Introduction
The subject of happiness is almost as ancient as philosophy itself. Many scholars, starting with Ancient Greek philosophers and ending with modern scientists and psychologists, pondered the question of what constitutes happiness, how important it is in our lives, and how could it be best achieved. Modern science is yet to achieve a consensus on whether it is possible or not to provide a universal ‘receipt’ for happiness. The empirical data on the matter is not conclusive.
The researchers are split into two camps – one camp is in favor of developing universal techniques for inducing happiness, while the other is uncertain and cautious about the psychologists making a public announcement on the matter. This paper shall analyze the “Yes” article, written by Julia Boehm and Sonja Lyubomirsky, and the strength of the argument it presents.
Premises and Conclusions
The argument is built upon three premises. Let us look at each of these premises and grade them based on five criteria, those being acceptability, consistency, credibility, support for the conclusion, and missing components.
There are differences between how happy and unhappy people perceive the world
Grade: Strong. This is a perfectly acceptable premise. Its evaluation is consistent, and it offers sources and empirical data as a base of evidence. The premise supports the conclusion albeit in an indirect way, instead of serving to relay the reader to another premise by stating that happy people, in general, employ certain mechanisms and strategies to facilitate a positive worldview. However, this premise does not give enough credit to circumstantial factors, instead of dismissing it at the very beginning.
Unhappy people can learn strategies to achieve sustainable happiness
Grade: Moderate. This appears to be the concluding premise of the text, which is instead put in the middle for some reason and serves as a transition point towards the next premise involving intentional activity. It acknowledges the possibility of unhappy people to learn how to be happy. However, the represented point is moot, which does not help support the conclusion. This premise admits that it lacks data, which would clear out whether the strategies cause happiness or are more likely to be practiced by people who are already happy.
Intentional activities are the basis of Happiness interventions
Grade: Strong. This premise is well-supported by research, and it describes several different strategies that could be implemented to achieve short-term happiness. It lends a lot of credibility to the conclusion, as the initial researches say that these techniques could ensure long-term happiness so long as they are not repetitive and interchangeable.
The article concludes with a quote that a “man is the artificer of his own happiness.” All three premises support this conclusion, whether directly or indirectly. Boehm and Liubomirsky state that circumstantial sources of happiness such as wealth, items, marital status, and others are not as important as initially assumed. Practicing intentional activities, such as processing life experiences, visualizing a better possible self, committing acts of kindness, and expressing gratitude can make people sustainably happier.
Key Components
The assumption that serves as a base for this article is that happiness is one of the key components to a good life. This is a very strong assumption, as the majority of people on Earth would agree with it. It is hard to imagine a human being leading a fulfilling life without pursuing personal happiness and satisfaction in one way or another. As such, it does not weaken the argument at all.
The article possesses two main qualifiers, which are:
- Happy people successfully enhance and maintain their levels of happiness using strategies that involve social comparison, decision-making, and self-reflection
- Happiness interventions involving intentional activities can be effective in increasing and sustaining happiness.
These statements are dubbed as qualifiers in a way that the authors do not say for certain that they are true. Instead, they say they are highly probable. These probabilities are supported by facts and research, which is why neither of these qualifiers weakens the argument.
The counter-argument is strong in the sense that it is backed by empirical research. It states that happiness likely has a strong connection to genetics and personality. It also suggests that people tend to adapt to good things in their life and eventually get used to them, making the state of happiness of a person a constant. This counter-argument ultimately brings the issue down to nature-versus-nurture. Since neither concept could be applied to the situation in full, this counter-argument does not completely dismiss the idea that happiness strategies could be at least moderately effective.
Conclusion
The text presents a credible and sustainable idea, is well-researched and supported by evidence. The opposition presented in form of a counter-argument, while raising certain valid concerns, does not completely dismiss the article’s thesis. The conclusions are not far-fetched and do not overestimate the effectiveness of happiness interventions both in the short-term and long-term perspectives. Overall, it is a strong article.