Philosophy & Happiness

June 2, 2008

Sucker for love

Filed under: Uncategorized — happyd @ 12:55 pm

23 Above all else, guard your heart,
       for it is the wellspring of life.

 

If …heart = life

Then does heart = death?

I couldn’t balance the cash flows today on my Finance exam, I spilt milk….soy milk. 

I had no money for lunch- someone lovely bought me some lovely :-) . All up though..I’m still as high as a.a..Chinaman stuck in a tree- Ok ok.all that shiznit is so fine.. all that can all be replaced. As long as my heart is ok. Right?

A fortress, made from the hardest iron-ore that was mined from the hardest miner with the hardest…never mind. That’s my heart. Untouchable. Get your hands off me. It’s not even my fault . I was designed that way-

God says so. But why? Can a man be truly free without the vulnerability of being unshielded- naked?

Defenseless to the attacks of the world?

What does it mean to love. .  . . 

 

*****

 

 

 ”emotions!!” says Rowland from Destiny’s Child

Taken over by them. Allowing the fortress to be crushed like an elephant  stampeding through mudbrick in India. Drowning in it- as though you have been drinking a bit too much Henny Xo. Maybe. Maybe that is love?

Doubt it. Not everyone drinks- or maybe some people have a tolerance level. Those who aren’t drunk- they can’t love? They are unable to access the greatest most widely used and abused drug on Pluto?

Mother-f that! Doubt it again.

Or truly- how unbearable it would be.. to not be able to love

You’re doing well by controlling your emotions. You are doin’ well if you enjoy protecting yourself. But but.. what is the point if you cannot access, succeeed and overcome  the very thing you are protecting yourself from? Does God want us to guard our hearts because we are SO incapable of handling the intoxication a drug  potent enough to ’cause death. . .  ?

We ain’t even talkin about drug here man. This is human. Human relationships brother! Not exactly UV lights at Springvale. (Ignore subtle hint of racism*)

In my quickest conclusion to date… here are some key thoughts.

-If it is ‘good’ to protect your heart because no heart leads to death. Death is ‘bad’ (Pressumably)

-why does it feel just as bad when you are protecting it- If you ain’t feelin it- if there are no emotions attached. .  ..

-thus meaning…. one cannot love- which is ultimately unbearable.

Unless…here’s a bombshell now and I’m gonna drop it likes its hot

Love           d o e s n ‘t   e q u A l…….emotions.

Wow……………………………… Maybe you can think about that one and get back to me.. .. .

 

:)

Thanks for reading.  . . . . .    :)

D FRESH  2.6.2008

Unless. . . . . . .our whole perception of love as emotions

 

 

Don’t ever take my kindness for weakness.

But I know not.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*you idiot if you bothered to look up this star thing Only idiots do that Grow up.

May 26, 2008

Contentment is the key to happiness

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , , , — happyd @ 4:56 am

“Contentment is the secret to happiness.” Discuss.

Dietrich Cheung               

24/5/2008                                          

1500 words.

 

 

This Chinese proverb suggests that to be happy one only needs to be satisfied and content with your current state – that is to say, being satisfied and not allowing this satisfaction to be compromised by any external force. Contentment is examined in contrast with discontentment; and the former proves itself to be a preferable option. Contentment demonstrates influences upon happiness; however, the idea that ‘contentment’ alone is the secret to happiness is questionable and will be challenged in this essay. If happiness includes furthering your career for example, can a contented outlook on life alone fulfil this?

 

“Affluenza” according to Jessie O’Neil is “the bloated, sluggish and unfulfilled feeling that results from one’s efforts to keep up with the Joneses”.[1] Consumer culture reigns supreme in first world countries, and is even beginning to infest some developing countries due to globilisation. In 2006, an average person is reported to receive up to 3,000 marketing messages a day[2]. These are all the symptoms of an underlying culture that endlessly proposes that a ‘better, faster, more-designer, newer’ product or service will provide the next level of ‘self-fulfilment’. Material prosperity undoubtedly brings a degree of pleasure; it is the constant need to compare with others that provides a certain sense of discontentment. The sense of inferiority when comparing ourselves with others who are ‘better’ often breeds discontentment. “Affluenza” describes the pandemic of discontentment with the reasoning that ‘no matter how well your situation, there are always people who are better off than you’.

 

Contentment, then suggests that a person does not feel the need to compromise their self-worth for anything external. They do not feel the need to compare themselves with others which in doing so often causes envy and unhappinesss. People who are ‘content’ are intrinsically satisfied, and thus presumably become happy. They are solid in their beliefs that all external elements (including events, opportunities as well as material possession, etc.) will not alter their happiness. Also, in contrast to discontentment a content spirit arises from the constant comparison to external factors that are ‘worse-off’. Buddhist teachings are a prime example – they emphasize heavily on contentment as a means to avoid disappointments and hence suffering caused by unfulfilled desires. Buddhists denounce material gain, as such acquisitive mindset generates numerous desires. Contentment thus becomes a symbolic proclamation that they would not want their ‘happiness’ to be hostage to external factors. In response to ‘affluenza’, a ‘content’ person reasons that no matter how bad you think you’ve got it, there are always people who are in worse off situations- and for that reason you should be happy with what you have.    

 

In comparison to discontentment, contentment in ‘the way things are’ appears to be a much more probable path to happiness as it doesn’t allow external factors to intervene and thus influence ones perceptions. External factors – defined as social status, age, health etc. are by nature always unpredictable and fluctuating. Content persons come to the realisation that in comparison there are always guaranteed groups of people who are ‘better off’ in every way. The ‘content’ position acknowledges this and deems it as an unnecessary distraction. There is really no need to be envious of others in superior positions. They reverse the discontent perspective and focus on what they ‘do’ already have instead of what they ‘don’t’. It is most effectively illustrated with the ‘glass that is half full’ mentality; contentment is a product of optimism.

 

It is generally agreed that having a positive outlook on life is vital in acquiring ‘happiness’. Optimists are more likely to achieve ‘happiness’, the relation being that no matter the external influence they will enlighten themselves by focussing on the lighter side of things. Contentment also demonstrates a strong relationship with optimism by the simple fact that people who are content are ‘intrinsically satisfied’. As long as they cultivate a sense of contentment, whether temporary or constant, they will enable themselves to see the lighter side of things. After all, there are always people who are much worse off than our own. One cannot really complain about the lack of choice for new shoes as soon as one come to realise that many in our world do not even have legs. Contentment then is preferable to discontentment for the fact that it enables one to acquire the habit of always having a positive outlook throughout life – a dependable en route to ‘happiness’ indeed.

 

Strategically, having a satisfaction for your current state is also a safer bet as external factors that can potentially alter our moods, emotions and happiness in general occur constantly. Having such a stable mental state ultimately means that you are less likely to sway in at least your emotional perception of happiness. The ability to disregard external factors by focussing on the positive side of things ultimately ensures that the pathway to happiness is a consistent one. By means of happiness, consistency is high in relevance. People desire consistency in their lives, especially when it comes to things that are considered ‘good’. If contentment fosters and encourages consistent positive mentality, continuously shielding off potential threats than it is a dependable en route to ‘happiness’.

 

Having a shield, a consistent intrinsic assurance is a dependable source of happiness. Consistency in a positive outlook contributes to one’s overall confidence. There is no longer a need to compare yourselves against a ‘bigger’, ‘better’ or ‘greater’ person or thing etc. There is no need because you believe that your current state is sufficient – keeping in mind that there are always people who are worse off in comparison. Ultimately, you become enabled to focus time and energy towards other things because you are confident and secure in your overall situation.

 

So far we have drawn that ‘contentment’ is an honourable candidate as ‘the secret’ to happiness- it offers one a secure life through a consistent positive outlook towards events that can potentially affect our happiness. The core belief being that there are always people worse off and you need not to compare with people who are better off – if you need to even compare at all. Happiness however encompasses greater aspects than a positive outlook on events; what about attaining goals? Thus far, the benefits of ‘contentment’ are all beneficial in the sense that it protects us from discontentment (symptoms of affluenza), what about if we desired to compare ourselves with others for a meaningful purpose i.e. obtaining goals or competition?

 

Avoidance of unhappiness is a precursor towards the path of happiness, is it the ‘key’ alone to happiness is a different question; for example what if you decided to build or renovate the house to better accommodate the family- to do this you would need to compare yourselves and exercise action that is contradictive to contentment. Within happiness there is an aspect of ‘obtaining’ through actions that contentment alone cannot fulfil. Contentment is focussed on the status quo, allowing for the possibility of happiness through satisfaction; however there are also things that can be done to improve oneself thus would also increase happiness. Competition or comparison amongst others for the purposes of bettering the current situations is a useful tool to maximise meaning and happiness because it enables ‘proactive pursuit’. For example, during the heat of an extremely competitive sprint you create for yourself an opportunity to achieve a certain goal- be it a personal best or a win over a competitor.

 

Contentment, the status quo- can effectively also be a barrier towards achieving goals and ultimately happiness. Being content with the current situation can breed complacency as everything is fine. There is no need to improve, however, in many cases this is often an insufficient method of achieving goals. Achievement and active pursuit of improvement through the execution of these goals is also a contributing factor to happiness as there are many external factors that can contribute to ‘happiness’ (as opposed to external factors that can deter one) for example career aspirations, financial goals, fitness goals.

 

The proactive process of setting, executing and achieving goals is a contributing factor towards happiness. It is often said that ‘success’ is more a journey than a destination. The essence of continual improvement within ones life is a proven means of achieving certain levels of gratitude. People strive for better living standards, safer environments and greater opportunities for themselves and their families. The process of achievement often includes competition or goal-setting, this type of comparison and competition however is distinguished from certain comparisons that may lead one into discontentment. The difference is that one is using comparative methods in a positive way to maximise happiness where as one is allowing the external factors to deter from ones happiness.  

 

Contentment alone without the struggle for betterment does not incorporate this aspect of actively pursuing happiness; instead it is focussed on preserving it and providing a barrier towards external factors. It is a strong mechanism to foster the potential for happiness, but it alone is not the ultimate ‘secret’ for happiness.

 

Obtaining happiness is both an act of contentment and an active pursuit of goals in a positive manner- finding the balance between these two aspects is the key.  Moreover, true contentment should not exclude a competitive spirit: a failure to achieve a goal should not lead to bitterness; instead the setback of disappointment can be cushioned with a content attitude- in doing so providing strength to repeat the process. In that respect, contentment provides us with a reality of one’s own limitations, as well as providing the necessary foundations to continue in the journey of happiness.

 

In conclusion, while contentment may not be the sole secret to happiness, it is certainly a vital ingredient.

 

 

 

 

  


[1] Affleuenza. O’Neill, therapist and writer of Golden Ghetto; Psychology of Affluence

[2] ZAG, Marty Neumeier.

May 15, 2008

Eeek a blog?

Filed under: Uncategorized — happyd @ 10:17 am

Even D has to give a shit about certain things

May 13, 2008

Restraint “true freedom?”

Filed under: Uncategorized — happyd @ 4:44 am

Have you ever been arrested? Pinned down? Overwhelmed by force so brutal that you are at the physical mercy of the law with no where to run? I have. It fucking hurts

Try to imagine a time when you were BOUND, when you couldn’t do anything. I’m not talking about just the physical shit, what about a time when you really really really  wanted something, someone- but you couldn’t get it. . . 

When you failed, when you crashed your car, when your best friend got bashed- and there was nothing you could do about it. You glistened with helplessness. Maybe you prayed. . . . . .

Last post I talked about how in society there are these ‘rules’ or ‘laws’  and whether we like it or not we are all bound by constraints. So I had this confrontation with the law recently, it tought me a lesson. I’m not saying that the law is ‘almighty’, far from that- but I know where I went wrong. I got what I deserved, I disobeyed the law. My punishment was arrest. I felt so helpless, running was not an option in this 19 year old’s mind.

Why is it so shocking? Maybe because I was so used to running, so good at it, at getting away with things. At being young and doing what I want. It’s FREEEDOM RIGHT? We’d do as we please- we get away with it. There is this ATM machine, the last user forgot to take the card out, it’s still logged in asking ’how much’ more you would like to withdraw, you know, $20 $40 $50 $100 maybe. You might give the card back and be good but I’m willing to say that some of you might consider taking cash, true? It’s not because we are unaware of the consequences, it’s because we deceive ourselves into thinking we can get away with it.

Them fools on those police car chases, you see it all the time, blazing recklessly through highways at 180mph (cos this kind of stuff only happens in America, yeah?;) dangerously swerving to avoid hitting pedestrians while trying to flee from the cops, unaware they are tracked 200m above ground by the heat-sensing helicopter that can see everything. Do they honestly think they can escape? There’s literally no where to run or to hide- but they still try, or we try, maybe it’s our instinct to run from consequences , we think we can get away with it.

Not this time. Pinned, bound to the floor with no where to run…restrained. You give up. You admit your fault and bear the full brunt of the consequences.

Maybe we hate it. But that is not the point- restraint is important.

What if there wasn’t restraint? What if there were no brutalities such as coppers and their 8.9kg batons? What if we always kept running?

Last year in June, Mr Keilar, a father of three, was shot dead in Melbourne CBD as he was trying to help Kara Douglas- girlfriend of the out of control Christopher Hudson. Another backpacker was also wounded but not fatal. One man died in a spur that day and two were heavily wounded all because one fucking idiot was on substance and decided to throw a fit. What if he got away? What if there were no consequences? What would it mean if he was let free?

Sometimes our consequences aren’t so obvious- maybe not to us. We think we are all fine- but are we? Isn’t it scary that we think we can handle things? Run away and hide when shit gets too serious? Do we need to wait until we can’t run no more before we admit that we aren’t invulnerable? Worse yet, what if we always got away with it? We will be playing GOD- thinking we can do whatever. Eventually we become slaves our desires. Kill a man? Easy.

Think about that for a bit.

Maybe a better stance would be to admit the consequences of our actions- admit that we are living within constant restraint within this world- and it’s for our good. True freedom really lies in knowing this. I will not condone mistakes, I screw up all the time I don’t even need to try…I am prone to them. However I will promise myself that consequences are for my better, a constant reminder that no I’m not God- that I’m free, free from being a slave to my own desires.

Keep screwing up, just know why :-)

Kudos

D

April 7, 2008

$2m AUD

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: — happyd @ 12:57 pm

 The need for money:  by Dietrich J Cheung 7/2/2008

Basically Peter asked me a hypothetical question in a tute a few weeks back (several class cancellations due to holidays), the question went a little bit like “What would you do with $2m AUD? and the follow-up ‘would you be happy?‘.

After a short objection on whether the likely-hood of suddenly receiving that amount of cash was feasible, Peter again defied logic with his answer: “this is philosophy”.

So granted I was to log into NetBank this week to find the total sum of $2,000,000.00, what would I do?

Who would I be? Where would I go? Who would I be with?

Money, the medium of modern life. Most people want a lot of it- and (as usual) a lot is relative to each individual. $2m is excess to me, but It may not be for the current owners of Facebook ($1.5bn+). Although the quantity is relative, there are principles that can be applied to both. If money is a means to purchase needs such as: a warm house to live in, physiological needs: food, health care, water etc, transport. It can be used as a tool to sustain relationships: gifts, education, entertainment. This is money as a neccessity, as a means for survival. This is no doubtedly a contributing factor to the wide-spread popularity of money, however this does not explain the overwhelming love of money, excess of money to be specific. So when Peter asked this question it sort of threw me in a deep ponder- one I’ve been wrestling with for a certain period of time. Of course, I had been used to handling money for the majority of my life- but i wasn’t used to excessive amounts.

When someone comes to me telling me they want to become wealthy and I ask why,  there are often a handful of reasons that keep resurfacing. The main ones include: ‘freedom’ ‘helping others’ ‘family’ ‘consumption’ and ofcourse there are endless reasons. However these reasons seem to be most popular.

So yes, the most likely thing I’d do with $2m would be to go with the flow and use it for those reasons. Go out to nice dinners with my family, purchase modern and stylish furniture, spend recklessly on motorsport, take care of the girl I like etc etc. These are the first things that come into my mind. It sounds very enticing to me, indulgence. Swimming in cash does also bring freedom- no longer would I have to wait 40minutes per say to transmute from home to the city. Live on a Spencer street penthouse more like it.

Isn’t that what most people would do though? Consumption, indulgence, freedom . . . for the self. Perhaps giving some to family, perhaps some to charity. But no matter what we do with the money, be it buy a fresh looking car or build a ‘charity’ under your name, I don’t think its the money itself we are attracted to.

 We are allured to the feeling of importance that money can bring. Tell me if I’m wrong but would wearing Louis Vutton as opposed to Target matter if you were in the middle of a jungle? Consumption feeds off people’s perceptions of importance- thus rapidly increasing the range of ‘faster’ ‘bigger’ ‘more expensive’ goods and services. Isn’t media king of this? On the flipside, there is nothing morally wrong with driving a $60,000 car at all. I know many people who are extremely passionate about their motorsport. It’s just all about affordability and practicalities. In my mind, even giving to ‘charities’ may not have a good moral angle if what you are actually desiring is a measure of importance. I guess what I’m getting at is that people in first world countries people are confusing what one can do with money and having lots of money itself. The consumption cylce continues: things will always get nicer – but the principle is still the same: we want these nicer things to make valid our importance as humans.

So yes, I will splurge I’ll be honest about that. But as in the article sent out by Peter ‘Affluenza’ I am skeptical of the lasting fufillment materialistic goods can bring. Up to a point I will think. “am I only important because I have x or y?” “do people enjoy my company for me as a person?”. This interesting double-edged sword presents itself, on one hand I present myself to others with surpreme importance, on the other I am heavily skeptical of the source of this importance.

I was honest with my list. These actions of how I would potentially spend $2m expose my values- things that may verify my importance. I did not list many, and the ones I did list were things I would do anyway whether I had excessive money or not. One might say to me: “Dietrich, why not give some away to charity?” I didn’t say I wouldn’t, it just didn’t come up in my mind as the first things I would do, honestly. Why? Because money is a means , it surely helps that institutions such as Oxfam, World Vision, Unicef have financing to support their operations. If the ends is helping people, why not give them your time? Your sacrificing of time is much harder is it not? Why give them the means when you can help them more by teaching them, educating them to help themselves?

My final proposal is this. If money is only a means (the quantity being relative), to get these wonderful emotions we feel… do we really need excessive amounts? Are we all so un-creative in that we can generate these deep feelings of importance without the particular amount? A medium that will confuse you into thinking that it alone will bring you all the happiness in the world? Peter your question really hit home. I still want to make in excess of $2m in my life, greater still I want to be valued so significantly with what I do with it. It is a challenge worth acomplishing, yet also need to keep reminding myself that the money is not the be all and the end all.

As I pursue my career in business, this post will remain a testimony of my once upon a time philosophical view on money, I may well change. Maybe in 10 years time (Peter you still will be just as good looking ;-) You can refer a bitter, money enslaved me back to this post.

Thanks again.
Kudos, (more…)

March 17, 2008

Happiness, popularity & opinion

Filed under: Uncategorized — happyd @ 10:21 am

After missing a lecture due to Labour Day public holiday, Peter  R. continued talking more about Socrates in his second lecture. The one hour lecture was a full interlinking of many various subtopics as usual; but if it had to be specifically narrowed down to a theme it would be “caring less about what other people think would in turn make us happier” What are the degrees of credibility in this argument? Or more so, how can the degrees of credibility be measured? We can only hope for a vague solution by the end of this discussion. Welcome to the philosophical diaries.

 For those of you unfamiliar with the teachings of Socrates, an excellent indepth commentary is available here: The Happiness of Socrates by Dr. Miller

An indifferent, suspicious and even ignorant approach to popular beliefs is predominant in the philosophy of Socrates. He could in many senses be deemed as an extremist non-conformist-causing his unpopularity, and ultimately his death. Countless examples demonstrate this philosophical heavy-weight’s appetite for questioning common beliefs, a life of wondering the streets of Athens questioning the reasons people did the things they did. He often not only questioned these ‘common beliefs’ but acted upon what he questioned: he wore torn robes, dirty sandals, denied wealth etc.
After much cross examination of the citizen’s belief systems he came to a conclusion that many of these common beliefs were based on feeble truths. He therefore applied the philosophy that because belief systems of man weren’t truths by any means, he could continue living his life in an indifferent, challenging and self-justifying manner.

In modern day Melbourne 2008, diversity in cultures has lead to a phenomenon in varying perspectives. We can still, however, come up with ‘common beliefs’. Common beliefs about common themes: money, friendship, love, power-these beliefs, usually drawn by the majority, should not be contemplated-they are common. 

 So if by defining ‘common beliefs’ as beliefs drawn by the masses, it can be assumed that we all in some way are shaped by these beliefs. In out democratic society, democracy employs the idea that the majority will always hold the power. What the majority of people support seems to be synonmous with common beliefs-and for that very reason we are all in somewhat affected by these ‘common beliefs’.
Yet, by simply observing people the next time we roam the public we can see that these common beliefs are already so deeply embalmed in society that many are not even aware of it. People wear clothes, they eat, they move, they interact, they think, they work to reach the desires of their hearts. These are the most common of all common beliefs-if everyone is doing it, then it must be right, right? The moral issue is not so much the question as to the purpose of common beliefs; common beliefs exist for a reason-to help us. Clothes keep us warm, conceal our genitalia (another common belief, perhaps), food feeds our body energy in forms of nutrition,water hydrates us, shelter protects us from the environment’s unpredictability.

 We live within constraints. Financial, societal, chronological, physical contstraints just to name a few. We cannot defy gravity with our physical body alone, we cannot reverse time, and we definitely cannot revive ourselves out of debt if we keep consuming for the wrong reasons. Basically all these are common beliefs, derived from the constraints on what, us, as humans can or cannot do. In that sense, common beliefs are truths in themselves-they help us function as society. Socrates extensive questioning of common beliefs was neither right nor wrong, it is not a moral issue; more a practical one. Common beliefs are designed for practicality, they allow us to realise our limits.

Of course, the degrees of common beliefs potentially extend to inifinite (so does philosophy), however if we can conclude that society impends beliefs for a purpose we can approach Socrate’s philosophy in a broader frame of mind. In that sense, it does matter that other people think the way they do. How they think is derived from common belief systems, which in tern is derived from our own constrains as humans. Again, there is nothing morally wrong about questioning these common beliefs. However there are consequences: if we extensively question the morality or reasoning of popular beliefs and turn our back against popular society, as did Socrates, life generally won’t favour you. Rather you should embrace that society has and will always impose ‘common beliefs’ upon us, they can be either good or bad beliefs depending on your perspective, but there is a reason nevertheless.

Kudos

D

March 10, 2008

Virgin

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: — happyd @ 11:59 pm

Despite the massive massive popularity of ‘the blog’ I had not started one until this–apart from random dabbling on msn spaces and ‘xanga’(out of curiosity maybe?), my current status till’ this day was still virgin

         Well…now that my blog of a cherry has officially *popped* I begin to wonder what the future holds:  a string of flimsy online commitments? Or possibly cherishing a long term commitment to a cyber outlet that lasts until death do us part. Whatever it holds it probably isn’t so important.

For that very matter I would just like to outline–[any] readership is highly encouraged, discussions are welcome, however the main purpose of this blog is to reflect, analyse, meditate and pragmatically scrutinise the many many concepts discussed in Philosophy & Happiness.

Peter R….something, the lecturer of the course, assigned us to keep a philosophical diary (worth 40%!). I thought I might refer to many of the concepts in the future…I eventually decided on the ever so populous format of blog.

What I’m really saying  is: I’m a virgin blogger, with that comes many of the anxieties that include worrying about traffic,readership and producing quality content. With that comes a subconciously self-concious tone of writing that deludes me into thinking everything I’m writing is being read. I’m sure some of you might agree? (Asking rhetorical questions is a deafening example.) I want to write as freely as I can, however for the purposes of this assignment I want to be honest as I possibly can to myself and eventually the lecturer. Good shit guys thanks!

Kudos.

D.Jeremy 

Blog at WordPress.com.