Interesting discussion. But I am not sure that there is a a clear link between truth and happiness?
Neither!
Happiness leads to narcissism and is mostly temporary, and not as important as we think but it is very good at making us do stuff we don’t need in order to feel good.
What is important to the human is Meaning. Happiness is temporary and The truth is always out of reach and suffers the null hypothesis.
The meaning we attach to things such as happiness or our perceived truth.
Meaning is laden with bias.
But we don’t like that paradox, and so we eat more than we should, belittle women and children unethically, buy more than we need, believe in things without doing the research.
Anything to keep us happy and an illusion of understanding the truth.
That’s why it’s called ‘retail therapy.’
We are the Eternal Child that refuses to grow up, as Dr Clive Bromhall would say.
"Faith is here a man's best treasure / Dhamma practised well brings happiness / Truth is really the sweetest of tastes / One living by wisdom they say lives best."
[Sagathavagga (The Book with Verses), Samyutta Nikaya]
There is a famous quote in sanskrit " Satyam Shivam Sundaram", which translates to Truth -Godliness- Beauty, but in life what I have experienced and heard from elderly people as well, Truth is the best path to adopt but we must be aware of the fact that truth will always be closer to Godliness but it will not be always beautiful. Both have a definite role in our life happiness and truth, but under some circumstance we may choose to deviate for a greater good.
Truth is relative. Therefore, “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” The science of rights:
https://www.academia.edu/37021128/Scientific_Proof_of_Our_Unalienable_Rights
Timaeus: As being is to becoming, so is truth to belief. (Timaeus 27c–31b)
Albert Einstein's thought on thermodynamics:
“A law is more impressive the greater the simplicity of its premises, the more different are the kinds of things it relates, and the more extended its range of applicability. (..) It is the only physical theory of universal content, which I am convinced, that within the framework of applicability of its basic concepts will never be overthrown.”
Dear Marko Vitas ,
“discovering the truth is a joy.”
“Joy” is happiness.
Relative to “Albert Einstein’s thought on thermodynamics,” which aligns with my work. And on that note, I must ask the question, is Einstein the “truth”?
Is Darwin’s take on evolution the truth?
Is Satyam Shivam Sundaram’s translation the truth?
I’m more inclined to say that it is one’s journey [Life] having freedom [Liberty] discovering one’s truth [the pursuit of] resulting in joy [Happiness]. Hence, one’s innate unalienable rights of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” as claimed by Thomas Jefferson.
In a letter to Isaac H. Tiffany, on April 4, 1819, Jefferson wrote:
“Of liberty then I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will: but rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will, within the limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’; because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual.”
It would seem Jefferson was referencing the “Golden Rule” the foundation to civility. Civility embraces a moral order that guides individuals in the prudent exercise of judgment. An individual in a civil society strives, albeit imperfectly, to be virtuous, restrained, ethical and honorable, respecting and embracing the unalienable rights of others. On the other hand, education in the diversity of truths is a prerequisite in discovering one’s truth resulting in “joy.” However, forcing one’s truth on another “is often but the tyrant’s will and always so when it violates the right of an individual.”
Dear Michael T Takac and readers,
yes, thermodynamics is a truth. Dawinism as well. The same applies even in a certain sense and extent to the Newton mechanics.
I do not agree with a premise, the the law is a result of tyrant's will. On contrary, law means protection and consequently freedom. The tyrants are the one who dislike to obey the law.
Regards ...
Dear Marko Vitas , & readers,
Thank you for sharing your philosophy, in part, on “the truth.”
The French economist and philosopher Frederic Bastiat stated in his book, The Law:
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused man to make laws in the first place.”
If the law protects and embraces the individual’s unalienable rights, the ethical application of the physical constructal law, then society becomes alive. For example, the dendritic patterns in the evening satellite image between the south and northern regions on the Korean peninsula, implies the south is more alive than the north. It is obvious the law in the north is different than the south.
It is the government who creates law. The question is, when does the government (the ruling-class) becomes a tyrant. According to the ruling-class, those “who dislike to obey the law,” are criminals.
Michael T Takac , for me the government is a tyrant when it acts on my behalf without my explicit (and uncoerced) consent, which is always. The only alternative to tyranny (a short-term semblance of stability and security achieved by popular, complexity-reducing measures) is an individual-centered anarchy (for no work is ever done collectively: a man works alone).
Dear Martin Klvana ,
Thank you for sharing “the truth” relative to your philosophy.
Martin Klvana
as much i see your points, your claim that a government must seek your consent on everything they do is setting you to be the tyrant?
A ship cannot be steered by committee?
Ralph Samwell , a government can do anything it wants, i care not, after all, it is not my government, but if it acts as if on my behalf and coerces my consent, which is always, for everything the government does is financed by the fruits of my work (which the government steals from me on almost daily basis), i can properly label the government tyrannical. But i do not seek approval for my views and i do not impose my views on others; but i do express my views, in many ways, from time to time, and i have fun doing it.
Martin Klvana
It can, relatively temporally, do anything it want's including acting on your behalf, which you do care about.
I fully support your right to expression, otherwise I wouldn't be asking. But in your view a government is tyrannical, assuming your not living in N Korea, then isn't that relative as well?
As you said, you're [lucky] enough to live in a non-tyrannical place where you are able to express your views.
Many aren't as fortunate as you?
Ralph Samwell , "you do care about" do i? about what? and how does a government know what i care about without consulting me? and yes, a government can act on my behalf without my consent, and it does, which is why the government is tyrannical -- which i have already explained; "isn't that relative as well" and?; "as you said" no i didn't; "many aren't as fortunate as you" and?
Dear Michael T Takac and readers,
Crime is not tied to the ones social background. Once law is violeted there is a crime. However, it is in general more easy to put in jail a pickpocket than a member of ruling class or perhaps is even better to blackmail him.
Regards ...
Martin Klvana
1. well this is about caring for happiness and you claim to be having fun but also state you don't care.
2. you claim to care about governments that are tyrannical over your life.
3. and stated, you are not consulted.
4. if you insist a government consults you on decisions, surely that makes you a tyrant?
5. if you gov was completely tyrannical, you wouldn't be having this conversation or you'd have been arrested by now.
In terms of Adlerian Psychology and Prof. Jonathan Haidt's work; what ever your perceptions of your gov. it is still your choice over how you view it.
or as the great Stoic Nelson Mandela said; "You can imprison my body but never my mind!"
This is a debate on happiness, i'm assuming from your comments, you believe gov has a role on your happiness?
Ralph Samwell ,
1. having fun living according to my principles, one of which is not caring about governments; fighting the system supports the system: so i don't fight the system.
2. no, i don't (viz. 1); just that i label a government "tyrannical" does not mean it bothers me: it does not: i am far beyond it.
3. yes, i am not consulted, and it does not bother me, and i am not surprised i am not consulted by a group of people that i don't ask to consult me.
4. i don't insist on anything; but i could and the government and its supporters might label me a tyrant -- would it bother me? no.
5. on the tyrannical scale from 1 to 10; tyrannies 1 and 10 may differ in some details, but principally they are the same.
No, government has no role on my happiness. i merely commented on a question by Michael T Takac ("The question is, when does the government (the ruling-class) becomes a tyrant.").
1. pointless to mention, as it doesn't involve anything other than yourself?
2. pointless to mention, as it doesn't bother you, nor do you care, and of no relevance to anything except yourself?
3. pointless to mention, as you're not bothered and therefore having nothing significant to mention for others here that do?
4. pointless to mention, as there is no insistence on anything, other than yourself?
5. pointless to mention, as you see no differentiation between governments?
How far do you take you view on 'happiness'; is it completely an internal loop where only you are the keeper of your happiness and everything else irrelavant and pointless? If a 'man works alone' why bother replying, why bother commenting at all? Is your happiness completely based upon being pointless?
Ralph Samwell , in a sense, yes: surface precedes body, line precedes surface, point precedes line . . .
Martin Klvana
Would you go as far as to say, all human reality is illusory and therefore inevitably you make your own?
Do you have a thought on a purpose or point of/for individuality?
Everything precedes illusion, even individuality?
Dear All,
In live which is the more important, the truth or happiness ?
The two are important. One may easily assumes that since the two are important then one should not have to choose which is more important. This is a serioius mistake. Truth in the sense of doing of what we feel is right is more important than choosing the path that seem to be the one necessary for our happiness. Choosing the path that seem most likely to bring us happiness is most of the time choosing the path that will make us the most unhappy. Because the paths of quick gratification do not bring us happiness which is not a short term affair. Because the paths of most likely long term social success are also not going to bring us happiness because they are mostly based on superficial social illusion that social prestige and money are the pre-condition of happiness. Happiness only comes about at the risk and at the cost of doing what we feel is right in spite of our social fears of loosing what is socially most superficially important. This fear of loosing that is not an illusion, in many cases it will materialize in heavy negative social consequences. But happiness will result anyway. There is no happiness without paying a price. Free happiness, quick gratification usually comes at the price of happiness. Happiness is not easy. If it was, we would all be happy already and it only come at the price of following the truth, at whatever price.
Regards,
- Louis
P.S.
John 14:6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
Matthew 16:24-26
24 Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 25 For whoever would save his life[a]will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. 26 For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?
Ralph Samwell , two quotes (on which i will not comment) from Kōdō Sawaki:
(1) [N]othing is really happening. Nothing is ever happening, no matter what seems to be going on—that’s the natural condition. Illusion means losing this natural condition.
(2) One at a time people are still bearable, but when they form cliques, they start to get stupid.
Dear Martin Klvana ,
With that said, do you find “Kōdō Sawaki” to be “the truth”? If so, is that truth more important than “happiness”?
Interesting discussion. But I am not sure that there is a a clear link between truth and happiness?
Dear Leonid V Vladimirov ,
“The truth” is relative to one’s philosophy. From Greek φιλοσοφία, philosophia, translation, "love of wisdom." One may say, the wise and ethical embrace of one’s philosophy results in “happiness.”
Truth and happiness are complementary to each other. Both are expected and essential for a meaningful life.
Michael T Takac
Dear Michael, thank you for your comment, However this coincidence is accidental and is unrelated to the discussion.
Charalampos Triantis Martinos
Is that so? - I am surprised. I believe in quite opposite - in real, common life - not in research - of course
Dear Leonid V Vladimirov ,
I was trying to answer your question. Perhaps, it was your question that “is unrelated to the discussion.”
Michael T Takac
Dear Michael, maybe my question was not so closely related to the discussion, BUT your answer/comment was unrelated at all. It was directly related to etymology but not to the issue of this discussion.
Very interesting discussion by all colleagues.but I think that truth results in happiness.
Both truth and happiness are forms of illusion, in pursuit of which human life and living seeks fulfillment and satisfaction, and ultimately, salvation.
For Fans of the movie Matrix, I have one question, “blue pill or red pill”?
I disagree with Dr. Shakir. True is relative as is happiness. The mantra “ignorance is bliss” sheds light on the fact that the human condition doesn’t find happiness within the weight of truth and reality.
Enjoying the response, Love and Grace to all,
Christopher
Michael T Takac , three more quotes from Kōdō Sawaki:
(3) Good and bad are relative concepts, which don't really exist. It's the same for truth and illusions.
(4) You must be beyond good and evil ... happiness and unhappiness, true and false.
(5) [I]s there any reward that could make you happier than settling your ass onto your sitting cushion ...?
I see two present faults;
1. the population are promised truth and happiness after they die.
2. the population are sold happiness and an illusion of truth through consumerism.
In life, which is more important, the truth or happiness?
Relative to my philosophy, “the truth” of the universe is to evolve. During the evolution from inanimate to animate the pursuit of survival became a positive feedback event for all life. Positive feedback evolved into the emotion of “happiness” for humans. The strive for happiness embraces evolution.
On the other hand, many humans may find unhappiness knowing the truth of the meaning of life is only to evolve. Therefore, “happiness” is more important than “the truth.”
Perhaps, evolution is not the end all to the truth. And in saying that, there may always be uncertainty in knowing “the truth,” but there is no question about the emotion of “happiness.”
Dear peace is more important than happiness because with peace happiness can be enjoyed.
It's hard to strictly define concepts like truth and happiness. Lao Tze said: "Tao can be described, but that's not the accurate Tao."
Dear Emmanuel Ifeanyi Obeagu ,
Good point about “peace”! But I’m incline to say it is the fundamentals in the ethical pursuit of happiness results in “peace.” And in the end, one’s “enjoyment” of peace, is the perpetuation of happiness advancing humanity to new levels in the evolution of a civil society.
And on that note, please allow me to expand on my last reply to Reham Almosawi question:
In life, which is more important, the truth or happiness?
Again, relative to my philosophy, "the truth” of the universe is to evolve. During the evolution from inanimate to animate, maintains freedom in the pursuit of survival, became a positive feedback event for all life. Positive feedback for humans evolved into the emotion of “happiness.” The strive for happiness embraces evolution.
On the other hand, many may find disbelief (unhappiness) knowing the true meaning of life is only to evolve. And in those cases, the drive for “happiness” is more important than the truth.
Perhaps, evolution is not the end-all to the truth. And in saying that, there may always be uncertainty in knowing the truth, but there is no question about the emotion of “happiness”; hence, “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness,” and that human emotion, seems to be a part of the physical laws of nature:
https://www.academia.edu/37021128/Scientific_Proof_of_Our_Unalienable_Rights
In Indian philosophy, truth and happiness both are identical. So, realization of truth means you are happy.
Iamblichus: Knowledge of the gods is virtue and wisdom and perfect happiness, and makes us like to the gods.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology
- Emotional Psychology
- Happiness