Reflections on happiness and a happy life

Q4 Arts and Humanities
Ars Aeterna Pub Date : 2020-12-01 DOI:10.2478/aa-2020-0009
V. Jakubovská, Jana Waldnerová
{"title":"Reflections on happiness and a happy life","authors":"V. Jakubovská, Jana Waldnerová","doi":"10.2478/aa-2020-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The main objective of the following text is to focus on and exemplify the basic axioms of theories of happiness that come from historical and philosophical tradition and are still, at least in some cases, relevant nowadays. As philosophers claim, the longing for happiness is a naturally human desire that has taken various forms in their thinking: happiness was connected with beatitude (Aristotle), with self-preservation (Spinoza), social helpfulness (Hume), living in the present moment without expostulations or false illusions (Comte-Sponville), and others. The desire for happiness means the main aim of a human life drives particular life goals and the values of individuals. Concepts of happiness have accrued in diachronic and synchronic cross-sections. The Aristotelian/Spinozan conception or Kantian, modern and postmodern traditions formed in a diachronic cross-section. Those that accrued in a synchronic cross-section segregated themselves on the basis of an individual’s spiritual and bodily aspect. Spiritual happiness (spiritual bliss, and inner equilibrium, ataraxis) was preferred by the eudaimonic (ευδαιμονία) tradition (Democritus, Socrates, Aristotle, Hellenism, French materialism and others); bodily pleasures were accentuated by the hedonistic traditions (Lipovetsky, Bauman, Keller). Some conceptions examined the problem of happiness through the optics of society and the individual, stressing general goodness and helpfulness (Plato, Aristotle, Kant); or personal goodness, pleasure and benefit – the contemporary hedonistic concepts (Lipovetsky, Maffesoli, Comte-Sponville) All these conceptions of happiness are united by the common desire of people to live happily; however, their means and ways to reach such a goal are different.","PeriodicalId":37754,"journal":{"name":"Ars Aeterna","volume":"12 1","pages":"34 - 44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ars Aeterna","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/aa-2020-0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract The main objective of the following text is to focus on and exemplify the basic axioms of theories of happiness that come from historical and philosophical tradition and are still, at least in some cases, relevant nowadays. As philosophers claim, the longing for happiness is a naturally human desire that has taken various forms in their thinking: happiness was connected with beatitude (Aristotle), with self-preservation (Spinoza), social helpfulness (Hume), living in the present moment without expostulations or false illusions (Comte-Sponville), and others. The desire for happiness means the main aim of a human life drives particular life goals and the values of individuals. Concepts of happiness have accrued in diachronic and synchronic cross-sections. The Aristotelian/Spinozan conception or Kantian, modern and postmodern traditions formed in a diachronic cross-section. Those that accrued in a synchronic cross-section segregated themselves on the basis of an individual’s spiritual and bodily aspect. Spiritual happiness (spiritual bliss, and inner equilibrium, ataraxis) was preferred by the eudaimonic (ευδαιμονία) tradition (Democritus, Socrates, Aristotle, Hellenism, French materialism and others); bodily pleasures were accentuated by the hedonistic traditions (Lipovetsky, Bauman, Keller). Some conceptions examined the problem of happiness through the optics of society and the individual, stressing general goodness and helpfulness (Plato, Aristotle, Kant); or personal goodness, pleasure and benefit – the contemporary hedonistic concepts (Lipovetsky, Maffesoli, Comte-Sponville) All these conceptions of happiness are united by the common desire of people to live happily; however, their means and ways to reach such a goal are different.
关于幸福和幸福生活的思考
摘要下文的主要目的是关注和举例说明幸福理论的基本公理,这些公理来自历史和哲学传统,至少在某些情况下仍然具有相关性。正如哲学家们所声称的,对幸福的渴望是一种自然的人类欲望,在他们的思想中表现出了各种形式:幸福与幸福(亚里士多德)、自我保护(斯宾诺莎)、社会帮助(休谟)、生活在当下而不受劝告或虚假幻想(Sponville伯爵)等联系在一起。对幸福的渴望意味着人类生活的主要目标驱动着特定的生活目标和个人价值观。幸福的概念在历时和共时的横截面中积累起来。亚里士多德/斯皮诺赞的概念或康德的、现代的和后现代的传统在历时的横截面中形成。那些在共时横截面中积累的人根据个人的精神和身体方面将自己隔离。精神幸福(精神上的幸福和内心的平衡,ataraxis)是欧戴莫尼克(ευ;享乐主义传统强调了身体的快乐(利波维茨基,鲍曼,凯勒)。一些概念通过社会和个人的视角来审视幸福问题,强调普遍的善良和乐于助人(柏拉图、亚里士多德、康德);或个人善、快乐和利益——当代享乐主义概念(Lipovetsky、Maffesoli、Comte Sponville)所有这些幸福概念都是由人们幸福生活的共同愿望所统一的;然而,他们实现这一目标的手段和方式各不相同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ars Aeterna
Ars Aeterna Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊介绍: The multidisciplinary journal focused on the questions of art and its importance in the contemporary world for the development of culture, mutual understanding, and the human Self.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信