T-block
B2B TST
Have we even defined "happiness"?
Are we taking it to mean "satisfaction with one's life"?
Are we taking it to mean "satisfaction with one's life"?
-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
can money directly lead to happiness?
- Thread starter Ocean
- Start date
- Status
We all know what happiness means without needing to define it or pin it down. You will never know happiness, because you're a ness main.
T-block
B2B TST
I don't even play 64 lol
I guarantee that different people have different definitions of happiness =P
I guarantee that different people have different definitions of happiness =P
materialism is progressive... why do you gain happiness from things you buy? from the feeling that these things are awesome, are that they're amazing etc. and operating under these assumptions, as there will always be better things, materialism itself dictates for you to get it. btw, under that same assumption, the select few that can afford it is relative to the society's amount of money, so in our society there are still only a select few.
Why do you have a little ness head then?
And why do you not know what happiness is if you don't main ness in 64?
T-block
B2B TST
I definitely would main Ness if I played 64.
It all depends really on what a person derives happiness from, if people find happiness in friends/family then money would be a less significant factor and therefore would not make them happy if they had to work to earn the money and spend less time with family.
Now if someone derives happiness from material wealth then it would lead to a lot of happiness, but this could lead to negative factors like paranoia. Such as when meeting new people if you value your wealth you could believe that others only want you for your wealth. This could then lead to depression and loneliness which would therefore make your unhappier for being rich.
Of course there are exceptions in all situations, like a lottery win. This could make a person who values family over wealth happy for having money, but could also lead to issues within the family, arguing over inheritance for example.
Now if someone derives happiness from material wealth then it would lead to a lot of happiness, but this could lead to negative factors like paranoia. Such as when meeting new people if you value your wealth you could believe that others only want you for your wealth. This could then lead to depression and loneliness which would therefore make your unhappier for being rich.
Of course there are exceptions in all situations, like a lottery win. This could make a person who values family over wealth happy for having money, but could also lead to issues within the family, arguing over inheritance for example.
*First post in here :D*
I think first we need to define happiness itself. There are many levels of happiness such as "that feeling you get after a hard day's work", "the feeling of content one feels when surrounded by a wonderful family and great friends", and "the ecstasy of winning a huge lottery jackpot".
I would probably define happiness as the range of emotions that contributes to an individual's well being. I would focus on any person's (or being's) most basic needs for content. This is the notion of security.
Before love, fun and games, and materialistic desires, our needs at the most basic level are food and shelter (though the latter is arguable). In a developed country such as the USA and in this modern age, the likely methods to obtain these basic needs is through bartering (likely using money) or thievery. In this sense, having money gives us comfort as the very possession of it leads to the acquiring and/or maintenance of these basic needs. Without it, the stresses of just staying alive start to come up which hinders these positive emotions.
After security, then we can fulfill our more important desires like paying off our hydro bill, electricity, and focusing on family and friends. Money is essential for the first two, but the second two are typically free in which money isn't desired.
This leads to materialistic desires. We'll buy all our unnecessary items like our video games, going out to eat, and perhaps buying love. While I don't believe love can be bought, but you can buy a person's direct attention for a long time while money keeps flowing in.
*Brain dead at this point*
While money isn't the only source of happiness (eg. family/friends), the abundance of it can definitely make us content/happy as we know our most basic needs will be satisfied. After this, money acts only as a medium to happiness as it helps us obtain the goods and services that bring us that feeling of content or joy. The money to keep the water and electricity coming, the money to have that night out, or the money to hire a maid because we're all slackers when it comes to home cleaning are just a few examples.
Money can't buy everything, but it sure can lead to the feeling of content and it can definitely buy happiness for a time. Family and friends are great, but who isn't happy when they buy something they really want? The feeling itself is limited but money can indeed buy happiness.
The reverse is true though. Money problems lead to divorces, civil torts, criminal charges, and destruction of friendships and trust. This doesn't deny the fact that money can also bring about positive feelings.
I think first we need to define happiness itself. There are many levels of happiness such as "that feeling you get after a hard day's work", "the feeling of content one feels when surrounded by a wonderful family and great friends", and "the ecstasy of winning a huge lottery jackpot".
I would probably define happiness as the range of emotions that contributes to an individual's well being. I would focus on any person's (or being's) most basic needs for content. This is the notion of security.
Before love, fun and games, and materialistic desires, our needs at the most basic level are food and shelter (though the latter is arguable). In a developed country such as the USA and in this modern age, the likely methods to obtain these basic needs is through bartering (likely using money) or thievery. In this sense, having money gives us comfort as the very possession of it leads to the acquiring and/or maintenance of these basic needs. Without it, the stresses of just staying alive start to come up which hinders these positive emotions.
After security, then we can fulfill our more important desires like paying off our hydro bill, electricity, and focusing on family and friends. Money is essential for the first two, but the second two are typically free in which money isn't desired.
This leads to materialistic desires. We'll buy all our unnecessary items like our video games, going out to eat, and perhaps buying love. While I don't believe love can be bought, but you can buy a person's direct attention for a long time while money keeps flowing in.
*Brain dead at this point*
While money isn't the only source of happiness (eg. family/friends), the abundance of it can definitely make us content/happy as we know our most basic needs will be satisfied. After this, money acts only as a medium to happiness as it helps us obtain the goods and services that bring us that feeling of content or joy. The money to keep the water and electricity coming, the money to have that night out, or the money to hire a maid because we're all slackers when it comes to home cleaning are just a few examples.
Money can't buy everything, but it sure can lead to the feeling of content and it can definitely buy happiness for a time. Family and friends are great, but who isn't happy when they buy something they really want? The feeling itself is limited but money can indeed buy happiness.
The reverse is true though. Money problems lead to divorces, civil torts, criminal charges, and destruction of friendships and trust. This doesn't deny the fact that money can also bring about positive feelings.
metalmonstar
Smash Lord
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 1,081
Aleate makes a very good point. I find that money can buy a level of happiness. The happiness of knowing that you can afford and take care of your basic needs and materialistic wants. If you look at Maslow's heirarchy of needs, you can see that money can provide you a good bit of the bottom two and maybe even a little of the third level of needs. The truth of the matter though is that above that money doesn't really do much for you. Having money but not the other things that bring happiness such as fulfilling relationships, self esteem, and beliefs means leaves one with a gaping emptiness. It is an unfulfilled happiness. You here about this quite a bit of this in the media, The cliche'd unhappy millionaire.
Money brings some happiness but you need more than money to be truly happy.
Money brings some happiness but you need more than money to be truly happy.
Theftz22
Smash Lord
I think that the topic needs to be clarified here. Most often money brings happiness by acting as a means to some desired end. But what I'm wondering is whether or not the OP would consider that "direct", as money is not the direct cause of the happiness it is secondary in the causal chain.
Granting that we are not labeling that use of money to be a direct lead to happiness, then there is a legitimate debate to be had here because now the only way to satisfy the condition of getting direct happiness from money is to be happy from money for money's own sake. Again it might seem like it's open and shut to say that people do get happiness just by making money before they even use it to buy products or services. However I think that this happiness may be plausibly attributed to the connotation of the value of the money because of the ends that it will later deliver.
Essentially what I mean here is that money has no value if not for the things that it obtains. If this is so then money can never be intrinsically valuable in and of itself, it can only act as a means to a desired end. This entails that money can only be a secondary cause of the happiness and thus is not directly accountable for it.
Of course there are counterexamples to be had when one finds happiness in the physical bills or coins themselves such as amusing yourself spinning a coin or something. I take it that this was not the intended meaning of the OP however.
Granting that we are not labeling that use of money to be a direct lead to happiness, then there is a legitimate debate to be had here because now the only way to satisfy the condition of getting direct happiness from money is to be happy from money for money's own sake. Again it might seem like it's open and shut to say that people do get happiness just by making money before they even use it to buy products or services. However I think that this happiness may be plausibly attributed to the connotation of the value of the money because of the ends that it will later deliver.
Essentially what I mean here is that money has no value if not for the things that it obtains. If this is so then money can never be intrinsically valuable in and of itself, it can only act as a means to a desired end. This entails that money can only be a secondary cause of the happiness and thus is not directly accountable for it.
Of course there are counterexamples to be had when one finds happiness in the physical bills or coins themselves such as amusing yourself spinning a coin or something. I take it that this was not the intended meaning of the OP however.
blazedaces
Smash Lord
Another point many people are disregarding: the world is not black and white. I don't believe money = happiness OR money != (does not equal) happiness. I believe, as many people would agree, that happiness is a function of happiness (and other things).
What am I trying to say?
Happiness (and this goes into something called utility theory) is a concave function of money. That's a mathematically ugly way of saying if you have 10 dollars and you find another 10 dollars that will make you very happy, but if you have 100 billion dollars and you find 10 dollars, it's not really that big a deal anymore. You wouldn't care all that much if you lost 10 dollars if you actually had 100 billion dollars already.
That is exactly why studies show that people who are filthy rich aren't much happier than people who are middle class. Yes, as someone earlier in the thread said the money to "secure our future" makes us happy... but after a certain point, after we already have enough money to secure our future... and our children's future... more money will not make us so happy anymore. This obviously varies from person to person (some people I'm sure can never be satiated by any amount of money...).
In my humble opinion the same could be said about love/family/religion, but those things are incredibly hard to quantify and also vary greatly from person to person.
-blazed
What am I trying to say?
Happiness (and this goes into something called utility theory) is a concave function of money. That's a mathematically ugly way of saying if you have 10 dollars and you find another 10 dollars that will make you very happy, but if you have 100 billion dollars and you find 10 dollars, it's not really that big a deal anymore. You wouldn't care all that much if you lost 10 dollars if you actually had 100 billion dollars already.
That is exactly why studies show that people who are filthy rich aren't much happier than people who are middle class. Yes, as someone earlier in the thread said the money to "secure our future" makes us happy... but after a certain point, after we already have enough money to secure our future... and our children's future... more money will not make us so happy anymore. This obviously varies from person to person (some people I'm sure can never be satiated by any amount of money...).
In my humble opinion the same could be said about love/family/religion, but those things are incredibly hard to quantify and also vary greatly from person to person.
-blazed
Having 100 billion dollars can make you really really happy on a day to day basis though, I maintain. Sure, gaining $10 at that point wouldn't mean anything, while it might mean a lot to someone with only $5 to begin with, but the $10,000,000,000 dude could potentially get a LOT more enjoyment out of his 10 huge than the poor guy could out of his fiver.
blazedaces
Smash Lord
I think you missed my point... that it's not a linear relationship between money and happiness. The point is not that more money doesn't equal more happiness, just that as you get more money each unit of money makes you less and less happy. I'm again pointing out that this varies from person to person, but I for one can attest that so long as I'm not too worried about bills, starving, paying for my future children's education maybe, etc... I don't really think any amount of money above this will make me much happier. Sure, I could buy more things.
But seriously man, this concept isn't very hard to understand. If you have one tv in the house ... another one could make you happier.... but if you have 200 tvs in your house one more is barely going to matter... to be honest I would be pretty sick of tvs at that point, probably would sell many way before that...
-blazed
Crooked Crow
drank from lakes of sorrow
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2007
- Messages
- 2,247
Aside from materialism, it doesn't correlate to happiness. I see your point.
I agree.
I agree.
ballin4life
Smash Hero
money doesn't make you happy but not having it sure can make you unhappy
I didn't miss the point. The point was pretty obvious, so I made another (equally obvious) point.
- Status