The word 'geluk' has two meanings in Dutch. One is 'fortunate, lucky' and implies a sense of fate, the other is 'feeling, showing or expressing joy, satisfaction'. They do not always go hand in hand. People born with a golden spoon in their mouth are certainly not always happy, nor are people constantly dogged by bad luck always unhappy. This article is about happiness in the sense of satisfaction with life. It is about valuing one's own life as a whole.
How
happy are we?
In
the press and in novels we read primarily about unhappiness. In scientific
publications too we more often read about sorrow than about
joy. Is unhappiness really the rule? Not in Holland in any case where sample surveys invariably show that an overwhelming majority of the population think of themselves
as happy.
What
determines happiness?
Unhappiness is often
associated with illness and disadvantage, happiness with social success. People who hold this viewpoint plea for investment in health care, social security
and schooling. Some believe, however, that happiness is mainly in your head. People holding this viewpoint recommend all sorts of different therapies. There is also an age-old belief that
attributes all unhappiness to a depraved society and believes that
happiness can be found by withdrawing from
the world. Is one of these beliefs better than another?
Research
shows that happiness depends, to a considerable extent, on the quality of life of a society. The
more prosperous and secure (safe) a
society, the happier the people are who live in it. Once a society provides the basic needs, freedom
plays an important role. Evidently, the more freedom people have to choose how they
want to live their life, the happier they are if, that is, that freedom includes the freedom of choice. A strong welfare state is then less necessary.
In
wealthy western societies we do not see much difference between the rich and the poor. Evidently, our level of prosperity is already so high
that a little more or less does
not make much difference. High incomes
have to be earned and work does not always
breed happiness. A wealth of human contacts
is more important for happiness. People
who live alone are in general less happy than people who do
not, and people with no friends have less pleasure in life than people with friends. Having children does
not make a difference here. Childlessness seems to be compensated for by contacts with adults. Only the very elderly who never had children are worse off, probably
because their close friends are no longer around.
The biggest differences in happiness can be attributed to physical and mental health. That physical health is important will surprise
nobody. What is surprising is that the effect of serious disorders is quite small. Psychological
disorders have more of an effect, even lesser disorders such as mood
changes and neurotic behaviour. A lack of social skills also seems to eat away at happiness. The idea that people are happier if they withdraw from society has not been proven to be a generality. Rather, it seems that at all levels
people are in general happier the
more they do participate.
Can
happiness be fostered?
Together with all the advice
over the years for a happier life comes the
warning that happiness cannot be changed much. Some religions preach that people cannot escape their fate and some philosophers believe that happiness is relative and that chasing after it will get you
as far as a mouse in a treadmill. While others
say that happiness is a fixed trait and as such is practically unchangeable Research
shows, however, that happiness can indeed be fostered. On one level by improving
society and on another by strengthening the personal qualities that are needed to function in that society. Humanistic organisations have something
to offer at both levels. To improve the quality of life in a society, social security must first be addressed. For third world countries this means addressing economic growth and human rights first. Wealthy countries profit more by promoting individualism. In all cases citizens should be encouraged to take destiny into
their own hands. Patiently waiting for
Big Brother is usually not very profitable. These
views play a role in humanistic development work.
In
our wealthy country (Holland), unhappiness is not often a
matter of a material shortfall. Aid in the form of a cup of soup has lost its meaning. Our shortfalls are found in the social/emotional sphere where need is less easily alleviated by subsidies and professional
advice. Aid is here more a question of
organised solidarity, one of the pillars of humanistic welfare work.
The social skills needed to be happy differ somewhat from society to society. In an individualist
society like ours it is very important that you stand up for yourself and that you forge intimate relationships and keep them. This can, to a certain extent, be learnt. Taking this into account,
humanistic welfare work focuses primarily on fostering the ability to manage
for oneself. In this area
as well, the humanistic organisations contribute their mite. The art of living is
important too. You must also know how to make something beautiful of life. To do this you have to know how to find the right
models, not only personal interests and goals in life, but models to help you experience wholeness. Quite a
task, because the standard models no
longer pertain to the individualised people of today. Humanistic organisations are also helpful in this quest. The humanistic media helps us learn about one another, humanistic socio-cultural education helps people broaden their interests and
humanistic observance offers modern
forms of expression.
Does
happiness really have to be fostered?
For
some, happiness is the greatest good and
the value of all actions should be measured
by the degree in which it contributes to
the most happiness to the greatest number of people. Many religions
see this differently and place more value on human suffering. The
critical philosophies regard happiness as unattainable in any case
and, thus, need not be aspired to.
In this case research can only give a limited answer. Research into facts cannot determine whether enjoying life is morally better than suffering from it. Research statistics do offer some insight into the consequences of some viewpoints and show to what extent seeking happiness meshes with other values. In this connection research was carried out into the extent to which happiness brings out the good or, precisely, the
bad in people. Research shows that happiness does not make blinkered individuals of people. Quite the reverse, it broadens a person's outlook. It has been found that happy people function better in relationships with friends and family;
they are more open, and more
independent as well. One striking result found is that happiness is good for your health. Happy people live longer.
Happy
citizens are shown to be beneficial to society. There is for
example a clear relationship between happiness and tolerance. Happy people
need fewer scapegoats, give more of
themselves for social organisations and are, perhaps, more sensible
voters.
In
short, fostering happiness gives you more than just a more
pleasant life. In a number of ways, happiness can make
life 'better' as well. Reason enough to give happiness a helping hand.