Is virtue happiness?

[Borachio]

Satan, Sin and Death.

That's Satan on the left, Sin is the snake, and Death is the transparent fellow on the right.

Um... what was Blake thinking?

 

[Winston Hughes]

Is virtue happiness?

To the individual, certainly not.

To a society, they are very closely linked, though not identical.

 

[AdamCrock]

Satan, Sin and Death.

That's Satan on the left, Sin is the snake, and Death is the transparent fellow on the right.

Um... what was Blake thinking?

I thought Sin was a woman I wonder what key represents on this picture and also why are those two looking at her boobs ;P Death looks shocked

 

[Kennigit]

Nope.

 

[Hygro]

No rational person habitually chooses to do something unless they think it makes them happy in some way. It follows that anything that somebody rational chooses to do habitually is something that they think makes them happy (or will lead to making them happy) in some way. Not so? Even drug addicts and alcoholics are doing what makes them least unhappy, because they think that not drinking and taking drugs hurts more than taking drugs. Perhaps 'happy' was too optimistic a word, but certainly 'as little unhappy as possible'.

I have had lot of habits and behaviors over the years that I thought were bad, wished I had stopped, and couldn't, only to learn that they were actually the healthier better behavior. Sometimes your body knows best even against the grain of your thoughts and society's feedback.

 

[timtofly]

Happiness is a state of mind that can be triggered by actions, and reactions.

Virtue is moral behavior.


They may interact with each other, but it is not a given.

 

[Mooseph]

Virtue and Happiness are two different words entirely for a reason. When people are virtuous, there are less problems in society, the lack of problems prevents people from feeling unhappy. However, happiness comes from self-realization, where one accomplishes something. In a virtuous society, nobody is happy by default, people are simply content and feel safe.

 

[Mise]

Even if we admit that everyone is both capable of and willing to act perfectly rationally, and in fact does act perfectly rationally all the time, it still doesn't follow that everyone is always right about what makes them happy. A drug addict might believe that taking more drugs will make them happy, whereas not taking more drugs will make them unhappy -- but are simply wrong about this belief. Not every rational belief is actually correct: there are countless beliefs I have had in my life that were perfectly rational and well informed -- but completely wrong. So even if we admit that all people act rationally, we still can't conclude that all rational beliefs are correct.

But even if we do admit that everyone is willing and capable of acting rationally, that everyone does in fact act rationally all the time, and that all rational beliefs are always correct, we still can't conclude that all actions based on rational beliefs will, in actual real life, result in an increase in happiness. Not only are there countless uncertainties in real life that confound our ability to accurately predict the outcome of an action, but we might simply be factually wrong about the basis on which we form our beliefs.

But anyway, I'm almost 100% certain that FP is playing devil's advocate, so we've already spent far too long discussing this

 

[gay_Aleks]

Most Christian "sins" can be quite pleasurable

Well, there is a saying in Medieval times that says "Three minutes with Venus, a lifetime with Mercury". Of course, that relates to the fact they were curing sexually-transmitted diseases with mercury (of all things!). Which tends to backfire.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

What does "virtue" mean in this case?

That is a very good question. Perhaps you can try to answer it.

 

[Paul in Saudi]

Most Christian "sins" can be quite pleasurable

Gluttony?
Greed?
Sloth?
Wrath?
Envy?
Pride?

Please give examples.

Why are we putting "random" words in quotation marks?

 

[timtofly]

It would seem that all acts are pleasurable even murder, or people would not do them.

 

[duckstab]

Not really - otherwise you can't enjoy a good meal, a good film or a good conversation. Perhaps basing all of your happiness on things which are going to end is silly unless you can find new transient things to keep you permanently occupied.

I'm not saying you can't still enjoy all these things. You can certainly appreciate them while they last and the pleasant memories they might engender. I'm just trying to point out that there's a difference between having the momentary enjoyment of something and being truly happy. If your happiness depends on lining up one pleasant experience after another, and pushing away anything unpleasant, you're not going to achieve happiness -- or anything else except exhaustion. Because no human being has ever had a life that didn't have some mix of pleasure and pain. The challenge is finding a source of happiness within that can allow you to gracefully ride those ups and downs.

So, coming back around to the question of "virtue", if you have an inner source of happiness, you're more likely to behave in a manner that doesn't harm others. You don't need to surround yourself with possessions, so you consume fewer resources. You don't need to feed your ego by exploiting, harming, or disparaging others. And you can still take pleasure in your own acts of generosity, compassion, etc.

 

[Borachio]

Gluttony?

I often gobble up large quantities of food with relish. (also mayonnaise)

Greed?

What it would be to have the riches of Bill Gates!

Sloth?

How often have I luxuriated in the idleness of my warm bed, first thing in the morning?

Wrath?

I'm righteously indignant you thought you had to include this one.

Envy?

I envy you your certainty. But that just makes me feel smug for being more "reasonable".

Pride?

I take immense pride in presenting a humble face. "That'll fool 'em", I think.

Wut?

What was the question again? Oh yeah, examples of enjoying Christian sins.

 

[Paul in Saudi]

So does the sin give happiness? It seems that satiation, being free of the grasp of sin, brings happiness.

You are not happy when you are gluttonous. You have pleasure when you are satisfied.

 

[Borachio]

"You are not happy when you are gluttonous".

What makes a person gluttonous, then?

I can see that overeating can make a person unhappy. But then we're back on the excess/moderation debate again.

You can't know what is enough until you know what is too much.

 

[Paul in Saudi]

Does not gluttony mean overindulgence, being a slave to the sin?

 

[Borachio]

I don't know. I thought it just meant eating in a ravenous manner. Which I do all the time. I can hardly be described as pecking at my food.

I wouldn't describe myself as a slave to food, though. I can go 2, maybe 3 hours, without any food at all.

(I'm exaggerating. Slightly.)

 

[Winston Hughes]

Even if we admit that everyone is both capable of and willing to act perfectly rationally, and in fact does act perfectly rationally all the time, it still doesn't follow that everyone is always right about what makes them happy. A drug addict might believe that taking more drugs will make them happy, whereas not taking more drugs will make them unhappy -- but are simply wrong about this belief. Not every rational belief is actually correct: there are countless beliefs I have had in my life that were perfectly rational and well informed -- but completely wrong. So even if we admit that all people act rationally, we still can't conclude that all rational beliefs are correct.

But even if we do admit that everyone is willing and capable of acting rationally, that everyone does in fact act rationally all the time, and that all rational beliefs are always correct, we still can't conclude that all actions based on rational beliefs will, in actual real life, result in an increase in happiness. Not only are there countless uncertainties in real life that confound our ability to accurately predict the outcome of an action, but we might simply be factually wrong about the basis on which we form our beliefs.

It occurs to me that 'virtue is happiness' can only be true if 'luck is virtue' is also true.