Philosophy of happiness

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Angelo Bronzino , Allegory of Happiness , (1564)

The philosophy of happiness (happiness philosophy) is the direction of philosophy that deals with nature and the ways to achieve happiness or bliss ( Greek  ευδαιμονία eudaimonia ). Both classical western philosophy ( philosophy of antiquity ) and eastern philosophy have been concerned with happiness since their inception. Because the pursuit of happiness is an ancient human longing, the topic has always been one of the core elements of philosophy and is accordingly also dealt with by modern philosophers .

Happiness in ancient philosophy

"Never in life does happiness rule louder and free from suffering."

- Antigone (Sophocles)

Aristippus of Cyrene

Probably the first philosopher to develop a complete philosophy of happiness was Aristippus of Cyrene from 435 BC. Until approx. 355 BC Lived. Aristippus was a student of Socrates and founded the Cyrenean school , he is considered the founder of hedonism. In his philosophy, Aristippus differentiates between two states of the human soul, pleasure as gentle and pain as rough, impetuous movement of the soul. (cf. 1 , p. 116) There is no difference between different lusts, which means that every pleasure, regardless of its nature, has the same quality. According to Aristippus, the way to happiness is to maximize pleasure while avoiding pain. He even claims that conscious enjoyment is the real meaning of life : "As the highest goal he set the gentle (smooth) movement that increases to the sensation." ( 1 , p. 115)

Plato

Plato lived from around 428 BC. Until around 348 BC In Athens , was a pupil of Socrates, dealt with his doctrine and that of his teacher Socrates in his famous dialogues . The sophistic and pre-Socratic opinions on the subject of happiness are viewed critically in the dialogues and for the most part fundamentally refuted in the Socratic conversation. According to Plato, the human soul has three parts: reason , will and desire . A person is only happy when all three parts of the soul are in balance and are friends with each other, that means not contradicting each other.

Aristotle

For Aristotle, the human being is realized in another way : in the polis , that is, in the community , in the state . Those who naturally develop the virtues and skills inherent in them within the political community are blessed. However, a person can only be called perfectly happy if he is adequately endowed with external goods and has spent his whole life in a virtuous manner. ( 3 , see p. 50)

In the Nicomachean Ethics (16), Aristotle starts out from people and organs that have a specific function to illustrate his concept of happiness: the flute player or cobbler; the eye, the hand, the foot. Such a being does a work. For the shoemaker it consists in a certain product, for the flute player and for the eye in a certain activity. It is the good of the being in question. Aristotle then applies this consideration to man as such. He asks what his work is. Like plants and animals, man accomplishes the work of life. His work as a human lies in the pursuit of life that distinguishes him from plants and animals: rational activity. Accordingly, happiness is primarily not a well-being, the complete satisfaction of all needs and inclinations, but active being, theoretical and practical rational activity as a specifically human life.

According to Aristotle, happiness and virtue form a unit. A flute player can play well or badly; he plays well because of his ability ( Arete ). Likewise, man can exercise the rational activity well or badly, depending on whether he is in the constitution of virtue (arete) or not. His happiness consists in this well-performed rational activity.

Fortunately, according to Aristotle, external goods also belong; it is also dependent on the favor of external circumstances. Of course, the morally good, like a good craftsman, will make the best of the given circumstances from the material given to him and thus achieve the highest possible degree of independence. But that does not exclude that he too is dependent on the external contingencies of life.

In both respects, as a morally good activity and in its dependence on external goods, happiness is tied to the human community (polis).

Epicurus

An important philosopher of happiness in antiquity is Epicurus , who lived from 341 BC. BC to 270 BC And founded the Epicurean school . He describes pleasure as the principle of a successful life. His position must not be confused or equated with that of Aristippus. For Epicurus, happiness is much more a freedom from displeasure than an unconditional surrender to pleasure. So it is the main goal of the Epicurean philosophy of happiness to achieve a state of physical freedom from pain by avoiding pain . This does not work through excessive enjoyment of worldly goods or indulgence, but through strategic reduction to the most necessary needs. Epicurus is of the opinion that someone who ventures very high also falls very low, so that extreme pleasure always leads to extreme displeasure. That is why he recommends a path of small happiness. The end of a letter to his friend Menoikeus has become famous: "Send me a piece of Kythian cheese so that, if I feel like it, I can indulge myself." ( 1 , p. 228) Epicurus himself actually stayed in his Last phase of life always with little luck, like this piece of cheese, which is not so surprising when you know its story a little better: He was expelled from Athens a total of seven times. His school was also burned down. Finally he retired to a garden. Epicurus' philosophy cannot be compared with that of Diogenes von Sinope , who took an ascetic attitude to achieve the state of bliss in renunciation. Through this ascetic lifestyle one can then attain a state of inner peace of mind by conquering the fear of death. Rather, Epicurus already believes that it is a happy life that man should strive for: "Happiness has a double meaning: in the highest sense it is like the deity, which allows no increase ..." ( 1 , p. 279) or even more clearly: “I don't know what I can even imagine as a good if I think away from the pleasure of eating and drinking , when I say goodbye to the pleasures of love and when I should no longer enjoy it Listening to music and looking at beautiful art works. "( 1 , p. 225)

The stoa

Completely different ideas of happiness can be found in the ancient Stoa , for example in Zeno von Kition , or in the Roman Stoa in Marcus Tullius Cicero and Seneca . They reject Epicureanism and raise virtue instead of happiness to the principle of life. Lust is rejected. For example, Zeno writes: “Desire is an unreasonable desire;” ( 1 , p. 59) or: “Pleasure is the unreasonable feeling of happiness about an apparently desirable thing.” ( 1 , p. 60) The achievement is different from Aristotle but also decoupled from happiness from political life, he who lives according to nature is now happy . Since only nature is determined by divine reason, whoever lives in harmony with the cosmic order and suppresses passions and desires is only called reasonable. Chrysippus von Soli writes, for example, in his book about the beautiful: "The law exists by nature and not through human statutes ..." ( 1 , p. 67) It is then reasonable to use virtue as the measure of action based on a certain judgment can be. One must be free of affects and indifferent to one's destiny ( apatheia ). Real freedom only exists in independence from external fate as well as from one's own passions and desires. In this way the state of ataraxía can be reached, which means bliss for the Stoics.

Happiness in medieval philosophy

The philosophies of happiness established in antiquity also dominated the subsequent epochs up to the modern age, they have even found their way into today's ideas of happiness. Many ideas from ancient notions of happiness are also borrowed from Christianity , which was so decisive in the philosophy of the Middle Ages , for example the idea of ​​asceticism, which can be found, for example, in Diogenes von Sinope, or a concept of salvation that the permanent state of happiness is not earthly, but only after death, in the hereafter , can be reached, as also described by Plato. In the New Testament , the idea of ​​happiness becomes particularly clear in the Revelation of John : “Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; ... and he, God, will be with them. He will wipe all tears from their eyes: there will be no more death, no grief, no lamentation, no hardship. ”(Rev 21: 1-5, standard translation ) Here again the thought of Epicurus is that happiness equates with freedom from pain can be found. In the Old Testament there are different ideas of happiness: the righteous, that is followed of the commandments of God will be rewarded in this life with a fulfilled life. Doubts about the correctness of this idea are already formulated in the Old Testament itself, for example in the book of Job , in which the unjust suffering of a righteous person is the subject. Here lies an important basis for ideas that have established themselves in the Christian church: salvation and paradise after the Last Judgment . In earthly life, for example, asceticism (cf. e.g. celibacy ) is preached and reference is made to happiness in the hereafter. The philosophy of happiness in the Middle Ages always refers to Christianity:

Augustine of Hippo

Augustine of Hippo , who lived from 354 to 430, wrote an entire book, De beata vita (On the happy life) ( 5 ), about human happiness. According to Augustine, love is the basic concept of ethics, which coincides with the human will . The ultimate goal of all human endeavor is bliss. However, man cannot receive happiness through satisfaction in goods from this world, but only through God. Only in God, as an immortal Creator beloved for his own sake , does man find fulfillment of his striving.

Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita

In so-called mystical theology, it is above all Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita , who lived around 500, who deals with the idea of ​​happiness. After him, the human soul longs for God . This longing can only be satisfied through a mystical union with God. Such a mystical union can only take place in the ecstasy in which man then also finds happiness. Dionysius writes:

"For by stepping out of yourself, free from everything being held and purely detached from ecstasy , you will be lifted up to the essential ray of divine darkness, dismissing everything from you and detached from everything." ( 4 , p. 89)

Happiness in modern philosophy

In the modern age , the various concepts of happiness of antiquity continue, with utilitarianism becoming the dominant philosophy in the Anglo-Saxon world and it still is today. In the United States of America today utilitarianism is practically the philosophy of the state. This direction was not able to establish itself to the same extent on the European mainland.

John Stuart Mill

A great philosopher of happiness was John Stuart Mill , who lived in England from 1806 to 1873. Together with his father James Mill and Jeremy Bentham, he is considered the father of utilitarianism. Mill builds a complete moral based on the idea of ​​happiness. He writes: “The conception for which utility or the principle of greatest happiness is the basis of morality is that actions are morally right to the extent and to the extent that they tend to promote happiness, and to the extent that they are morally wrong as they tend to do the opposite of happiness. "( 8 , p.12) There are to Mill so two basic strategies that can be followed, one is maximize happiness and the other minimize suffering (Leiden) , while happiness (happiness) is pleasure achieved (lust), while pain ( pain ) and the lack of desire is to be avoided. Mill quotes Epicurus and mentions him with praise, the strategy of minimizing suffering comes from Epicurus himself, maximize happiness is added. According to Mill, the task of society (the state) is to achieve maximum happiness for the maximum number of people. Mill goes further than Bentham and not only distinguishes between so-called higher and lower pleasures, but also gives people of different sensitivity and intelligence a different rating with regard to the principle of greatest happiness to the greatest number.

Immanuel Kant

For Immanuel Kant , the concept of happiness is more in the tradition of the Stoa. Happiness is equated with the main moral goal ( enlightenment ), happiness as a moral principle is initially rejected. He writes: “The essence of all the moral value of actions depends on the moral law directly determining the will. If the determination of the will takes place according to the moral law, but only by means of a feeling of whatever kind, which must be presupposed so that each becomes a sufficient determining factor of the will, and therefore not for the sake of the law; so the action will contain legality, but not morality. ”( 9 , p. 117) Precisely this rejection of a feeling, or the wish for happiness, met with immediate resistance. Friedrich Schiller wrote about it:

I gladly serve my friends, but unfortunately I do it with an affection
And so it often annoys me that I am not virtuous.

The concept of happiness that humans have is not tangible for Kant, since even the simplest inclinations fluctuate and the entire concept is therefore only temporarily valid even for individual concept definitions. Kant replaces the concept of happiness with that of duty ; happiness cannot be achieved during one's lifetime, because the pursuit of happiness limits action and duty. Nevertheless, according to Kant, one can make oneself worthy of happiness through moral action, which is why there is a God who allows worthy people after death the degree of happiness they are entitled to receive; here Kant again refers to the Christian eschatological principle. The theoretical synthesis of Kant is important here, as he implements the coupling of happiness to moral action, already called for by Socrates, by combining virtuous and happiness-striving action and seeing in the fulfillment of duty the way to the goal of happiness after death. For Kant, morality and happiness are part of a theoretical synthesis and cannot be separated from one another, but rather two conditions that can be reconciled to the best of our ability. Happiness becomes a moral task. The greatest good becomes an end .

Arthur Schopenhauer

For Arthur Schopenhauer the fact "that we are there to be happy" ( 10 , p. 233) is the innate error of man. This pessimistic basic conviction is by its very nature contrary to every pursuit of happiness, nevertheless Schopenhauer gives instructions for such a pursuit, man should not focus on external goods such as possession and reputation, but rather focus on the development of his own personality. For him, the greatest enemies of happiness are pain and boredom, although the latter can be overcome through spiritual wealth.

Friedrich Nietzsche

Friedrich Nietzsche has a completely different idea of ​​happiness; for him, happiness is not an externality that is grafted onto people, but an inwardness that is immanent in every human being. Nietzsche rigorously rejects the stoic fixation on virtue or even the general moral law of Kant. He writes: “The beast in us wants to be lied to; Morality is a white lie so that we are not torn apart by it. ”( 12 , p. 64) Epicurus, on the other hand, finds Nietzsche's approval, he sees in him an optimistic, life-affirming person in a difficult time; he asks:“ Was Epicurus an optimist - especially as Sufferer? ”( 11 , p. 17) Nietzsche does not reject all modesty, nor does he believe that happiness can only be found in the Dionysian, in this respect he is often misunderstood when viewed superficially. Rather, happiness is also something calm. In Human, All Too Human, he formulates three pillars of human happiness:

  • "The usual". Nietzsche writes: "An important genre of pleasure and thus the source of morality arises from habit ." ( 12 , p. 94)
  • "The Slow Arrow of Beauty". According to him, beauty must go hand in hand with calm : “The noblest kind of beauty is that which does not suddenly become carried away, which does not make stormy and intoxicating attacks (such a one easily arouses disgust), but that which slowly seeps in and which is carried away almost unnoticed and once again met the one in a dream, but finally, after long and humbly lingering on our heart, taking full possession of us, filling our eyes with tears and our hearts with longing. "( 12 , p. 43f)
  • "The nonsense". Nietzsche: “How can a person enjoy nonsense? As far as there is laughter in the world, this is the case; yes you can say that almost everywhere where there is happiness, there is joy in nonsense. "( 12 , p. 74)

Bertrand Russell

Bertrand Russell asks above all the question of the relationship between the society in which a person lives and the happiness of the individual. First he states: "When the basic needs are met, the happiness of most people depends on two things: their work and their social relationships." ( 13 , p. 152) Russell believes that society is central to the happiness of their individuals, in a bad society people are more unhappy than in one with a good social order. Russell considers society to be elementary, but admits that the other can also be a source of displeasure: “In most people's daily lives, fear plays a greater role than hope ; they are more filled with the idea that they might be possessed by others than with the joy they can create in their own lives or in the lives of others with whom they come into contact. "( 13 , p. 141) In the end, Russell also admits that happiness resides more in the individual than in the state. He writes: “If all people had the courage to live like this [without fear] despite adversity and obstacles, it would not be necessary for the renewal of society to begin with political and economic reform: all this followed without resistance from moral Renewal of individuals. "( 13 , p. 141)

Ludwig Marcuse

Ludwig Marcuse (not related to Herbert Marcuse ) writes a whole philosophy of happiness in his book of the same name. In this book he tries to summarize all the philosophies of happiness, starting with Job in the Old Testament and Hans im Glück , a German folk tale . Then he explains Baruch Spinoza , whom he quotes with the sentence: “I think in order to be happy” ( 14 , p. 18) - but also examines Seneca, Augustine, Tolstoy and many other philosophers. As with this work, Marcuse notes that there are as many views on happiness as there are philosophers. He asks: “Is it because of the philosophers who have never been able to agree? The word luck has something ambiguous in all languages. It is like a sun that has a host of word satellites around it: comfort, pleasure, lust, contentment , joy , bliss , salvation . ”( 14 , p. 20) Marcuse's book has more the character of a report than a report Rating. The only thing he doesn't like is the theory of the negativity of happiness, he writes: “Happiness is happiness.” ( 14 , p. 170) He means above all that happiness is not unhappiness, but something positively independent.

Criticism of happiness in the modern age

A critic of happiness is above all Friedrich Nietzsche who, through the positive notion outlined above, also worked out the idea that only the 'last person' strives for happiness, who is the 'last', because he can only relate to general and understands unchangeable terms and has forgotten that he developed these terms in his own thinking and history, i.e. that is, he has lost the ability to change his self-conception. In addition, Nietzsche opposes 'happiness' as the ultimate goal of human beings, because it makes all human beings equal, which for him is an act of violence that stems from the tradition of Western metaphysics. Nietzsche's criticism of happiness therefore positively focuses on the individual person who fails when he is guided by general terms such as 'happiness' inherited from tradition. The positive notion mentioned above is based on this criticism.

In the present, Georg Römpp is following this up, who in his 'Anti-Glücksbuch' examines the usefulness of the idea of ​​'happiness' for people and comes to an overall negative result. Römpp is based on a conceptual historical and conceptual analysis. On this basis, he comes to the conclusion that the pursuit of happiness is not useful for humans, (1) because humans strive for a 'whole' with it, although life consists of details, (2) because humans deal with it holds on to something that is too general and therefore loses contact with the real and the individual, (3) because people want to use it to measure and compare their own life and the lives of other people and thus begin to evaluate all life within a closed horizon, (4) because people can no longer accept other people in their individuality and also see themselves from foreign perspectives, (5) because people attribute a false and rigid self to themselves, which they seek to realize in an unfree way , and (6) because man thereby endangers his freedom by accepting the compulsion to have to become 'happy' in ways that have arisen in the tradition or by others be prescribed for the elderly.

Römpp thus contradicts the view that happiness must be the goal of the art of life . He even opposes the art of living to the pursuit of happiness in a positive way, because this art is able to dispense with false generality, fixed concepts and the orientation towards a false whole in the pursuit of happiness. Like all art, the art of living works on the individual and uses creative abilities to create something new, so that it is able to free people from rigid traditions that dictate what they 'ultimately' have to strive for . Overall, Römpp thus emphasizes the individuality of human life against the idea of ​​'happiness' and therefore comes to a radical criticism of this idea.

See also

literature

swell

  1. Diogenes Laertius : Lives and Opinions of Famous Philosophers. Felix Meiner Verlag, Hamburg 1967. (1998, ISBN 3-7873-1361-3 )
  2. Malte Hossenfelder (Ed.): Ancient teachings of happiness. Sources in German translation (= Kröner's pocket edition . Volume 424). Kröner, Stuttgart 1996, ISBN 3-520-42401-0 .
  3. Plato : Complete Works 1. Rowohlt, Reinbek bei Hamburg 1994, ISBN 3-499-55561-1 .
  4. Aristotle : Politics (Aristotle) . dtv Klassik, Munich 1986, ISBN 3-7608-3526-0 .
  5. Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics . Reclam, Stuttgart 2001, ISBN 3-15-008586-1 .
  6. Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita : From Names to Unnamable. Johannes Verlag, Einsiedeln 2000. Or at Quelle
  7. Augustine of Hippo : De beata vita . German text source , Latin original text source
  8. John Stuart Mill : Utilitarianism. Reclam, Stuttgart 2002, ISBN 3-15-009821-1 .
  9. Immanuel Kant : Critique of Practical Reason. Reclam, Stuttgart 1998, ISBN 3-15-001111-6 .
  10. Arthur Schopenhauer : Aphorisms for wisdom. Insel Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 2003, ISBN 3-458-31923-9 .
  11. Friedrich Nietzsche : The Birth of Tragedy. Outdated considerations, Critical Study Edition Volume 1, de Gruyter, Munich 1999, ISBN 3-11-016596-1 .
  12. Friedrich Nietzsche: Human, All Too Human. Critical study edition Volume 2, de Gruyter, Munich 1999, ISBN 3-11-016594-5 .
  13. Bertrand Russell : Paths to Freedom. Socialism, anarchism, syndicalism. Edition Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt 1971, ISBN 3-518-10447-0 .
  14. Ludwig Marcuse : Philosophy of Happiness. Paul List Verlag, Munich 1962. (1972, ISBN 3-257-20021-8 )
  15. Verena Thielen, Katharina Thiel (ed.): Classical texts for happiness. Parodos Verlag, Berlin 2007, ISBN 978-3-938880-10-4 .

Secondary literature

Other media

  • Josef Pieper: What does happiness mean? 1 audio cassette. Matthias-Grünewald, Mainz 1998, ISBN 3-7867-2141-6 .

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Friedrich Schiller: Works. by Julius Petersen, continued by Lieselotte Blumenthal, ed. on behalf of the Weimar Classic Foundation and the Schiller National Museum in Marbach by Norbert Oellers. National Edition, Vol. 1, Weimar 1943, p. 357.
  2. ↑ Georg Römpp, The Anti-Glücksbuch. Why luck doesn't bring us luck, A. Francke Verlag, Tübingen 2012, ISBN 978-3-7720-8454-6 .