Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Dennis Prager :: Townhall.com Columnist
Happiness Is a Moral Obligation
by Dennis Prager
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


For much of my life, I, like most people, regarded the pursuit of happiness as largely a selfish pursuit. One of the great revelations of middle age has been that happiness, far from being only a selfish pursuit, is a moral demand.

When we think of character traits we rightly think of honesty, integrity, moral courage, and acts of altruism. Few people include happiness in any list of character traits or moral achievements.

But happiness is both.

Happiness -- or at least acting happy, or at the very least not inflicting one's unhappiness on others -- is no less important in making the world better than any other human trait.

With some exceptions, happy people make the world better and unhappy people make it worse. This is true on the personal (micro) and global (macro) planes.

On the micro plane:

Consider the effects of an unhappy parent on a child. Ask people raised by an unhappy parent if that unhappiness hurt them.

Consider the effects of an unhappy spouse on a marriage.

Consider the effects of unhappy children on their parents. I know a couple that has four middle-aged children of whom three are truly extraordinary people, inordinately well adjusted and decent. The fourth child has been unhappy most of his life and has been a never-ending source of pain to the parents. That one child's unhappiness has always overshadowed the joy that the parents experience from the other three children. Hence the saying that one is no happier than one's least happy child.

Consider the effects of a brooding co-worker on your and your fellow workers' morale -- not to mention the huge difference between working for a happy or a moody employer.

We should regard bad moods as we do offensive body odor. Just as we shower each day so as not to inflict our body odors on others, so we should monitor our bad moods so as not to inflict them on others. We shower partly for ourselves and partly out of obligation to others. The same should hold true vis a vis moods; and just as we avoid those who do not do something about their body odor we should avoid whenever possible those who do nothing about their bad moods.

The flip side of the damage unhappy people do when they subject others to their unhappiness is the good that people do when they are, or at least act, happy. Just think of how much more you want to help people when you are in particularly happy mood and you realize how much more good the happy are likely to do.

On the macro plane, the case for the relationship between happiness and goodness is as apparent.

It is safe to say that the happiest Germans were not those who joined the Nazi Party. Nor did the happiest Europeans become Communists. And happy Muslims are not generally among those who extol death. The motto of Hamas and other Islamic groups engaged in terror, "We love death as much as [Americans, Jews] love life," does not appeal to happy Muslims.

Cults, hysteria and mass movements all appeal to the unhappy far more than to the happy. It is one more example of the genius of America's Founders to include "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" in the Declaration of Independence. No other major civilization so enshrined happiness as a core value. This American belief in the moral and societal merit in pursuing happiness is a major reason America has developed differently than Europe. The American emphasis on happiness is one reason no fanatical political or religious movement, Left or Right, has been able to succeed in America as such movements have repeatedly succeeded in Europe.

The pursuit of happiness is not the pursuit of pleasure. The pursuit of pleasure is hedonism, and hedonists are not happy because the intensity and amount of pleasure must constantly be increased in order for hedonism to work. Pleasure for the hedonist is a drug.

But the pursuit of happiness is noble. It benefits everyone around the individual pursuing it, and it benefits humanity. And that is why happiness is a moral obligation.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dennis Prager is a radio show host, contributing columnist for Townhall.com, and author of 4 books including Happiness Is a Serious Problem: A Human Nature Repair Manual.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Dennis Prager's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Happiness
is a perception of the individual. Some people in the middle east were happy after 9/11. Americans were saddened and outraged. People can read an article on this site and interpret in a hundred different ways.

Actually, since I'm up so late, I just wanted to be the first comment (never have before). :)

Yes!
Mr. Prager has eloquently described the importance of our social obligations. Bad moods are like colds: they should not be shared. Too many people believe that a good mood is unsophisticated or a sign of immaturity. They then poison the air around them, much like the man who sneezes on his colleagues.

Since I've started forcing myself to act cheerful (a great survival trait in my career as a teacher), I've found that I've actually become more cheerful. It's also made me a better teacher and better company.

Some of the grumps will condemn this editorial as "fluff". However, this article also describes successful people, regardless of politics. FDR and Reagan were cheerful and infected the nation with it. Who would any of us rather follow: Mr. Grumpypants or someone with an optimistic vision?

Fluff ?
What Dennis says is truth for the majority, but do not lump everyone in the equation.

A positive mental attitude does wonders for your motivation and success. Even Al Frankin might have done better if he wasn't always so down on everything in America.

There may be mitigating factors, such as pain. I had an ultra grumpy coworker at one job. When I finally asked him why he was always so cranky, he told me his back was screwed up and he was in constant pain, while taking pain meds.

So if you do know someone grumpy, cut them some slack and see if you can help them, instead of shutting them out and being grumpy right back.

Doesn't it flow better
here at TH when we have a few jokes going back and forth rather than some hopeless screed such as that from Aryling (who will not be missed)?

Vic
Yes I agree. And you made me think about it. Many of us Conservatives have posted a joke now and then. But I have never seen one posted by a Liberal. Have you?

To Goshawk
No I haven't. I have to be careful with my jokes, being exnav their mostly nasty so I can't put them on here.

Be as cheerful as you can
The old folks used to say "If you can't be cheerful, be as cheerful as you can." But don't go around telling people to cheer up or "turn that frown upside down." That grumpy co-worker may tell you that her mother has just been diagnosed with Alzeimer's and she has no idea how they are going to look after her -- or that her sister who lives 1,000 miles away has had a stroke and they don't know if she'll live through the night. A quiet, "Can I help with anything?" might do a lot more good.

While I agree that we should be careful not to take the World of One attitude that "If Mama ain't happy, ain't nobody happy", it may be as much as we can do to remain quiet and stay out of the way as we work through our personal misery.

As far as urging people to BE happy, remember that happiness is a result, like fame or money; you have to do something else in order to receive it. People who believe they are entitled to be happy never will be.

I remember a New Yorker cartoon of a man sitting at the breakfast table surrounded by a beaming wife and eight neat, well-scrubbed, beaming children as he opened a birthday card, and exclaiming "Why, Sally! I never knew you cared!" Sometimes we are already happy and we don't know it. And if you get to feeling like the world is a howling wilderness and you might as well howl too, just think of the plagues of Egypt and consider the fact that at this particular time, not a single one is afflicting you.

Ok,here is my contribution to the joke..
...of the day:


Barack Obama

I love a good laugh
and nam65-66 that's a good joke.

Hey if anybody wants a few chuckles I have some satirical chats with Obama, Biden, and the usual suspects on my blog if you haven't been there yet.
Just click my name and you are there.

My joke of the day is Tehran Kim. Wouldn't it be nice if we didn't have to see her usual hateful, angry rants?

The Rapier Like Wit
of Conservatives is unleashed in the above two posts. No wonder they need a laugh track in the the Half Hour News Hour!!!!!

Excellent article
This is a fantastic piece. Check out Prager's book Happiness is a Serious Problem. Really great stuff. I see, thanks Dennis for doing such a good job with the topic.

A good mood
and a smile can turn around many people. Also, if you put a smile on your face, even if you don't feel like it, you reap the rewards in double. I've had it happen many times.

This is a really good article by Mr. Prager.

Where I used to work
December was the happiest month because the boss took that month off.....and we worked outside in the cold.

To vespanat
No we don't need a laugh track, soon all the libtards will be here and we will be LOAO, particlularly at those foreign libtards who like to tell use cheeky Americans how we should run the country.

Vic
No liberal me, just don't find the above comments funny. I don't think Americans are particularly "cheeky" either. I'm not sure you understand what that means.
I don't think I've ever told Americans, "cheeky" or otherwise, how to run their country either (apart form voting in 1996 I suppose).
Seriously though I did chance upon a snippet of the Half Hour News Hour, it was very poor. I can't understand how a nation that can produce such comic genius as Bill Hicks, Seinfeld, the Simpsons etc can also produce such dross.
I hope you don't go down the same route that we have in Blighty, we can't seem to produce much decent comedy these days sadly.

Nam65-66
That really would be funny if it were not so tragically true.

A suggestion for Prager
I've listened to your show a lot Mr. Prager. And I've noticed that you are generally happy when you talk about "micro issues", and trivial things, like yesterdays hour on trivial Presidential facts. But when you talk about politics and the left, your blood seems to boil.

I've heard you advise others that, if something is making you unhappy, you should consider not doing it. Well, wouldn't you be happier if you gave up talking about politics? And if you would, don't you, by your standands, have a moral obligation to give up talking about politics.

I'm serious about this. I don't think you realize how much anger and hatred you stir up in people when you talk about politics. You stir up anger and hatred among your right wing followers toward people on the left, and you stir up anger and hatred on the left by a) the way you unfairly characterize and paraphrase their positions; and b) by the way you only look at the bad side of the left, and the good side of the right.

Dennis, for your own sake, and for the sake of the happiness of the whole country, drop the politics. Stick with the topics you enjoy talking about. I wouldn't listen anymore because I find that stuff extremely boring, but from listening to your show, it sounds like you would still have some kind of an audience. Apparently some people really appreciate your advice on these matters. Sure, you'd probably make less money, but you'd be happier. I guess you have to decide which is more important.

Phylo out.

Happiness

I've lived long enough to learn that happiness is
a gift you give yourself. Others can contribute
or take take away from your happiness but in the
end, it is up to you.

Good article.

Point Made???
Nam65-66 writes: Tuesday, February, 20, 2007 6:51 AM
Ok,here is my contribution to the joke..
...of the day:

Barack Obama

My joke of the day is Tehran Kim. Wouldn't it be nice if we didn't have to see her usual hateful, angry rants?

"Cutting, sarcastic putdowns"

Nam 65 - 66 - vespanat - Phylo
Phylo - So glad showed up - you mean you want Prager to be more like you? The milk of human kindness running through your veins and into your posts? puhleez ! Like " a) the way you unfairly characterize and paraphrase their positions; and b) by the way you only look at the bad side of the left, and the good side of the right." Be more like you huh?

Nam 65-66 - Funny, but I think John Edwards is much funnier - he thinks he has a chance !!

vespanat = you're a happy person too we can tell - I don't think Rosie or Jeanine R or Ellen D or Penn & Teller or the old wacked out foul mouth hippy are funny - they're potty adolescent rants are sad and deserving of pity, but ultimately a waste of time. There are lots of Good Comedians out there. Which ones do you like?

The 9/11 dancers in the streets weren't happy like Prager is talking about 'happy' - they were rejoicing fulfilled revenge - not a very happy occasion I'm thinking, like a new baby or a wedding, graduation, spring weather . . .

vespanat and Lynne
"Cutting, sarcastic putdowns"

Ah, how sad.

Webster's definition:
Sarcasm:
"a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language..."

Glad you enjoyed it vespanat.

Lynne,
Lefties have no sense of humor at all. They prove it over and over.


By the way, for everyone, I saw Tannabear on Hannity's America Sunday night. There was this Imam who almost said word for word what Tannabear usually states.

Thank you Mr. Prager
This is so fundamental that like many of the great truths, it's almost in danger of appearing trivial.
I have come to the same conclusion, brought home to me after enduring a personal tragedy. I realized in the aftermath that I had a couple of choices: to bleed onto others, or to tuck it away in the confines of my own heart. I concluded that the former--to wail and whine in grief, was a form of self pity. I know others' hearts wept for me, but I needn't push for more, take advantage.
We live in a society that encourages the purging of your pain in public, the venting of your anger, the telling of all the wrongs done to you. I think the psychology of this is seriously wrong: to vent anger just fans its flames, to whine and moan doesn't "get it off one's chest"... it just begets more whining and moaning. Habit forming.
Our own unhappiness unfairly burdens others...worse than second-hand smoke, I'd be willing to bet.

I Love Texas
Not sure if you were being sarcastic (it's always hard to tell in print!!). I am quite chipper today, in work with nothing too pressing.
Comedians I like would include from Britain; Ricky Gervais, Reeves and Mortimer, Peter Kaye, some Monty Python, Fawlty Towers etc. Not sure if many of them are known across the pond.
US comedians who have tickled my funny bone would include; the afore mentioned Bill Hicks, Chris Rock, Christopher Guest (more a writer than a comedian I suppose), Seinfeld (more the show than his stand up), similarly the Simpsons, when I lived in the States the only part of SNL that made me laugh was Norm MacDonald doing Weekend Update, he was suqsequently dropped. Go figure (as you Yanks would say!!). I think I must have caught it well after its Golden Era.
Rosie O'Donnel from what I remember is excrutiatingly bad. I quite liked the Ellen Show before she got too 'lesbiany', I'm no homophobe but don't need to be preached to.
Any current US comics (of whatever political persuasion, funny is funny whatever the views of the comedian) anyone can recommend?

One Current US Comic...
... who seldom fails to make me laugh is Jeff "You Might Be A Redneck" Foxworthy but I don't know if his shtick would translate well to English (as opposed to Amerengspanish or whatever it is we speak here).

re: Vic
Vic wrote:

"No I haven't. I have to be careful with my jokes, being exnav their mostly nasty so I can't put them on here."

>>

Yep. You can take the squid outa the navy, but you'll never get the navy outa the squid =)


Even ten years out of the service I still find myself saying, "Aye! Aye!" and occasionally referring to "ladders", "overheads", "bulkheads", the "head", and sometimes remind my wife to "dog the door" (ie: lock the deadbolt). And those are just the *clean* examples ;)

To Liberty First
I've been out for 30 years and I still say "overhead", "field day", "ladder", etc. Somethings are never lost.

OK, here's my joke for today involving bovine flatulance: The UN wants us to give up eating now as it reults in GW.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0220/p03s01-ussc.html


What is happiness?
Mr. Prager is absolutly correct. As a liberal and Buddhist, I agree with him completly. He is correct that happy people bring happiness to others and improves quality of life for all of us. Happy people do not comit crimes and are more likely to help others.

First what is happiness? There is no offical medical/psychological definition. We know mental disorders including depression. But not happines. We Americans confuse happiness with pleasures. Therefore we tend to pursue materialism and view happiness as selfishness. Being we live in a materialistic society, we view our happiness with what we have/do not have in comparission to others.

So what is happiness? Accoriding to the Dali Lama's book "The Art of Happiness" and in a recent article in Scientific American Mind, Happiness is:

1. Compassion, doing for others. People who volunteer are generally happy people. Try to help make other people happy.
2. Learning to live in the present moment. Do not think about past or the future. Engage in the present. You only experience life in the present.
3. Do not focus so much on goals and career. Find balance in life. The middle path.
4. Practice moderation. Do not grow attachments to things.
5. Strive for contentment with what you have.

The above is not easy to do. It takes time, practice and mental conditioning. We already have what we need to be happy. We just don't know it yet.

In this vein..Morality can be defined as, do your actions casue suffering or happines to others?

So as Americans who value the Bill of Rights and the "Pursuit of Happiness" - A qustion for you conservatives - Why not allow gays to marry if it brings them happiness?

Great Article!

Count me among those who has always viewed "the pursuit of happiness" as a self-centered thing; just another perk that made it cool to be an American. It never occurred to me that there was a moral imperative hidden in there. What an insight!

Many thanks for the eye-opening article, Mr. Prager. And many thanks to the posters who illustrate the spirit of this piece.

Phylo, chill out.

Blimey, You've Done It Now Stedes!!!!!
what with the whole suggestion of gay marriage thing!!! Not a popular proposition in these pages I've found.

Prepare yourself!!!

Your hate avoids finding us funny
How many liberal professors can you get into a VW van?

9 if they squeeze in really tight, 37 if you use a woodchipper.

AudiR10 writes:
"remember that happiness is a result, like fame or money; you have to do something else in order to receive it."

The only precursor to happiness is contentment. One is not content because one is happy, but one is happy because one is content. And contentment, unlike fame and money, is purely the result of a frame of mind.

happiness
Where I spend my time and money is where my heart will be.

Lincoln,the pursuit of happiness,onjokes
I think Lincoln said it best:
"People are about as happy as they make up their minds to be"

I still think it is the pursuit of happiness that we as human beings
have to value as an inherent right for everyone.

Thus, that is why
I am for opening up citizenship to all of good will
I am for changing laws to make gay marriage legal (or is that
hedonist?)

Prager I think writes this is the challenge to Americans to not
inflict their unhappiness on others. Can you do it?

On jokes:
Doesn't it seem that Barack is the happiest, most self-confident
Dem nominee. No joke.
I told a joke yesterday on Donald Lambro's article and people
took offense. So I won't repeat it here. I think it was a cultural
thing. You decide.

Hedonism versus happiness
The principle is valid, but the challenge (as the columnist points out) is the distinction between hedonism and happiness. Many, perhaps most, of the college students I teach are convinced that easy classes, casual sex, and liberal quantities of alcohol are the “pursuit of happiness” alluded to in the Declaration of Independence. Now that I’m in my forties, of course, I can see the recipe for disaster: Easy classes = no job skills; casual sex = inability to form deep relationships/ STI/ unwanted pregnancy; binge drinking = alcoholism. At the same time, try telling a drunken fraternity/ sorority lightweight that they are pursuing a path that will not bring them happiness. As an interesting side observation, I also find that – the older I get – the more I look at politics with an eye to what will bring the most happiness to the most people over the longest period of time, rather than what will bring a small group of people the most pleasure at the immediate moment. I believe that’s why conservatism is more commonly associated with age, and liberalism more popular in one’s youth. As Speaker Pelosi said, “the gavel is now in the hands of the children,” or words to that effect.

Good article

I agree with AudiR10 and Pappy Michael. It is hard to be "happy" when you are in constant physical pain. My family has a hereditary gene for a neurological disorder. My mother had it, as does my sister, as do I. We have lived in pain all of our lives. None of us has succumbed to pain killers, but both sis and I have had many surgeries.

Mother is now gone, and I am 57 and sis is 56. We have both had a hard time being "happy" over the years, but I find much contentment in the simple fact that we have survived. That has been quite an accomplishment for two people who have contemplated suicide so often over these many years.

I regret inflicting my depression on my co-workers for over 35 years. And, as well my spouse of 30 years and our only child, who was born, thankfully, without my disease.

I can say that I am now happy. I drew inspiration from the great southern writer William Faulkner, whose novels all involve survival during the dark years around the time of the American Civil War. The greatest achievements of his protagonists, usually poor blacks, was that they endured, survived, and even thrived.

Amused by the Passing Parade
Odd for Americans, reading our British counterparts promote comedy to stimulate happiness. “Are you having a laugh?”

Did everyone intentionally overlook Dennis Miller? He was the SLN golden era 400 lb. gorilla doing Weekend Update. Look, I like the blue comedy boys as much as the next guy, they’re as American Comedy as it gets! Dennis is the thinking person’s comedian. Where do you think John Stewart saw inspiration for his cerebral twists of personalities and events?

Thank you Dennis Prager for distinguishing happiness from pleasure! The first may precipitate the later. But you’re correct, the pursuit of pleasure never leads to happiness.

MORALE OBLIGATION?
We seem to have entered an age with great propensity to moralize everything valued as good or bad. Sure, for selfish reasons, a pursuit of happiness is beneficial. Also, happiness has an evolving effect on the micro and macro levels. But to assign a moral obligation to the pursuit of happiness is absurd.

There is nothing in the major religous texts nor in the trends of natural science that obligates an individual to the pursuit or attainment of happiness. If anything, the excessive commitment to happiness can be construed as detrimental. Americans often move too far toward becoming whores to feeling good. There is a balance. Short term happiness, for instance, does not always result in long term happiness. A pedaphile obtains happiness in ways that are clearly against the greater good.

The term "moral obligation" is a tool of the religiously, simple minded in an attempt to control the behaviors and outcomes of the greater society. Sure, let's bring to the surface the benefits of happiness in our daily lives. Moralizing applies a disfunctional lable on activities. Moralizing is rooted in emotion and mystical thinking. Leave moralizing to your pulpits.

Kodiak & Col. Dan
Kodiak - Good post! Col Dan - kinda sad.

Society today equates happiness with self-gratification. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

True happiness comes from looking out for the needs of others - or what you might term "moralizing". It's a Biblican principle that has been taught for thousands of years.

As a law enforcement chaplain, my husband had to take a class on police burnout. Those officers who took time to help others through their church or their community (like Toys For Tots, etc.) had significantly less depression that those who went out drinking with buddies.

Our church took a group of high school/college kids to Mexico to built a community center over the Christmas holidays. One guy who went was battling depression. He came back a new man because he spent time with those less fortunate than himself. He was doing physical labor (which helps with endorphins that effect emotions) as well as handing out coats and blankets to little kids. The look on his face when this little 4 year old boy have him a huge hug after giving him a jacket was priceless. This young man got his eyes off himself and his problems and concentrated on others. He's a changed man since then.

You want true happiness? Look to the needs of others. Imagine what would happen if we all practiced this! The world would be a much better place.




Excellent article and posts!
Happiness is a state of mind. "If you can't change your circumstances change your attitude" will often fill the bill.

Physical pain is so difficult. My heart goes out to you sdan.

Kath: Worthy of note: I have an old Medical Text from the 1950's. The prescription to cure Meloncholia (depression) was to prescribe that the patient do something for someone less fortunate than him/herself.

I've never met a self-centered person who was happy. Self focus means there is always some perceived shortage or slight. ME ME ME is a prescription for misery.

Happiness as a mindset
Waski wrote:
"Some of the grumps will condemn this editorial as "fluff". However, this article also describes successful people, regardless of politics. FDR and Reagan were cheerful and infected the nation with it. Who would any of us rather follow: Mr. Grumpypants or someone with an optimistic vision?"
------------
I completely agree about successful people. It seems to me that happiness is most abundant amongst people who take personal responsibility for their lives. Likewise, the most miserable people I know are those who always have an excuse or someone else to blame for their shortcomings. It's forward thinking versus backward thinking. I've never met a miserable, forward-thinking individual.

Perception and mitigating circumstances
conservativefuneraldirector writes: :"Happiness is a perception of the individual. Some people in the middle east were happy after 9/11. Americans were saddened and outraged. People can read an article on this site and interpret in a hundred different ways."

True enough. However, one of the points Dennis makes about happiness is what psychologists call the "locus of control". His emphasis is on taking control of your own happiness, to the extent you possibly can. Outside events will have an inevitable impact on your happiness, but most of the time you have a lot of control over how happy you are.

To Pappy Michael: There are always mitigating factors. It seems to me, part of having a happy disposition entails not having to badger others into being happy. If you're generally happy, you can tolerate more unhappiness in your surroundings and cut people more slack. The last thing you want to do is allow your mood to be held hostage to another's mood.

(And as always, sometimes it can't be helped. But even if you're in a bad environment, you have a lot of power to not make it any worse.)

Bush Lied us into Iraq
We would be much happier if it weren't for Bush's lies and the greedy oil companies that got us trapped in Iraq and caused the deaths of thousands of troops and millions of innocent Iraqis.

(Note: Kimbat is off today and asked me to fill in. She gave me a copy of her standard responses to all TH columns. There are only two to choose from, but they are pretty much identical)

Happiness through rebellion
Our forefathers through rebellion and hatred of a tyrant king, pursued their happiness fighting for life and liberty.

They knew what suppression was. I think they would be in awe at how much supression we take from our very socialist oppressive gov of today, compared to then.

Wrong Analogy
This article is a timely reminder to a country where depression is allegedly on the rise and newspapers obsess over the impending doom of either the environment or of Palestinians at the hand of Isrealis.

At the same time, Prager's body odor analogy is quite flawed. In many parts of the world, body odor is not regarded as offensive; in fact, Americans are more obsessive about eliminating body odor than any other nationality in the world. That's fine for us, but it's only arrogant to assume that everyone else should follow the same standard.

Different cultures have a tendency to place an emphasis on different virtues. So while Africans, for example, take little notice of body odor, they fastidiously wash their faces after every meal, comb their hair, and keep their skin moist with lotions. They consider it deeply wrong to pass someone on the street without greeting him.

There may be countries where melancholy and a stern demeanor are more of a national trait than a spiritual problem; if so, then we shouldn't waste our breath condemning them for being the way they are. It is also helpful to remember that there is such a thing as a false smile. It is possible to communicate deep happiness, joy, and satisfaction without smiling, just as it is possible to be "clean" without wearing deodorant.


Feelings trigger actions
I made up my mind a long time ago to be happy. Until Mr. Prager reminded me that happiness is a character trait, I hadn't thought of it that way, but I agree. We have no right to dump our moods on others, unless they are good. Dour, unhappy people spread their moods like germs. But happy people can spread cheer the same way, and we happy ones should launch a new campaign every day to infect as many people as possible with the happiness germ. A smile and a cheerful countenance is a good place to start. As one commentator said, acting cheerful makes you feel cheerful. Our actions trigger feelings, and our feelings will trigger actions as well. Be happy!

No jokes in this post, but how about ..
.. some semi-serious, semi-philosophical definitions?

Joy (aka happiness): what you experience when you attain your values

Value: that which you seek to obtain or retain

Virtue: the actions by which you seek to obtain or retain your values

----and now for some whiny analysis----

I'm sure that a suicide bomber feels a perverse kind of 'joy' just before he blows himself up. After all, he has just attained his 'value' which just happened to be the destruction of innocent lives. In his loony-tunes world, his action is 'virtuous', truly deserving of multiple virginal defloration rewards in his benighted paradise.

So, it comes down to this: happiness depends on your value system. So, the 'pursuit of happiness' (per se) cannot be defined as a universal 'virtue', although it has come to be known as the foundation of a free society.

Values, on the other hand, make all the difference.

Somewhere in all this is a clue to WHY conservatives are losing the MORAL debate.

[whine] Oh fudge, it's just 'too hard' to think about all this serious, buzz-killing stuff. Much easier to slouch off into another night of mindless gluttony and leftist debauchery! [/whine]

Joy vs. Revelry
Joy has the same prerequisites as love, as Paul of Tarsus once stated so eloquently. For those of you who brought your Bibles, turn to First Corinthians chapter 13, verses 4 through 7:

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."

Revelry rejects those restraints; it is an immature attitude towards "fun." (Paul hints at that observation, contrasting love with childishness in verse 11: "When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child.") Joy (and love) require moral discipline. But some cultures are less moral than others; thus some adults are less grown-up than others.

Truth from Lies/Lines
Colenel Dan:
Ronald Reagan, for whom I’m sure you have undying respect, profoundly said, “facts are funny things.” He was I’m quite sure, very happy at the time.

Who is morally obliged to deny good and surrender to bad? Are you the arbiter, to whose detriment? I quoted Mr. Prager here earlier; “distinguishing happiness from pleasure” is a moral absolute.

Truth and moral absolutes are inextricably joined. Deny one, you forfeit the other.

“Behaviors and outcomes of the greater society” are what we’re all trying to influence here. Moralizing displays absolute truth. Appealing to emotions only satisfies the senses.

Icedog:
Tough assignment, heh? For the record, as of this writing, you’ve been commissioned to repeat the same two points we’re been reading and listening to for four years. No wonder they seem identical to you. Continuously repeating anything that long has to be annoyingly repulsive, causing one to become, might I say, conspicuously repugnant, even to yourself. Take a breath, look around, entertain another line, or two. Tell Kim (or whom ever) for me to do the same.

Alan:
Well done there, brilliant corollary, love and happiness!

Where did my post go?
Now I know my post was not offensive at all, and it pertained directly to the article, so I am offended that it was removed!

stedes

Your post started will enough. The concepts of happiness you mentioned are also found in the Holy Bible.

Oh, and the reason they are so hard is because of our sin nature. However, with the new nature of Christ, we allow Him to express His perfect nature through us.

How does one get a new nature? Consult the "Owner's Manual" for that. It has a lot of other great ideas as well.

Let's tackle your question, "Why not allow gays to marry if it brings them happiness."

Well, golly, stedes. If we are going to refer to the "Owner's Manual" for some things, wouldn't you think it would be wise to consider it what it has to say? As a Buddhist, you are O.K. with homosexuality? It sure doesn't say much for the Buddhist religion as far as I am concerned.

You may think what the homosexual couple even does in privacy wouldn't effect others. But, think about this.

What is the real worldview of those who engage in that sort of behavior. Are they relativistic, do they believe in right and wrong, do they believe in being held accountable and, even more so, are they aware of the Law of Unintended Consequences? If they can wade through those questions without any guilt or shame, I would have to say their conscious has been numbed.

Now, outside of the bedroom, how are they going to act? Most likely, they would be demonstrating the same values in the workplace, politics and the culture. If you had to pinpoint where bad behavior emanates from, I leave if for you to answer that question.

voice of reason

I disagree with you on your definition of "joy".

For me, joy and happiness are two entirely different emotions.

Happiness is something that is usually temporary, like my team won the Super Bowl or my kid had a good time today or I won a couple of bucks in Vegas.

Joy, on the other hand, is an inner satisfaction that comes as a result of special relationships. For instance, it has been mentioned about the hardships several of the bloggers had gone through or are going through.

Happiness is very fleeting for them, but often when they sense joy, it comes knowing that someone cares for them, that someone will be there in their time of need. It is when the deep felt compassion of one person is expressed to another. It is when tears flow knowing you are loved.

It is longer lasting and far more meaningful than happiness can ever be. It is the "glue" that makes relationships far more caring than it might be otherwise.

Is joy a value? Well, not really. Values come from your worldview and, in turn, determines you behavior. If your worldview consist of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, then it is His joy that is being expressed because although the joy of a human may be compassionate, the joy of the Lord is truly pure and loving.

voice of reason

I would like to tackle the moral debate issue you say the Conservatives are losing. Perhaps I can give you a clue.

Perhaps it is because the Conservatives you have come across do not know how to frame a debate. It takes practice as certain rules have to be adhered to.

The liberal places a lot of their value on knowing how to debate and frame their issues. It is important for them to "win" the battle on the intellectual battle field. Their problem is that their arguments are framed from the emotional aspects of an issue instead of a rational perspective.

For instance, the Buddhist asked earlier, "Why not allow homosexuals to marry if it makes them happy?" (See the posting at 1:36 a.m.) Too many of the Liberals arguments are based upon, "If it feels good, do it."

The Conservatives, on the other hand, are lazy. They whip out the Bible and slam around some verse much like they were throwing gospel grenades hoping it will land some place and blow their opponents argument up.

Until they learn to philosophically express a Christian viewpoint on a particular subject, they will usually screw up their talking points.

As an example, take the simple question of, "Why does a Christian go to work?" The answer is NOT to make money. Until they learn the answer to that question and others like it, they cannot advance to the more difficult social issues being discussed today. Thus, they don't leave the impression they want to leave nor does their opponent benefit from the exchange. We just wind up in shouting matches with each other using a lot of name calling.

Personally, I enjoy the spew being thrown around here. I like rolling around in the mud a little myself. Does that make me a hypocrite? Maybe, but I don't care and it doesn't bother me because I know when I am doing it and I can turn it off without getting heated up about it. I think there are a bunch of great verbalizers on TH and I have really grown fond of a lot of them. I look forward to seeing who is tossing the ball around and who is going to get whacked. Great sport as far as I am concerned.
So, sock it to me!!!

The pursuit continues ..
Sonny,

I don't object to your definition: happiness is a transient, ephemeral version of joy - which, you state, is a more lasting emotion.
That is analogous to a statement that an emotion is a 'transient' thought, not always representative of a fully-reasoned, rational, cognitive response. By this definition, an emotion can be subjective (or even wrong). Sort of like an instant 'barometric' response, but one that may have to be replaced by more deliberative thought. People who are more objective in their thought processes (and values) are more likely to experience an objective emotional response - which is consistent with the fully-reasoned thought that follows.

Example: [whine] I really, really want to watch the Superbowl on an expensive 100" plasma HDTV [/whine] - but the tradeoff is that I have to put my kids in a sub-standard public school. A subjective emotion may pull me momentarily in the direction of the splendiferous TV; an objective thought soon replaces the emotional pull, but only if I VALUE the education of my kids.

With the definitions understood - let's stipulate (in the context of a discussion about the 'pursuit of happiness') that we're talking about a lasting joy (aka happiness).

No doubt we can ascribe all the ills of leftist ideology to the whiny 'it feels good in the short term, so it must be OK' mentality. Although it does apply in some cases (e.g. drug use, casual sex etc), that is an oversimplification in the larger context.

Why is it an oversimplification? Contrary to popular conservative analysis, mature leftists ARE capable of thinking long-term. Consider a semi-trivial example: leftists are often quite conscious of healthy diet & exercise. If their world view was one of instant gratification, that would hardly be the case.

So, if leftists ARE capable of long-term thinking, why does their world-view not reflect that? Thomas Sowell touches on this topic in his "Vision of the Anointed", but he stops short of exposing the 'values' inconsistency. We should also ask ourselves "Do modern-day conservatives espouse a consistent world-view"?

I am interested in identifying the reasons why mature, intelligent people (of both left and right persuasions) choose an inconsistent value system.

Comments, anyone?

PS: joy is not a 'value' (per the definitions in my previous post: joy is what you experience when you attain your values).

PPS: not all conservatives are religious.

Also, I [usually] don't 'spew'. To me, the desire to spew is a transient, emotional, subjective release. I usually delete that impulse before I hit "Post Your Comments" and replaced with 'reason'.

Otherwise, I wouldn't be worthy of my screen-name!

voice of reason

Your answer to my post induluges in dialouge which uses a vernacular that I am not used to and may also be difficult for others to understand on this thread as well. It is not the normal conversational language most people use to convey their thoughts.

In your effort to justify your screen name, I guess you may feel it is the only language you can use. Most of the others who post on this site articulate at about the same level. To attempt to hold yourself above others in the way you express yourself lessens your ability to engage with a wider number of posters. I want to spread as wide a net as I can when I communicate. You are not offering yourself that opportunity.

As an illustration, to be absolutely honest with another person, I try to create the image of "dropping my pants". I think you can picture the vulnerability it puts oneself in. If I want another person to trust me, I must do or say something to the other person that says, "I trust you". They most likely will say to themselves, "Well, it looks like he trusts me. Maybe I can trust him". Once they feel they can trust you, they will "drop their pants" and you can continue with your relationship on a equal footing. True and long lasting friendships have been fostered through trusting relationships.

As for your question, "Why mature, intelligent people chose an inconsistent value system?"

In my 2:01 posting, I mentioned that everyone has a worldview. Some are absolute and some are not. The first question that must be answered is what make a mature person and what makes an intelligent person.

Obviously, age does not make one mature. I think with men, the "little boy" in him really never goes away. The "little boy" has just gotten older. Thus, there must be another standard. I believe men have three main responsiblities in life: being a husband, a father and a provider. Each is difficult in its role. Some men do well at one, maybe two, but all three requires being a "seasoned" person. Thus, as a man tackles all three roles, (much like a juggler with three balls in the air) the more experience he gains, the more mature he becomes. He learns to have balance in his life and takes each challenge as they come and using the experience he has gained provides an example to others of how he handles what he is confronted with.

As for intelligence, education is usually the first thing that comes to mind. However, with me, it is wisdom that is more important. I could be the most well-read person in the world, but if I was unable to apply it into the world in which I live, all that knowledge would have little or no value.

An inconsistent value system, I believe, comes as a result of a person not being able to determine for himself his worldview. I also think it comes because he is not mature, thus does not have the wisdom to understand the centrality of all things.

Where is the center of the universe for a person? Is it himself or something outside himself, thus greater than himself?

The question is timeless, but nevertheless, an important one and one, I believe, that must be determined if you want to have a consistent value system.

The absolute in my life is that Jesus Christ is the Creator, Sustainer, Redeemer and Judge of ALL life. If you choose to believe that, then you study Him and His ways. What He says about Himself is that, "I am the way, the truth and the life..." Since He is truth, then that answers the question of what truth is. Since He is the way, I learn His way of doing things and since He is life, I also learn He is willing to impart His life in me.

If that is my worldview, that also establishes my values which, in turn, governs my behavior. By spending enough time in a personal relationship with a Living God, the values I possess are not my values but His. Unlike myself, His values never change and I can be confident that my values are consistent and exhibit His wisdom and not my own.

Inconsistent values are elusive for all humans because of their sin nature, but with the new nature of Christ, we learn His ways are higher than our ways and His thoughts are higher than ours. I, therefore, lean not on my own understanding, but trust in the Lord that He will lead and guide my paths to bring glory to Him and not to myself. I do this on my own free will.

Sorry about the language ..
.. if I didn't present my point clearly, I apologize.

I have posted some of our dialog on my blog. Since Prager's column is no longer posted on the 'current' list, it may be easier to continue our discussion at:

http://voice.townhall.com
feel free to visit and add your comments!

Homosexulaity and bad behavior
Sonny

You are making all these judgements on immoral homosexual behavior based on what? The Good Book? Scientific data? What research do you have? You have no data or facts to support your assertion that homosexulaity is the basis of bad behavior. Show me the data and I will reconsider my position.

To make blanket statements on the immorality of homosexuality based on belief is not a basis for public policy and is pure ignorance.

My position is not if it feels good do it. My position is if it brings you happiness and society is not hurt, then let them be. I do not judge people by some arbitary book of beliefs. Our role in life is to bring people happiness.

As conservatives you support the bill of rights, The pursuit of happiness and government out of people's lives. Unless you do not like it, then you want the government to step in and regulate behavior. You cannot have it both ways.

BTW - I speak for myself, not for Buddists or Buddhism.

stedes

Aren't your judgments based on your opinions and beliefs?

How come you get to do it and I don't.

It sounds rather hypocritical to me. Doesn't it to you?

You want me to support my position factually yet you are not doing the same. This conversation is going no where if your opinion is the only one that matters.

Happiness is just a temporary moment and evidently you are unaware of the Law of Unintended Consequences.

How can you say unequivocaly that society is not hurt by homosexuality. Do you have any proof that it isn't?

Homosexuality by ANY standard is deviant behavior. It is unacceptable if a society is to stay civilized. The people who engage in it are debasing society, not adding to it. If you are married with children, are you O.K. if your children engage in it? Would you say pornography is O.K. and society is not hurt by it? Would you say gambling and drunkedness is O.K. and society is not hurt by it? How about drugs? Are you O.K. with that too?

As John Stossell(?) would say, "Give me a break!" The underpinning of any GREAT society is determined by the values and morals of its people. Maybe you haven't noticed, but this country is reeking with immorality, our children are leaving school functionally illiterate, our prisons are bulging at the seams, our rehabilitation centers can't take care of all the needy people.

Yes, stedes, American is NO longer great. We are bankrupted financially and imploding from within. We face threats from the radicals in the Middle East, our immigration policies are useless, the Consitution is being stomped on daily, and you think homosexuality is not harmful.

In effect, stedes, you are greasing the wheels on the path to decadence. You can either be part of the problem or part of the solution, The choice is yours.

Happiness is a moral obligation
This is one of the best articles I have read. I sent the piece to many as an interesting read but more importantly I believe it is essential for teenagers to read and discuss. Teens have a tendency to become dark and negivitive. This article would help give them the perspective they badly need during this time. I printed the article and put it on my refrigator after I asked my youngest to read it.
Thank you Dennis Prager-on target once again.

Sonny
I just want to say I really enjoy reading what you have to say. Your writing style is very fluent and cogent. It's quite apparent who has the most influence your life.
God bless.

Ya Gotta Have Guilt
Dennis said:

"For much of my life, I, like most people, regarded the pursuit of happiness as largely a selfish pursuit. One of the great revelations of middle age has been that happiness, far from being only a selfish pursuit, is a moral demand."

So now it isn't enough punishment that someone is unhappy, he should feel guilty too? Apparently it isn't enough to pursue happiness, one must do it from a sense of duty. I have this vision of people grimly determined to be happy, no matter what the cost, lest God frown upon their failure comply with His command.

I guess that it is an improvement on those people who think we should feel guilty for being happy while there are others who are unhappy.

Too bad Dennis didn't hear his hero, former Senator Santorum, say that the problem with America is that people are "pursuing their own happiness". That's right, Santorum is opposed to the pursuit of happiness.

And people wonder why he lost.

yes--happiness is an obligation
I have been listening to a downloaded podcast of your discussion "Happiness is a Moral Obligation." Loved it.

I was fascinated by the number of people who seem to have missed your point about HAPPINESS AND PLEASURE NOT BEING THE SAME THING.

I would have to agree for the most part with Aristotle, who believed that happiness is a function or result of actions that are in accord with "arete," a Greek term that can be translated as virtue, or probably better as "excellence."

We are happiest when we are acting up to our full potential as human beings. Happiness is something we do, something we choose to do, not something that falls upon us like bad weather or the flu. These are unpleasant, but they are unrelated to "happiness" when it is understood in this fashion.

And since as you (and Aristotle) observed, none of us live entirely unto ourselves (that is, our understanding of excellence involves relationships with others), happiness truly is an ethical or moral imperative. I owe it to my family and to my community to strive to be the most excellent human being I can be. I also owe it to myself.

So yes, I shower regularly both for myself and for others. It is a debt I owe both.

Personally, I also believe happiness--the pursuit of excellence as a human being--is a debt of gratitude I owe to God.

Thanks for your thoughts. Be Happy.

Cafe Au Lait and Beignets
Oh yes happiness is the answer. But my good friend Prager does not realize that he has in fact made the argument for the left. French people are oh so much more happy than are Americans. They follow love where it takes them and don't abort a romance because a stateless and enslaved people turned to genetic ties rather than land to determine their nationality. Fidelity means so much more to people on the left than where they deposit their bodily fluids. Fidelity means that each days love must be earned and love is therefore wonderfully and completely selfless. French people take four week holidays with their families instead of buying the latest material possession. Doctors in France know that they can help anyone in need, not just those that can pay. The stupid and incompetent are allowed to share in the wealth created by the gifted. The gifted work for pride and for excellence. Being a judge in France is honor. They don't have to be paid like tobacco lawyers to live a life of service. The French don't pretend to live by absolute biblical principals and then pick and chose what they like. They use the gift God gave every one of us, our conscience. They don't make the easy decisions of the closed mind they make the hard choices based on all Gods gifts, their culture, religion, and literature. They know that happiness does not come from personal wealth but the small things that can be shared with all, health, love, and friendship. A Frenchman sitting at a cafe at the end of his life can know that he lived in a great culture, that values family over money, friendship over avarice, and honor over the empty pretensions of pretended moral absolutes.

Those of us who live and love humbly know a happiness that many in the United States will never understand.

It's a State of Mind thing
Happiness is a state of mind. A mature person finds happiness in the things they do daily. I have seen people make a wreck out their lives, seaching for the something that would make them happy. After all, if they had it, they'd be happy, right? Last week, Harry Reid was being interviewed and described himself as the eternal pessimist. He assumes things will go wrong so he won't be dissappointed. What a way to live your life!!!

Liberals and their lies
Sonny writes:
"I would like to tackle the moral debate issue you say the Conservatives are losing. Perhaps I can give you a clue." (SpiderMBA: I can hardly wait)


The liberal places a lot of their (sic) value on knowing how to debate and frame their issues. It is important for them to "win" the battle on the intellectual battle field. Their problem is that their arguments are framed from the emotional aspects of an issue instead of a rational perspective. ("Debate and frame their issues." So that's what Al Franken and his fellow leftists on Air America did when they insanely ranted and raved, calling conservatives lunatic names...)


"The Conservatives, on the other hand, are lazy. They whip out the Bible and slam around some verse much like they were throwing gospel grenades hoping it will land some place and blow their opponents argument up."

(SpiderMBA: Liberals debate and Conservative are "lazy" and "whip out the Bible" while "throwing gospel grenades." No generalizing here by Sonny...)

"Until they learn to philosophically express a Christian viewpoint on a particular subject, they will usually screw up their talking points."

"As an example, take the simple question of, "Why does a Christian go to work?" The answer is NOT to make money."

"Personally, I enjoy the spew being thrown around here. I like rolling around in the mud a little myself.
So, sock it to me!!!"


(SpiderMBA concludes: My observations of liberals, generally speaking, is that their agenda of bigger government, more welfarism, more socialism, more class warfare and race warfare, less freedom, more abortion, more homosexuality and fewer family values - this liberal agenda is promoted through lies and fear and hatred.
Lies such as "it isn't a baby, it's just a bunch of cells" are repeated endlessly. Norma McCorvey wasn't really pregnant when she became the "Roe" in "Roe v. Wade" and claimed she was pregnant.

Liberals don't really "support our troops" when they demand we cut and run from Iraq.

Liberals don't really support the Constitution and Founding Fathers when they demand more taxes and bigger government, though they pretend otherwise.

Most importantly, liberals aren't the "intellectuals" they are always pretending to be.

Lies are what liberals use to promote liberalism more than anything else. It's terribly offensive of them.

What a bunch of crap
This is an over-simplification. And as a stereotypical position does not offer a true insight in to what is important. The position is a weakened water-down example of conservative core values. Watered down only by the qualification that this “pursuit of happiness” is not to be associated with hedonistic pursuits. Clearly, however, what makes on person happy may infringe upon the happiness of many others. What makes one person unhappy make create happiness and joy for many others. Since it’s such a hollow position without much substance other than Dennis’ typical self-serving statements which support his agenda, there’s not a lot more to say.

CRAP ???

Prager's ideas are straight from the books and teachers of liberal therapists?

Happiness is just as much left as it is Right. Mr. Prager's therapy actually works... and it's FREE!

Thanks Dennis... you rock!
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.