|
Everyone, certainly, reflects on the meaning of the word happiness, sometimes, over time, internally for themselves overestimating this concept. Not once asking yourself the question, what is happiness, I assigned it to a certain definition of the soul, not only depend on the specific external factors.
So I designation significantly simplify your life by depriving her of the struggle for the achievement of these factors and removing the responsibility for their presence or absence. But in a conversation with a young and rather charming man I have heard from him the phrase, seemed strange to me, "I was never happy," - he said.
Then he was saying I was very surprised - really was not like that unlucky young man smiling. Him
from
part was something significantly larger than emotional state. Yes, of course, the emotion - one of the components, an integral figure, but what struck me happiness, he called no more than a joy.
We even had an argument, left, as often happens - each to his own opinion. However, this conversation led me to a shelf with directories. "Happiness - the notion of moral conscience, the human condition, the corresponding inner satisfaction of his being, fullness and meaning of life," - says the great Encyclopedic Dictionary.
Philosophical Dictionary gives the following definition: "Happiness - * axiological concept that refers to a specific individual optimal combination of various goods, which is expressed in a sense of inner satisfaction with the way his life in general.
The philosophical tradition and everyday consciousness is usually equated with the highest good, considering it as a common denominator of all values of human aspirations. "Where does this sense of inner satisfaction and the more meaningful?
Let us first for the convenience of the general formula derive some psychological basis of happiness, for example, we assume that this level of claims divided by the value of the individual self. Let's say we know that the level of claim is determined by the spiritual, mental and physical development of a person, his previous experience.
Thus, the higher the intellectual level, the correspondingly higher level claims and as a consequence, more difficult path to the optimum value of the fraction, i.e. to achieve the status. We can assume that the opportunity to experience the state of happiness largely depends on the role of the human condition, how it corresponds to the social and individual characteristics of the person.
Everyone is constantly playing (in the sense of - carries) a role. The role of the child of his parents, the role of parents of their children, the role of urban passenger transport, an employee of the company, director of production, etc. The role - a relatively stable pattern of behavior (including the actions, thoughts, emotions), worked out in the community to carry out a particular social function for the implementation of a certain social status.
Each role has an impact on the individual, on the self-consciousness, as it mobilizes the resources of your body and mind to fulfill this role. Sometimes, however, even more frequently - than is sometimes - intrapersonal conflict arises when a person is forced to play the role, presentation of which do not correspond to his idea of himself, his individual "I" or mental capabilities.
If the "role" beyond the capabilities "I", the person feels constant fatigue, the conflict creates a permanent self-doubt, dissatisfaction, loved ones around the world. For example, a young person is not ready to be a father, he feels that he imposed role, which he is unable to comply.
He can not get rid of the discomfort, increasingly withdraws into himself, feels miserable, and all because of the fact that the role of the father is currently above the moral / physical / material resources. As time passes and the young man feel in this role as comfortable as between its capabilities and the inner "I" is an equals sign.
In that case, if the "role" below capacity "I" when the situation seems undignified and humiliating for a man permission intrapersonal conflict takes many forms. A person can objectively make a difference, for example, being dissatisfied with his work, he goes to study and change the profession, thereby proving their ability to more challenging activities.
Not being able to (or unwilling) to change the situation, people tend to change it "just for themselves." The son did not show up in the parents who are unable to notice it in the adult, independent man. He avoids external manifestations still existing conflict by refusing to fulfill contradicting its "I" role. To get out of this kind of conflict, many have resorted to the method of "rationalization".
In this case, the person forced to perform does not meet his "I" role, assures himself and others that he is doing it solely "on their own" or "in the name of someone / something", even worse - if the "vehicle function something / someone out of spite. " For this kind of rationalization (search argument for their actions) usually lies low self-esteem, fear of rejection, fear of something new, fear of change, etc.
"Inappropriate behavior" manifested in the replacement drive is not available to the person as a desire to play the role opposite. For example, a child in need of tenderness and affection, but not looking to get the role of a loved one, begins to behave rudely and brazenly emphasized. Often there is an option in which a man, who turned out in inappropriate for its "I" role, turns his anger against himself, while considering himself a loser.
The conflict between the role and the "I" can not be permitted, but removed from the sphere of human consciousness, suppressed. As a result, actions, and feelings in the mind clearly shown the existence of a conflict between "I" and the role, but the internal stress increases. The person becomes irritable, tearing down evil on their loved ones, he again depriving themselves and their state of happiness.
Perhaps the environment affects the feeling of happiness. Well, can not create "optimal for a particular individual combination of various goods", for example, in a given country or area. But this is a problem of attitude and ability to quickly acclimate. I wonder what people think about the issue of happiness, our great scholars?
Abraham Maslow, an American psychologist, saw the happiness of man in his self-actualization, the path to which is through the satisfaction of all needs, from the simplest food, drink and security to the need for recognition. Self-actualizing person is calm, confident, talented, forgiving, not prone to depression and hysteria, with a healthy self-esteem and harmonious appearance.
Philosophical currents hedonism and utilitarianism * * happiness is identified mainly with sensual pleasures. What is easy to explain the state of happiness the lovers. Here, of course, and meeting the need for recognition and under-recognized chemical-biological response ...
Nietzsche believed that it will likely never be achieved at least for the majority of contemporary Europeans. Christian killed the true God, the giver of God, created for himself the ideal of God-sufferer.
Man must strive to get closer to God, purged of sin through the deprivation and suffering. He simply does not have the right to be happy, he must suffer for the sake of the purity of his soul.
But closer to me, after all, the notion that the state of happiness depends on the degree of our emotional state, because if a person will program itself to suffering, no joy of life did not bring happiness ...
* Axiology - philosophical teaching of values. Axiology originated in the late XIX - early XX century as a subjective idealist doctrine.
* Hedonism - (gr. Enjoyment) ethical stance, asserting pleasure as the highest good and the criterion of human behavior and reducing to it all the diversity of moral demands.
* Bentham, the founder of utilitarianism, considered the foundation of morality utility, which is identified with pleasure. In support of the "greatest happiness" (pleasure) for "the greatest number of people", and is, according to Bentham, the sense of ethics and principles.
|
