Forums: Discussions for entrepreneurs and small business.

Happiness...the WE proposition. I firmly say that collaboration on a viable project is my definition of happiness. It is now, and it was as a child when i tried to get the family to understand what i wanted to do for everyone one summer, a matter of cooperation that makes me the happiest person i know, and that i understand. I do understand that outside factors are less important than an internal awareness of our our own realized potential. However, a firm commitment of valued players in seeing the project through to it`s goal of benifiting all involved is still best presented as the cause and enduring principle of happiness, that when business partners, family, community, or friends show the 5 c`s of kindness...that most projects and their outcomes are held in public scrutiny as being well thought out and an honor right back to the people who began and carried the idea through to success, to its fruition. When Kindness in business relations is surrounded by consideration,concern,care,cooperation,compromise there can be little argument that not only will the project have success, but everyone with a stake in it`s success will enjoy much genuine happiness for the formula of proper collaboration and partnership. This, most definitely includes all paperwork as a security detriment to backing out or sabotage. We must remember upfront and all through our vision of happiness, that we must insure unscrupulous people will not interfere. But also if we are to insure the basic idea of cooperation on into the marketplace, there is that simple reasoning of not apologizing as we select the right people. Again, my personal idea of happiness is that the right people will come together and promote my small business ideas as viable and worth their time in terms of profit for themselves...lift up the company by their talent and their creative imagination...and then take off on their own pursuit of happiness in various directions as they realize.  .  . Happiness Is The Expression Of One`s Chilhood Upon The World Of Business.

I think what you`re saying is similar to the philosophy (that I find the most harmony with) of Victor Frankl.  It`s not what happens to you, it`s your response to it (at the risk of sounding "PC" and cliche).  Happiness therefore is a DECISION.  You decide-- long before the nervous system transmits electronic impulses-- to be happy.  It`s a state of being.  A personal way about you-- the anecdote for this is (again) every miserable person you`ve ever known. 

There`s also a distinction between doing the right things and being happy, vs. being happy and doing the right things.  For example, another cliche is to be happy via an "attitude of gratitude" but perhaps it`s that happy people have that attitude FIRST. 

When you get right down to it, I think happiness has everything to do with the ability / willingness to choose it.  The choice precipitates, in my mind, the attitudes, etc.  

OR, maybe happiness is a self-fulfilling cycle?-- you choose to be happy, so you do things in a good spirit, and have a good attitude, and those things in turn produce results or stimulus that reinforce the choice / attitude so that perhaps happiness DOES result from outside stimulus-- with the catch being that unless the individual chooses to start the "cycle of happiness".

Hmmmm.  This is good food for thought though-- great thread.

-------------------------

Paul Strauss
www.ChicagoSuperConference.com

Happiness, as a descision to be happy, originates as the original concept of propriortorship of the original idea. The further proposition by members of the expanded partnership to take such idea not only to the marketplace, but also to the minds of the consumer, is limited only by agreement to the common goal and therefore the conclusion of said happy fruition by each collaborator in determining the profit of each member in his or her personal life. We, the original idea maker have no real concept of the furture happiness of each member other than the expressed belief that everyone will profit financially and therefore will determine their own expression of community involvement. 

OK, so I had a wonderful Cuban meal next door and I might have had an extra Mojito tonight, but...what???  I don`t get it.

-------------------------

Paul Strauss
www.ChicagoSuperConference.com

I say, once and finally, that two brains are better than one. In my childhood mind, my happiness depended on whether you were happy. As i matured, i realized that my happiness depended on realizing my own potential aside from yours except where yours enhanced mine and mine enhanced yours. I am only trying to say that we are intrisincly connected in our pursuit of happiness because of likeminded efforts to reach the same goal. And therefore if we bring a compromising reality to the marketplace that sells beyond our wildest dreams, surely we can appreciate the definition of happiness as a creative attempt to share the complete expression of individual childhood dreams in small business and shout to the up and coming entrepreneurs that the best idea of making a profit lies in the cooperation of individuals who are attempting to express their shared imagination to the customer and entrance them to buy value,discount,trust,vision,style,comfort, etc. while at the same time identifying with said company or brand over quick flavor or percieved need. P.S. this will be my last post. I am happy in my pursuit of my small business dreams.

LOL! :-) Never tell a philosopher there can be "little argument!"

But I see where you`re going, and I see your point. What bothers me is that this post indicates that you place your entire happiness in the hands of other people. Yes, you make the caveat the they must be the "right" people, but there`s no way to ensure that you have a system or process in place to determine those "right" people. That reminds me of "right-thinking" people.

My argument is that I`m not interested in placing my happiness in the existence of others. Of course my happiness often includes my response to the actions and attitudes of others, but fundamentally, my happiness is my own responsibility.

Daniel (frnchps) said:

I say, once and finally, that two brains are better than one.
I am only trying to say that we are intrisincly connected in our pursuit of happiness because of likeminded efforts to reach the same goal. And therefore if we bring a compromising reality to the marketplace that sells beyond our wildest dreams, surely we can appreciate the definition of happiness...

Paul (WCRTPSS) said:

I think what you`re saying is similar to the philosophy (that I find the most harmony with) of Victor Frankl.  It`s not what happens to you, it`s your response to it...

Okay, Daniel proposes that happiness is a consensus process. We have a response, but that response is inextricably associated with the people around us. My question would be, then, is it true that if we are castaway on a desert islad, it is impossible to be happy?

Paul, on the other hand, finds resonance with a philosophy that first says there must be meaning to life, and secondly, that our urge to find meaning is the fundamental characteristic of human psychology. He wonders if the idea that happiness is a response to five themes is the same.

This entire thread rests on the meaning of emotion. Emotions are not the same as feelings. Happiness is NOT a feeling, it`s an emotion.

Emotions are evaulations, calculated in memory (subconscious, but memory nonetheless), and based upon all same experiences with the "set" of a particular experience.

Feelings are biochemical events producing non-verbal sensory perceptions. We assign words to feelings, based on past experience, but those words are only an interpretation by the intellect. The feelings are pretty simple: pain, pleasure, like, dislike, anger, fear, anxiety, agression. It`s only the words that create what seem to be shades of difference.

An emotion is an evaluation---a judgement. Happines is a response to events, in which we evaluate our physical, emotional, intellectual, and imaginative status.

If we were to follow Daniel`s consensus philosophy of happiness, we would first have to set up some sort of authority body---the arbiter of happiness. If we follow Frankl`s philosophy, we would have to determine whether or not the meaning we assign to reality is true or false, then wonder if we`re happy because something is true, even if we don`t feel happy.

People make the concept of happiness too complicated. It`s because they don`t want to differentiate between feelings and emotions. Emotions can`t possibly be so "cold-hearted" as to be simple, or pure, calculations. Who says calculations are cold-hearted, or cold-blooded, or otherwise devoid of passion and love? Not me.

We can either shove the entire analysis of happiness into the growing bin of "things too hard to ever understand so we`ll just muddle along," or we can attempt to understand how those things actually work. Individualism is a philosophy that proceeds to that understanding.

Love, happiness, passion, justice, reality, spirit, quality---all these terms produce closed loops in a dictionary. They offer nothing, only other vague terms. "Love: a profoundly tender, passionate affection for another person." "Affection: fond attachment, devotion, or love."

The dictionary gets us nowhere. Is that good enough? Are we "content" (rather than happy) to go through life, each of us with our own personal definitions? Modern America is descending to the point where everyone seems to want their own personal set of laws. What happens to that cooperative venture of "society" and "culture" when everyone has their own kingdom, their own rules, their own laws, and their own definitions?

If you want to play Scrabble, you have to agree on a common language and dictionary. So too, if you want to reason, you have to agree that logic exists, definitions exist, and that the result of that reason is non-contradictory.

Daniel asks what is my "final" disposition on the definition of happiness? My final analysis is what I wrote in the first post to this thread. My only interest is in whether or not other people have reasoned out the (or a, or their) definition of happiness. :-)

I would say that while it`s not exactly my own view, that a critical component of happiness is finding meaning in suffering.  I`m 36 (on Tuesday), healthy, I have a good marriage-- healthy wife and son, I have all the money I need-- my circumstances are wonderful and I`m grateful for my current blessings, I`m also mindful of times past when things weren`t so good. 

My stress level was higher, and there were moments of frustration, but it would be inaccurate to say I was unhappy. 

Suffering in life is the norm-- it`s good times that are the exception.  This is why I think if you can`t find meaning in suffering, you have no hope of ever being happy.

One of the characteristics of GREAT people (if not happy people) is that they STICK in tough times.  If happiness becomes your idol, your holy grail-- and you add to that a definition of happiness that is dependent on circumstances-- you will flit off in search of it at the first obstacle, difficulty, or sign of struggle. 

In a more controversial, and non-PC aspect of my opinion-- I would say it is a character flaw to be in constant search of "happiness" in some magic circumstance.  Horribly "judgemental", I know.  But the fact is if I know this about you- how can I trust you?  Can I marry you, or partner with you in business, or even just have a semi-meaningful friendship?  Sure-- if things are hunky-dory.  But when the proverbial excrement hits the proverbial fan-- you`re outta here.  Or, you`re so unhappy as to be a basket case-- useless.

I`ve known people like this-- as I eluded to in my original post I think we are witnessing a collective generational hangover from the philosophy of "do whatever makes you happy".  All of the sudden the free-lovin`, good-time-rockn rollin` generation wants what I think every human being wants-- a sense of meaning.  What did it all mean? I think the conclusion has been that it didn`t mean much.

 

-------------------------

Paul Strauss
www.ChicagoSuperConference.com

Case in point-- read the Chicago Tribune Profile on Judy Mayotte today-- headline:  "I`ve Always Been Lucky".

Dig into the article you find that she works with refugees in Capetown, South Africa.  She was pushed out of her troubled home as a child, became a nun, and an international expert on the displaced.  She was stricken with polio and learned to walk again, after leaving her order to marry the love of her life- she was widowed, she became an acclaimed producer, and author. 

You know what she said when a relief pilot misdjudged an airlift of emergency food while she was working in the Sudan-- dropping a 200 lb bag on her leg, breaking it in 10 places, and jamming her knee into her femur so that her leg had to be amputated?  "Fortunately, the leg knocked off was my polio leg".

I don`t know about you, but I can count a half dozen people I know that a)  Haven`t done a 10% of the real, actual work she`s done; and b) who would have been down and out if any ONE of the tradgedies that have befallen her had happened to them.

Read the article and you find she`s quite happy.

-------------------------

Paul Strauss
www.ChicagoSuperConference.com

To: Craig. I`m very much a happy person for your approach to this thread. You have been a great host and given us thought to consider that happiness depends more on a person`s view from their unique and current position they have in life, rather than philosophical views of definitions based on altruistic reasoning. My offline message to you of a concrete final definition was met by you to say that you are foremost interested in the perspective of many people of their definition. I came back after reading your current message, to speak on specific ideas...and to apologize for running off in exasperation that no one thought me to be happy because i am gaining like-minded collaboration on small business ideas and that for right now, cooperation unto success has me elated with the prospect that many people will benefit from togetherness as we all pursue product,service,organizational ideas to their fruition of not only community awareness for our collective vision, but also from pure profit and monetary gain which is equally distributed to the owners of websites and products. My applause is to everyone who is working to the success of the overall vision. So...Yes. #1. I truly believe in Authority in any project. It comes first from the goal of the project and then is dictated by the mindset of the owners. I am happy first and foremost because I can rely on the authority and wisdom of My God above and beyond the authority of anyman, making it difficult for any one person to fool the team. #2. If i were on a deserted island without human contact i would only have a relationship with who i percieved in my mind to be that great spirit of Comfort. Everything i did to survive would be measured by my belief for rescue by concerned people who would tell me that they were there to help and that soon i would be free to once again join society. Above all, I believe that when either a man and wife or two partners in business are in complete agreement over life or business, it makes all the difference in reaching the agreed upon goals of success. Inextricably we are tied to each other. Without anyone else to share with...I can only be happy with the singular expression of creation, which is to find joy in the beauty and perfection of said creation. My God`s "do this" definition is yes, You are your brother`s keeper...and also that pure religion is this, that you lift up the widows and orphans. So, i am biased against an individual definition of happiness and i champion any partnership of cause based on the wonderfull authority we have in the words of many prophets who explain unity over individuality as the basis for lasting happiness. P.S. my Sister`s idea of being on a deserted island is to feast on seafood while getting an incredible sun tan. Beatle`s philosophy - Happiness Is A Warm Gun. Thanx Craig. Much can be said of individual happiness based on a person`s state and station. Currently...I am happy for like-minded friends.