11. What We Strive For

11.4 Happiness

Let us move away from examples that relate only to people’s social needs, and look at a value that many consider the most obviously important: happiness. In 11.2, my main argument against wealth as a fundamental goal was the observation that wealth and happiness are not equivalent. So have we not already found everybody's fundamental goal?

I can rephrase the description of the hierarchy of needs from “needs that human beings have” to “things human beings need in order to be happy”. So obviously a value system based on “happiness” covers the entire hierarchy of needs, from enough to eat to self-actualization.

From a biological point of view, happiness is just a feedback system of our body (happiness hormones). What makes us happy is a mix of what is innate and what is learned. That food makes us happy is innate. That a stamp collector is happy to complete their collection is learned.

But this description does not help us in the slightest to understand what makes someone happy, what a happy society looks like, or what consequences such a society would have.
We can of course fall back on the goals of freedom and wealth: if I am allowed to do anything (freedom) and have enough money for it (wealth), then I can do anything to become happy. So it is understandable that freedom and prosperity count as the great promises of Western democracies: What makes someone happy differs from person to person. With freedom and prosperity, everyone can pursue it for themselves.

The major problem I see with leaving it at freedom and prosperity as society’s goals is that it means everyone is left to pursue their own happiness alone, using these tools. But in the many futurities in this book, we have seen how much better a large community is at achieving goals together, rather than each person striving alone. Aiming for the common goal of “happiness” does not actually help in designing futurities that work towards it. For this chapter, it therefore misses the mark.

A second major problem arises from defining happiness as a biological state: if happiness is a feedback system of our body, is it really always identical with what we actually want? If I read a dry book in order to acquire knowledge, I may have to force myself to read it. I do so because I believe it will make me happier in the long run. For example, because I need that knowledge for my dream job. And of course, it is great that human beings are capable of this kind of delayed gratification (ability to plan). But I find it problematic that someone who constantly chases the happiness of the moment (and therefore, for example, eats far too much) does not by any means become happy in the long run. Should the short-term pursuit of a goal not also help in achieving it long-term?

Let us look at long-term happiness. If our body lures us onto the wrong track in the short term, does happiness at least in the long run line up with what we really want? A description of happiness is not enough to answer that. After all, what each person really wants differs from one person to another. But the way the human body functions and processes happiness hormones is the same for everyone. So here is a thought experiment by which each reader can decide for themselves whether the happiness reported by their body really matches what they want:

You are offered the chance to lie down on a cot and be connected to IV lines. Heroin is injected through one of them. Heroin causes the release of happiness hormones, you will be happy. The dosage is chosen to ensure that your receptors do not become desensitized, so the happiness lasts in the long term (as long as you remain on this cot). The cot is a technical marvel that supplies your body with everything it needs. So you could remain healthy and live to a very old age on this cot. And you would be very happy for your entire life. Would you do it?

Each reader must answer this question for themselves. I would fight with all my might against being placed on that cot. And I think, and hope, that many others would feel the same. But why is that?
It is because happiness is only an approximation of what we really want. An intuition of our body. But one that can, in fact, also be wrong. Different people desire different things. Yet there are some things that make every human being happy, simply because of how the human body functions. Our minds can only somewhat influence what makes us happy. But we can still want those other things.

So we can absolutely decide to do things that we believe are right, even though they do not make us happy and will not lead to more happiness for us even in the long run. Perhaps because we want to support other people, or an idea. We are not happy while doing it, and yet we still do what we are convinced is right.

So while “happiness” is treated in just about every self-help book as the obvious goal of all striving, we keep looking. For a fundamental goal that cannot be reduced to absurdity. One that actually helps each individual make decisions. And helps a society choose which utopias it wants to realize.