We are assured, in our Declaration of Independence, that we have a God-given right to the pursuit of happiness. While I'm not sure I agree, it still begs the question, "What makes you happy?"
All humans are motivated by happiness. All humans want to do that which makes them happy. It is a fundamental drive, and I'm not suggesting in the least that it's necessarily wrong. It's just part of our construction, part of that which makes us human. We are concerned about our best interests. Even someone who commits suicide does so because they believe that would be best for them. We inherently love our selves and want to be happy.
While there are a lot of possibilities -- seemingly endless -- of what makes people happy, I wonder how bizarre my version really is. Perhaps it's not so far out there. What really makes me happy is the joy of others. That seems to be a primary motivation for me in so many areas of my life. I dearly want my wife to be happy and will go great distances to accomplish it. It sounds like self-sacrifice, I suppose, but that entirely misses the point because it is her happiness that makes me happy. So if I surrender something to make her happy, I am simply doing what makes me happy. This works itself out in so many other ways, too. I feel the need to engage people I know who appear unhappy to see if I can help them out. Their happiness makes me happy. I want to hear from people the good news they are sharing because their happiness makes me happy. The other day I paid for lunch for a friend of mine. He was a little low on cash and I thought he'd enjoy a lunch if he didn't have to pay for it. Now, the motivation might have been to make him indebted to me or to encourage him to like me or ... well, lots of things, but it wasn't. If buying him lunch made him happy, it made me happy.
Happiness is a fleeting and fitful thing. Sometimes we can find happiness in the wrong thing. Reveling in other people's misfortune is probably the wrong thing. Sometimes we can find happiness in cheap things when we ought not be satisfied with them. The thrill of a sexual encounter outside of marriage is nothing like the deeper satisfaction of the union of sexual relations within marriage, for instance. We might go to church and enjoy the singing when we could have been enjoying the presence of God. Happiness, then, can be elusive and misguided. On the other hand, humans are built to pursue it. Do we find our happiness in the things we ought to? What makes you happy?
5 comments:
Stan,
In the original thoughts on the issue of the inalienable rights, a la Locke, Blackstone, et al, those rights were listed as life, liberty and property. Property is also well developed in the common law system, which was a progenitor of our current legal system.
The change from 'property' to 'pursuit of happiness' by the writers of the Declaration is very interesting and it's tie-in to Calvanism. Suffice it to say that I think like in many cases of what is now becoming revisionist and post-written history, the 'pursuit of happiness' in the minds of those who penned those words meant something totally different than it does in contemporary culture. The same is true for phrases in the Constitution like 'general welfare'.
I'm putting together a post based on some of these ideas stemming from the recent state of the union. Hope to have it out in the next few days.
Also, it's interesting to look Biblically at what followers of Christ should look for, which is the joy of the Lord; which I would suggest may in some circumstances incorporate or envelope happiness, but goes much farther than a more transitory feeling that is situation-dependent.
Great post.
I'm curious about the connection between the phrase and Calvinism. I know that Locke had some connection. He and Calvin both believed that "the pursuit of happiness is not merely intellectual and contemplative: it is carried out in one’s struggle against sin, and is attained in righteousness." But I can't find a connection with Jefferson.
I did find that some of the concept of Jefferson's "the pursuit of happiness" comes from John Locke himself. He defined it as seeking our greatest good, required the component of engaging the intellect, and included the concept of discriminating between imaginary happiness and true happiness. Locke wrote, "The necessity of pursuing happiness [is] the foundation of liberty." True happiness meant freedom from enslavement to particular desires. Carol Hamilton writes, "Properly understood, therefore, when John Locke, Samuel Johnson, and Thomas Jefferson wrote of 'the pursuit of happiness,' they were invoking the Greek and Roman philosophical tradition in which happiness is bound up with the civic virtues of courage, moderation, and justice."
And the happiness of which I speak is the one that is so oft repeated in Scripture: "That your joy may be full".
Stan,
I'm afraid i'll have to be brief and I hope my comments make sense, my wife and I are expecting our fourth child any day and i've been working some nights to get ahead before the big event. Eyes are crossing a bit.
The bit about the Declaration and Calvin was just with regard to property, not necessarily about the phrase "the pursuit of happiness" in particular. You are well aware of how Calvin and Locke meticulously develop the line from Imago Dei to Dominium to property. That's all I was trying to draw in there.
In reading my comment over I think "change from property to pursuit of happiness" was probably the wrong usage. I didn't have my reference material in front of me and so I couldn't pull a quote. However, the quotes you provided do I think convey what I was trying to get across when I said what the founders meant by pursuing happiness was miles away from today's understanding (which might at least be immediate gratification of desires).
Two other quotes from Locke's second treatise that I find exceptionally good are:
"The great question which in all ages has disturbed mankind, and brought on them the greatest part of those mischiefs which have ruined cities, depopulated countries, and disordered the peace of the world, has been, not whether there be power in the world, nor whence it came, but who should have it." Chapter 11, Who Heir?, No. 106
"The same law of nature, that does by this means give us property, does also bound that property too. 'God has given us all things richly' (1 Timothy 6:17) is the voice of reason confirmed by inspiration. But how far has he given it us? 'To enjoy'. As much as anyone can make use of to any advantage of life before it spoils...Nothing was made by God for man to spoil or destroy." Chapter 5, Of Property, No. 31
Blessings.
Stan,
By the way, have you ever read "The Ancient Hebrew Polity" by Benjamin M. Palmer?
It's quite good.
Never read it. Thanks for the suggestion. Oh, and congratulations in advance on the new family member.
Post a Comment