about the gains that artificial intelligence could bring to the animal-welfare field. Pilot studies have indeed shown great promise: For example, with A.I. assistance, 24-hour video surveillance can help pinpoint sick or injured animals much more quickly so they can be pulled out for veterinary care. Last year, a group of European researchers announced that based on 7,000 recordings of more than 400 pigs, they had made significant progress in understanding the meaning of their grunts. “By training an algorithm to recognize these sounds, we can classify 92 percent of the calls to the correct emotion,” one of the scientists remarked.

That well may be, but given what we know about pigs — specifically, their remarkable intelligence, which rivals (if not exceeds) that of a dog, to the point that a group of scientists recently trained some to play video games — there is no amount of A.I.-driven progress that can reconcile their short, crowded life as an American industrial food animal with any definition of what a “good” life looks like for such brainy creatures, all 75 million of them.

The laying hen, among the four species considered at the contest, is the one that lives among us in the largest numbers: There are an estimated 308 million of them in the United States alone, or nine for every 10 Americans. In a backyard flock, these hens could be expected to live six to eight years, but a vast majority of them toil in industrial operations that will slaughter them after only two to three years, once their productivity (six eggs a week) declines — and chickens, notably, are not covered by the Humane Slaughter Act. Poor air quality, soiled litter, nutritional stress and conflict with other chickens can contribute to dietary deficiencies, infectious diseases, egg-laying complications, self-mutilation, even cannibalism. And even in the best laying-hen operations, including the “cage-free” ones imagined in the contest scenario, these are short lives spent under 16 hours a day of artificial lighting in extremely close quarters with other birds.

More than in the other scenarios, the organizers had made the laying-hen choice a straightforward one. The corporate farm offered fewer amenities for the birds, which were also observed rarely to use the dirt-floored, plastic-covered “veranda” that was supposed to serve as a respite from their long hours laying in the aviary. The more commodious verandas of the family farm, covered with synthetic grass, proved more popular with their chickens, and in warm weather, its birds made use of a screened “garden” as well.

In her presentation, Catherine LeBlond correctly picked the family farm, for many of the same reasons that the judges did. Again, she “granted” some positive qualities of the corporate farm and offered it some advice — reflecting, after all, the values of the veterinary profession that she was training to enter, a field that takes on the advising of everyone who has animals in their care, not only the most conscientious.

Even so, at the very end, LeBlond briefly stepped back to ask a true ethical question, one that troubled the entire premise of a multibillion-dollar global industry: “whether or not it is ethical to keep these hens for the sole purpose of egg-laying, only to have them slaughtered at the end.” Among the scores of students we watched over the course of a weekend, LeBlond and her teammates from the Atlantic Veterinary College were the only ones who, in the final seconds of their talks, raised deep questions about the scenario’s entire premise — about whether, in the end, these fictional animals should have been put in these fictional situations in the first place.

It was a question that the judges of the Animal Welfare Assessment Contest had no doubt considered, but it also was one that seemed to lie outside the contest’s purview: In its either-or structure, the contest is helping train future professionals how to improve, rather than remove, the ties that bind animals into human society. Unless the day arrives when there is no need for laboratory rats, or poultry barns, or facilities to house desert tortoises and other captive wildlife, the animals of North America will be in the hands of veterinarians and animal scientists like LeBlond and her classmates, to help shape their situations the very best way they can.

Parts of this article are adapted from “Our Kindred Creatures: How Americans Came to Feel the Way They Do About Animals,” by Bill Wasik and Monica Murphy, published this month by Knopf.

Read by Gabra Zackman

Narration produced by Krish Seenivasan and Emma Kehlbeck

Engineered by Lance Neal

Explore The New York Times Magazine

A Playwright Reimagines America: In her new play, “Sally & Tom,” Suzan-Lori Parks brings exuberant provocation  to the gravest historical questions.

The New Mood Music: The Texan trio Khruangbin’s vibes  have spawned countless imitators, but their magic isn’t so easy to replicate.

Inside a Media-Fighting Law Firm: Tensions had been brewing for years inside Clare Locke, a top defamation law firm. Then came the biggest defamation case of them all : a case against Fox News.

Is Corporate America in Denial?: Despite Donald Trump’s populist promises , many bigwigs are keeping the faith that it couldn’t really happen here.

Larry David’s Rule Book: He’s a wild, monomaniacal jerk . He’s also our greatest interpreter of American manners since Emily Post.

Inside The National Enquirer : An ex-editor at the tabloid reveals the story of the notorious “catch and kill” campaign  that now stands at the heart of Donald Trump’s’s legal trial.

Advertisement

'A rip the band-aid off quarter': Here's what Wall Street expects from Tesla earnings amid an epic stock skid

• Tesla is set to report first-quarter earnings results after the market close on Tuesday.
• The earnings report comes amid a sharp stock decline for Tesla, with shares down 43% year to date.
• Detailed below is what four Wall Street firms expect from Tesla's upcoming earnings report.

Tesla has a lot to prove when it reports its first-quarter earnings results after the market close on Tuesday.

The company has been hammered by a barrage of negative news over the past month.

From a big first-quarter delivery miss , to a recall of 4,000 Cybertrucks , to a potential big shift away from a low-cost Model 2 toward a robo-taxi, Tesla CEO Elon Musk will have to calm the nerve of investors who have experienced painful volatility in recent weeks.

Tesla stock hit a new 52-week low on Monday at $138.80 . The stock is down 43% year to date and off 66% from its record high, reached in November 2021.

Here's what Wall Street expects from Tesla when it reports its first-quarter earnings results on Tuesday.

Barclays: 'Facing an investment thesis pivot'

Barclays said in a note last week it expected Tesla's earnings call to be a negative catalyst for the stock as investors came to terms with the company's potential strategic redirection away from a low-cost Model 2.

"Facing an investment thesis pivot and a sea of uncertainty, this Tesla call is extra highly anticipated," a Barclays analyst, Dan Levy, said. "Expect negative catalyst."

Levy said he thought Tesla's closely watched first-quarter gross margins would be below consensus estimates on Wall Street.

"Moreover, we expect little commentary from Tesla to dissuade investors that near-term fundamentals remain weak," Levy said. "FCF may be negative, marking the first quarter since 1Q20 of negative FCF. There could be some shock factor to this result."

Finally, Levy said that while investor questions on the call would be largely focused on Tesla's long-term strategy, "these questions may be unanswered."

Barclays rates Tesla at "neutral," with a $180 price target.

Bank of America: 'Results matter, but growth factors may matter more'

Bank of America said Tesla's headwinds were well known and likely fully reflected in the stock price. That will make the company's commentary about the state of electric-vehicle demand and its growth plans all the more important.

That could set the stock up for a positive price reaction, a recent note from the bank said.

"Despite near term pressures, the unveiling of future growth drives has the potential to support the stock," Bank of America said. "Results matter, but growth factors may matter more."

While the bank doesn't expect Tesla to make any big product announcements during its earnings call, it could provide some hints on the highly anticipated robo-taxi event scheduled for August 8. Tesla could also reiterate its intention to launch a low-cost Model 2 in 2025 or 2026, which would likely be met with a positive price reaction in the stock.

Bank of America rates Tesla at "neutral," with a $220 price target.

Wedbush: 'A rip the band-aid off quarter'

The Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said Tesla's upcoming earnings report was "a moment of truth" for the company, according to a recent note.

Ives said the environment for Tesla was reminiscent of the challenges and uncertainty the company faced in 2015, 2018, and 2020, but it could result in a loss of long-term shareholders.

"This time is clearly a bit different as for the first time many long time Tesla believers are giving up on the story and throwing in the white towel," Ives said.

It's crucial, Ives said, for Musk to confirm that a low-cost Model 2 is still on the company's product road map. He added that first-quarter results would likely take a back seat to any updates on the company's long-term vision.

"While we and the Street are expecting a rip the band-aid off quarter and a softer outlook, Musk needs to do 5 things on the conference call to start to change the narrative in the Tesla story," Ives said. "If Musk is flippant again and there is no adult in the room on this conference call with no answers then darker days are ahead."

You can read more about those five things Ives said Tesla must do on the earnings call here .

Wedbush rates Tesla at "outperform," with a $300 price target.

JPMorgan: '>10% global layoff undermines hypergrowth narrative'

Tesla's recent layoffs suggest the company's long-term growth prospects are dwindling, a recent note from JPMorgan said.

The bank said: ">10% global layoff undermines hypergrowth narrative and should further dispel notion big 1Q delivery miss was somehow supply-driven." 

Instead, Tesla's big first-quarter delivery miss was likely driven by a concerning decline in demand for electric vehicles, the note said.

And the company's premium valuation is at substantial risk if growth is stuttering.

"Despite Tesla shares falling -61% from the all-time high reached in November 2021, its market capitalization is still equivalent to the combined $593 billion valuation of the world's two largest automakers, Toyota and Volkswagen, plus General Motors and Ford, despite those automakers collectively delivering over 30 million vehicles in 2023 vs. Tesla less than 2 million," JPMorgan said. "Clearly, valuation remains extremely demanding."

JPMorgan rates Tesla at "underweight," with a $115 price target.

• Main content