Jump to content

happiness only real when shared


Itoero

Recommended Posts

"and so it turned out only a life similar to the life of those around jus,merging with it without a ripple, is genuine life, and that an unshared happiness is not happiness"

~ Dr. Zhivago, Boris Pasternak

 

Is happiness only real when shared?

We are social creatures.

By living in a group you used to increase the chance to survive and create offspring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

 

hmmm ... apparently babies prefer beautiful faces according to research. (which I can't post a link to for unknown reasons).

My guess is they will look at faces that are not average to their prevailing experience for longer because it's novel which makes sense to me because it's new data.

 

 

Abstract.

 

Young infants prefer to look at faces that adults find attractive, suggesting a biological

basis for some face preferences. However, the basis for infant preferences is not known. Adults find
average and symmetric faces attractive. We examined whether 5 ^ 8-month-old infants discriminate
between different levels of averageness and symmetry in faces, and whether they prefer to look at
faces with higher levels of these traits. Each infant saw 24 pairs of female faces. Each pair consisted
of two versions of the same face differing either in averageness (12 pairs) or symmetry (12 pairs).
Data from the mothers confirmed that adults preferred the more average and more symmetric
versions in each pair. The infants were sensitive to differences in both averageness and symmetry,
but showed no looking preference for the more average or more symmetric versions. On the
contrary, longest looks were significantly longer for the less average versions, and both longest
looks and first looks were marginally longer for the less symmetric versions. Mean looking
times were also longer for the less average and less symmetric versions, but those differences
were not significant. We suggest that the infant looking behaviour may reflect a novelty preference
rather than an aesthetic preference.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since non of us can recall our baby days, lets move to how we feel about sharing and happiness now in our adult lives shall we.

 

Happiness boils down to how much people care about themselves in respect and love. When these qualities of self-love and self-respect don't apply to people's emotional state of how they feel, happiness wont be felt. As a result of a person lacking them, they look to others to show and give them love and respect in order to fill in what they dont give themselves. A person may enjoy the company of another in order to feel cared for, and that enjoyment may indeed make the person more happy than they were prior to being in the other's company, but once that person has a respect for themselves of who they are in all ways - mental, physical, emotional, and even spiritual (who they are in relation to others) then they don't need the others company to feel happy because they have self acceptance of their state of being. Once one can accept that it's perfectly ok to love oneself in all ways, and not feel inferior in comparison to others, then happiness follows.

 

The process is to live outside of judgement of others and yourself by comparison, for to compare is to compete. Don't compare your past actions with your current actions otherwise your competing with yourself, and not to compare yourself with others, again pointless competition. If you respect and love yourself, you dont need to compare because you already accept who you are. Learning without judgement is true growth.

Edited by Blueyedlion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, but they are quite happy to look at an angry face.

Babies are sometimes clearly happy- even though they have no way to know whether their view is shared or not.

And that proves that un-shared happiness exists.

So the OP is wrong.

Yes but does a baby laugh when he or she is alone?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Happiness is an emotional state, which can only be temporary.

 

Who said it had to be constant? i never said it had to be, where are you getting the idea that you have to be happy all the time?

 

What's being asked is, can you be happy without others and im saying you can be very easily. Explain to me what part of what ive expressed doesnt make sense? Self happiness doesnt mean you have to be in that state all the time, but it means if you need others to feel happy, then there's something you're rejecting about yourself that's stopping yourself from allowing you to enjoy you as you truly are. Of course we can feel disappointed and frustrated and sad ourselves at times, but they are states to welcome for the human experience is meant to teach you about who you are and you cant do that if there's no emotional, physiological, physical nor spiritual work to do on yourself.

 

 

 

Of whom?

 

Of yourself - 'Happiness boils down to how much people care about themselves in respect and love.' I explained the answer to your question in the very question you asked. Did you not read the entire sentence?

Edited by Blueyedlion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.