Happiness .. discuss

mmm thought I'd heard it before.. my sister used to quote him at me ...

Ohdratakhyam the ancient Persian philosopher/polymath (reign of Darius) stated "..that Happiness does not require a complicated society for it's attainment but that true happiness only requires contentment. Without contentment happiness cannot be attained no matter how complex a society is but more the elegance (this word is not used in the common sense but in its philosophical sense) of the society and the beings within it."

The Bhuddist concept of Nirvana is the removal of all causes.. thus one can argue that anarchy would (contrary to Hume) would be more condusive to happiness than his striving complex society your quote describes. However if you combine the idea of philosophical elegance with anarchy who knows we might remove the need for Butters to sail..

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: missing the point

Is there a difference between virtual and real happiness. Silly question as well, but why would Powerskipper be masquerading as Jimi? ( this is proabably one of my normal naiive questions)

<hr width=100% size=1>Life's too short- do it now./forums/images/icons/wink.gif
 
Re: missing the point

I must say jimi has saved me a load of loot this morning, as thinking about virtually duffing him up is MUCH cheaper than actually going sailing, and the weather can't spoil it either (i am thinking of duffing or virtually duffing him up indoors).

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Ships Cat

Chomp, Chomp - happy? /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>I am the cat but I am only 6.
 
Re: missing the point

i don't think there's much difference really between actually being happy, and virually being happy. Shallowness, is well, yerknow, sort of alright.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Last season we had a really quffable house Cotes du Rhone at Gins but the s*****g Committee discontinued it this year. Shame.

I'm very happy with a Cornas or a Cote-Rotie as well - but then again, who wouldn't be?

<hr width=100% size=1>Khyber
 
Probably. In pre-historical times happiness was waking up in the morining after a cold night and going to sleep at night having found enough to eat (without being eaten). Perhaps these days our happiness targets are artificially high and consequently more difficult to achieve and subsequently leads to our societies current addiction to "quick wins" (TV, soaps, computer games, alcohol, drugs), all psuedo involvement rather than actual involvement. Was society happier when the world was smaller, and life objectives more clearly defined? Who knows?

Just a thought,
Regards, Jeff.

Sorry - in a melancholy mood today /forums/images/icons/frown.gif

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://users.swing.be/FDB/centurion/index2.html>Centurion 32 Web site</A>
 
This is what Maslow's hierarch of needs is about:

1. Biological and Physiological needs - air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sex, sleep, etc.

2. Safety needs - protection from elements, security, order, law, limits, stability, etc.

3. Belongingness and Love needs - work group, family, affection, relationships, etc.

4. Esteem needs - self-esteem, achievement, mastery, independence, status, dominance, prestige, managerial responsibility, etc.

5. Self-Actualisation needs - realising personal potential, self-fulfillment, seeking personal growth and peak experiences

Briefly the needs at each level need to be satisfied before the needs at the next level become relevant. And of course it becomes increasingly complex to satisfy them the higher up the hierarchy you move. I suppose in a simple society satisfying Biological & safety needs would make you happy .. but in today's affluent society trying to fulfil the self actualisation goal is pretty complex .. unless of course you go sailing.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Happiness - Having a Borg Warner Velvetdrive slip easily onto the bell-housing studs after being dropped by the mainsheet pulleys from the boom. This against the pontoon in a F4.
I'll have an extra teabag in the brew.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Wrong..

That is only correct if their "industry" is running the country, with the end of attaining power. In reality their effort goes into attaining power, by whatever means, which makes them happy. So happiness for themselves is their goal as well.

Equally it could be argued that the selfless politician (stop giggling!) is someone who wants to make things better, and is happy when they succeed in doing so. Not many of them make it very far though.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
I believe happiness can be an out look to life,
If you can say to yourself " I feel happy" well then stop what you are doing and enjoy that feeling.
We all feel down at times, but its how we cope with it that counts,
"Hey OK I feel down"
Now lets find something to be happy about, simple things are normally the best,

throwing a rope and catching the cleat,
A beautiful sunset seen from a boat,
sun coming out after a rain storm,
a friendly smile and wave from a stranger,
A hug from a Friend,
A shared joke among Friends,
a sense of satisfaction after a job well done,

I could go on but will leave it at that!

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://powerskipper.mysite.freeserve.com/>http://powerskipper.mysite.freeserve.com/</A>
Julie
 
Re: Plagiarism

Correction - David Hume (1711-1776), <font color=red>Scottish </font color=red> philosopher & historian.

For your edification,
someone born in Scotland is referred to as being Scottish,
similarly someone born in Wales is referred to as being Welsh,
likewise someone born in Ireland is referred to as being Irish
whereas people born in England are generally referred to as being.......(south Britons?)

<hr width=100% size=1>
hammer.thumb.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top