Being happy all the time makes me inhuman?

[RT Wolf]

Hey all,

I was talking to a friend of mine and asked her, "If you found a way so that you could be happy forever, regardless of circumstances, would you go for it?"

She said no, and I asked why. She replied, "Because if you were happy all the time, you wouldn't be human. You'd be so alien. You wouldn't be able to empathize with other people."

That, for some reason, really got to me. I've been noticing a whole lotta cognitive dissonance because of that. Part of it, from my own introspection is from the inferrence that I'm not human. I've always been a really optimistic and happy go-lucky kinda guy. But I don't think I'm alien and I don't think I have an inadequete ability to empathize with people. However, I'm really getting into feeling joy all the time, a la Tolle and Mathieu Ricard (as in his book, "Happiness"), and I think I'm a little afraid that I wouldn't be human in the sense of some sort of "human" experience. And I'm worried that I wouldn't be able to empathize with people. I haven't problems with this before, but its still a worry. It doesn't seem like Pavlina has any trouble empathizing with people, nor Tolle, however I've never met either of them, so I don't know. I've always been weird or strange, and often proud of it, however, like most human beings I don't want to be tooooo weird. But that sounds like egoic identification to being "human" in itself.

I've been working to understand her words, and to try to mitigate the impact of them, partially because I think she was going to an extreme. Someone who's happy all the time isn't not human. I mean, if you have a biological definition of human beings, then you remain human.

After that point, my thinking starts to run in circles.

The thing is, I've started noticing resistance to continuing to control and mange my thoughts, to keep myself in a good and happy mood, so this is having an impact on me.

I'm not entirely sure what I'm asking for here. A little clarity would definitely help, and any advice or tips on how to remove this cognitive dissonance, perhaps by changing some of my beliefs or perceptions, or whatever. Maybe a little reassurance. Anything and everything is welcome.

Thank you.

[norbert]

That's what bothers me too when living in the present. I feel ignorant and inhuman because suffering instantly disappears and I experience joy and happiness instead. That's what I've been aiming for but still, I feel
a) guilty because I feel like I should be "normal" like everybody else around me (although I tend to be proud of being "weird" most of the time)
b) fear: I'm afraid I'm going to regret missing the "human" feelings I should have experienced when my time is over here

At the same time I am aware that whatever I do, I can't possibly ever be "inhuman".

I guess we should maintain a balance living in the present vs suffering, identifying with the ego vs detachment etc. Maybe even being conscious vs unconscious?

What do you think?

[Andy]

Here's my take on it. The whole "not human" statement makes the assumption that being happy all the time makes one worse at empathizing. I've personally found it to be the opposite. When I've been in periods of seeming everlasting happiness, I'm able to empathize better with others because I'm no longer being brought down by my own emotional issues and I can focus better on the issues of others. However throughout all this I seem to retain my positive outlook completely...not sure how it works, perhaps it's being able to understand other's emotions but without the necessity of feeling them.

Another thing about the initial argument, it could be restated as "if most people suffer, suffering is right" and then "if those who suffer can do x, those who don't cannot." The logic is quite flawed. Just because something is considered normal, or common, doesn't mean that it's the best option, it just seems that way because of being so prevalent.

Really though, someone who's happy all the time could very well ignore the emotions of others and be aloof, or they could connect with others, just like anyone else.

[RT Wolf]

You're right Andy, I just remembered that I had just recently gone through a period of intense happiness and I was still able to empathize, perhaps better than I normally did because I could see other people's motives and emotions and just let them be.

And I agree with you about the faulty logic. Yet my gut says there's something else. It might be the fear that norbert mentioned abuot missing out on "human" experiences. It seems like this might be the sort of thing journalling, meditation or consulting your subconscious (as described in that Pavlina podcast) might work. I've been wanting to try out one of those techniques on a real problem. Good opportunity.

I think the implication that I wasn't human just got me. It was entirely unintentional, obviously. I keep doing something and its good, but as soon as someone sticks a label to it that's harsh, you see that something in a whole new, less than positive light. More proof that labels can be as damaging as useful. Maybe that's part of it.

Thank you both for your replies. I got some new angles on this and I really appreciate it.

[wystan]

New here. A Brit in London.

I think it is quite curious that you are worried about being happy if you are, as you claim, happy all the time. Surely, if you are concerning yourself about this matter, there must be a part of you that feels incomplete or even inadequate or guilty. None of these things (in theory) is commensurate with total happiness.

My ex-boyfriend was - and still is - what we called Panglossian, in that things always happened for the best reasons. I know another, very successful guy, who thinks the same and interprets everything positively. Lucky them I say, who often does the opposite. But while we all live a different reality, I often wonder whether this constant need - desire - abilty?? to see things as absolutely positive. My ex, for example, has been single since I left him in 2001 and seems to work too hard because he 'loves his job' and being happy all the time seems to mean that you lack some ability to gauge what's important in your life and might prevent you from making difficulty decisions. I think people who are happy the whole time - or do I mean workaholics? - are like many people who don't decide they just do - again, lucky them - but they don't realise they have a choice about how to behave because they are not really truly capable and / or prepared to examine their motives for doing things. But one could say the same of unhappy people.

Two differing answers to the same question and and negating phrase.

Michael

[RT Wolf]

Ironic, I know, being worried about happiness. But its not the happiness I'm worried about, but the goal of being in a state of joy all the time. And I'm not "worried" as much as I am feeling a slight tug of cognitive dissonance that wants resolution. I'm still pretty happy, all things considered.

I think my friend's words have made it seem less appealing to me by applying the label of "inhumanity" to it, which is usually used in cases of extreme cold-heartedness. I think it was like poisoning hte well by attaching a label like that to it. I'm slowly dissolving the cognitive dissonance, and its fun, in its own way.

Also, I don't believe I've said that I'm happy all the time, but I am predisposed to happiness. It is one of my goals to be joyful all the time, but i'm not there yet. I'm not entirely sure you're familiar with this, but the idea here is that the happiness and joy are not tied to external circumstances. You don't just try to spin situations into the best light (which is a useful method to encourage happiness), but you also simply be happy all the time. The Power of Now is about this state, and even though I don't believe the spiritual parts of it, it is still very useful to this goal. Sometimes I can even be happy yet still feel negative emotions like guilt. But I'm getting really good at dissolving those negative emotions. Actually, I've been working to dissolve any emotoinal blocks I have lately. It takes time and practice but its fun in its own way.

And because the inner state of happiness is not tied to anything, its not dependant to things like a job or something that's inherently "fun". That also leaves me free to continue to remember what it is important in life, because I go with what brings true joy into my life, when given a choice.

In terms of examining motives for doing things, I try to understand myself as much as possible. Self-awareness and understanding is one of the founding blocks of PD, I think. I don't believe in blind optimism, but I do believe in inner happiness. There is a space between stimulas and response, and in that space, we are free to choose how we feel. Why choose anything but happiness?

You might be interested in this: http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/200...ctive-beliefs/ That is, if you rated your ex and yourself's beliefs abuot happiness. I find it way more empowering to look at situations positively, even though the truth may simply be that random things happen, good or bad.

I hope I've explained myself clearly, and that I understood your post correctly and that my response was right. Thank you for the different perspective, its very interesting and I'd love to hear more of it.

[Roman Budzowski]

Some people can be mad at you knowing that you don't waste your energy worring about anything. Yep, there are times when I am upset, but most of the time I am happy and think positive. Some people hate me for that

best
Roman

[bellbird]

She said no, and I asked why. She replied, "Because if you were happy all the time, you wouldn't be human. You'd be so alien. You wouldn't be able to empathize with other people."

Ehmm.. naturally that is her take on happiness versus not. It's not your opinion. I think the fact that we experience both dark and light times in life makes us understand through experience what they feel like and what they mean. We can appreciate happiness fully knowing where we've been before in unhappy hard times. If you only experienced happiness and didn't know what it was like to be unhappy, how could you tell you were happy in the first place?

Also, I don't believe I've said that I'm happy all the time, but I am predisposed to happiness. It is one of my goals to be joyful all the time, but i'm not there yet. I'm not entirely sure you're familiar with this, but the idea here is that the happiness and joy are not tied to external circumstances. You don't just try to spin situations into the best light (which is a useful method to encourage happiness), but you also simply be happy all the time. The Power of Now is about this state, and even though I don't believe the spiritual parts of it, it is still very useful to this goal. Sometimes I can even be happy yet still feel negative emotions like guilt. But I'm getting really good at dissolving those negative emotions. Actually, I've been working to dissolve any emotoinal blocks I have lately. It takes time and practice but its fun in its own way.

And because the inner state of happiness is not tied to anything, its not dependant to things like a job or something that's inherently "fun". That also leaves me free to continue to remember what it is important in life, because I go with what brings true joy into my life, when given a choice.

Sounds like you enjoy your life and the way you deal with it.

I think my friend's words have made it seem less appealing to me by applying the label of "inhumanity" to it, which is usually used in cases of extreme cold-heartedness. I think it was like poisoning hte well by attaching a label like that to it. I'm slowly dissolving the cognitive dissonance, and its fun, in its own way.

Some people can be mad at you knowing that you don't waste your energy worring about anything. Yep, there are times when I am upset, but most of the time I am happy and think positive. Some people hate me for that best Roman

Damn right. Some people just get annoyed when they see you bouncing around being happy. "You can't be so happy! How dare ye!"
And all that Just get on with your life I reckon.

[wystan]

Thanks for your reply. Well, surely here we are getting into the realms of philosophy. It's like the scene at the end of Brazil, where Sam Lowry (Jonathan Pryce) is "plugged in" to images of flying through the sky over a beautiful land, but is actually imprisoned - I can't remember quite how. [I guess this is Gilliam's idea of a joke about popular entertainment, looking back on it]
Anyway, the question is, should he struggle? Surely he should if he wants to be free, even if it did not make him happier in the short term? And should we struggle? How much can we change our circumstances? Do we know what we can change and what we can't.

It's certainly the case that happiness most of the time one goes through one's normal life is a great goal and one I try to work towards. But a part of me thinks - as a thinking person - that, if I simply, in the Buddhist manner, named everything I saw in front of me, I would stop thinking, making connections, creating. Is this true? Would I like to actually BE the Dalai Llama (without the awed worshippers who believe I am a god, of course)

Is the Llama in denial about certain problems that he has?

Again, I just sense an odd tension between your friend saying you are "inhumanly" happy, your concern at your happiness, and your desire to be happy all the time - this time you did say it - revealing, perhaps, that you don't think you are happy enough! Perhaps you are trying to hard - I couldn't say.

I am enjoying this forum though. I have never posted to one more than once before.

Best,

Wystan

[Zulu]

RT,

Being happy (which, ultimately is everyone's goal in life) doesn't exclude empathy at all. Being sad brings you inwards towards yourself without the capacity to help others. That's my take on it.

Cheers,

Paul

[bylto]

I heard this sort of opinion recently on TV (think it was Richard & Judy). The worst thing about it was, he was an 'expert'. He said it wasn't human to be happy all the time and that we need to be unhappy sometimes.

I just agree. I don't think we have to be actually happy all the time but the choice between happiness and say contentment (middle of the road) is very do-able in my opinion. i don't think we need to drop all the way down to unhappiness or misery - I know I don't.

just yesterday, people in work were asking me do I bounce out of bed with a smile on my face in the mornings? That's the sort of impression I give I guess, this was great to hear. People often get involved in moaning and complaining in the workplace but I just don't join in.

I wouldn't worry about someone having a differrent opinion RT Wolf, let them own their own opinion, they will live according to their beliefs i.e. up and down. You will live according to yours and be happy most of the time, be happy that you are this way, that's all you have to do I think.

[notsosmartTX]

Originally Posted by RT Wolf

The thing is, I've started noticing resistance to continuing to control and mange my thoughts, to keep myself in a good and happy mood, so this is having an impact on me.

new here...got my share of issues so I hope I don't sound pretentious...but, if you have to control it, is it real? From what I know, such control is an illusion and it will fade. Thus, you're ability to become worried about it.

As far as happy all the time, it's simply not a logical condition to me. Emotions are a balance. Both positive and negative. If someone keyed your car or broke into your house or someone close to you was hurt, I would expect some kind of response besides happiness. Taking it in stride and moving forward are not the same as being happy all the time.

Some things merit being sad. The effort to control your emotions completely implies something is hidden IMO.

I wish the best.

[YouseffTheSheep]

I don't really bother to read anyone else's posts, but, it sounds like you're not happy right anyway, so you're human! Way to go!

I doubt you where always happy and optimistic anyway, I mean myself, I am incredibly happy and optimistic, and happy-go-lucky to the point some people question whether or not I care sometimes... But I still feel sadness. If you have found a way to keep yourself from experiencing large amounts of fear, anger, or whatever. That's awesome man. More power to you, because billions of people wish they had as much control as you and I.

I don't believe in Otherkin, we're all human no matter how monstrous, emotionless, or intelligent we are.

[Mitalp]

Originally Posted by RT Wolf

Hey all,

I was talking to a friend of mine and asked her, "If you found a way so that you could be happy forever, regardless of circumstances, would you go for it?"

She said no, and I asked why. She replied, "Because if you were happy all the time, you wouldn't be human. You'd be so alien. You wouldn't be able to empathize with other people."

That, for some reason, really got to me. I've been noticing a whole lotta cognitive dissonance because of that. Part of it, from my own introspection is from the inferrence that I'm not human. I've always been a really optimistic and happy go-lucky kinda guy. But I don't think I'm alien and I don't think I have an inadequete ability to empathize with people. However, I'm really getting into feeling joy all the time, a la Tolle and Mathieu Ricard (as in his book, "Happiness"), and I think I'm a little afraid that I wouldn't be human in the sense of some sort of "human" experience. And I'm worried that I wouldn't be able to empathize with people. I haven't problems with this before, but its still a worry. It doesn't seem like Pavlina has any trouble empathizing with people, nor Tolle, however I've never met either of them, so I don't know. I've always been weird or strange, and often proud of it, however, like most human beings I don't want to be tooooo weird. But that sounds like egoic identification to being "human" in itself.

I've been working to understand her words, and to try to mitigate the impact of them, partially because I think she was going to an extreme. Someone who's happy all the time isn't not human. I mean, if you have a biological definition of human beings, then you remain human.

After that point, my thinking starts to run in circles.

The thing is, I've started noticing resistance to continuing to control and mange my thoughts, to keep myself in a good and happy mood, so this is having an impact on me.

I'm not entirely sure what I'm asking for here. A little clarity would definitely help, and any advice or tips on how to remove this cognitive dissonance, perhaps by changing some of my beliefs or perceptions, or whatever. Maybe a little reassurance. Anything and everything is welcome.

Thank you.

Quite the contrary, if your not happy all the time, your inhumane. Bliss is our natural state, this why babies are so happy all the time. We are then conditioned by society and we get the concept of unhappiness. Live is nothing more than a journey to get back to that new born state of bliss.

[RT Wolf]

Roman, its funny you mention that. Back in high school, one of my "friends" chewed me out for, get this, being too happy. Its true. He said I was way too happy. Weird stuff.

bellbird, you're right, its her opinion. The thing is, though, that her words wouldn't have had an effect on me if they hadn't resonated with some part of myself. Consciously, I don't agree her, but I still get this feeling in my gut that tells me this isn't resolved. There's more stuff there and its deeper. I think it has to something to do with a self limiting belief(s) I may hold that I'm not quite aware of yet.

Also, is there a criteria that needs to be applied, to be "human"? Who says you've had enough bad feelings or enough good feelings? I've felt sadness and sorrow, pain and loss, anger and regret. Do I need to continue to have those emotions to still qualify as having lived a "human" life? I know it sounds kinda like a stupid question, but it also related to something logicseeker posted a little while ago called "whats wrong with sorrow?" I believe.

wystan, I don't think I'm not happy enough. I'm quite happy, and I want to be happier. There's two sides to every goal, to either get away from a state or to go towards a state. In this goal, I can want to be happier or I can want to not be sad/negative. Or a combination. My motivation is to be happier, as far as I'm aware.

The other thing that you're talking about in terms of how much control we have, I think that the buddhists have found a good answer to this, which is total acceptance. You might like to read the Power of Now about this sort of thing. Acceptance is not approval, rather just blatant acceptance. The other thing is that we find ourselves happiest when we are striving towards something. The flow state outlined in the book Flow is about this doing which makes us happiest. Happiness is a huge and incredibly complex topic. From lasting joy to transitory happiness and everything in between.

Zulu, I'm having trouble accepting that. That may indeed be the cause of the block I'm feeling. I will attempt to adopt that belief and reply here if I get results.

bylto, please read what I wrote to bellbird about the similar thing. It is great to hear that you jump out of bed with a smile on your face.

notsosmartTV, that's an interesting point you raise about if I can basically create happiness, is it real? Is that correct? I have never found happiness induced from inside myself to feel any different from happiness induced by outside events.

Also, I'm not talking about positive versus negative emotions, I'm talking about overall happiness. You see, we have "baselines" of happiness which we tend to return to if something good happens or something bad happens. You can find the key points in a book called Stumbling on Happiness, as well as a summary of key points in the first review here:

Amazon.com: Stumbling on Happiness: Books: Daniel Gilbert

I am simply trying to raise my baseline happiness, as well as better control the "swings" of emotion from this baseline, especially those that happen to negative emotions.

You do make me think of something else, though. Alright, imagine that I've reached the state of eternal joy. I'm le happy all the time. I'm also totally empathetic and sympathetic. Say someone close to me dies or comes down with something fatal. How would I feel about that? Being able to empathize is one thing, but not feeling sad about something as major as someone close to you falling ill or dying does sound inhuman to me. I feel that this is the main issue inside me. Its not so much that I wouldn't be able to empathize that I care about, but that I'd be cold hearted. Not in the sense that I'll be murderous or uncaring, but rather that I wouldn't feel anything. That, to me, is the definition of inhumanity.

Alright, so I've identified the key belief that's causing this issue, which is that I would be uncaring if I was in the state of Joy. Especially towards the lives of those close to me. Of course, adopting the belief that death does not mean the end of consciousness because we're all of one consciousness is an option, however I'm wondering if anyone can anyone offer an explanation or alternative belief other than that? I'm also going to think about this and see what I come up with and I'd appreciate any help.

Mitalp, you make another interesting point. I'm going to think about this. I've heard it before, but I've had a tough time accepting it. I'll go meet some babies and see for myself.



Wow, this turned out to be a really long post. While writing it, I thought of more things and I think I've figured out the main reason why her words had that impact on me. I really appreciate everyone's posts and insights, and I apologize if I misunderstood anyone or did not reply to your satisfaction. Feel free to ask me for clarification or anything.

[Brutha]

Bliss is our natural state, this why babies are so happy all the time.

Never seen a baby crying?

Someone who's happy all the time isn't not human. I mean, if you have a biological definition of human beings, then you remain human.

Why is the goal being human?
Having quite a bit titanium in my own body (due to medical reason) I don't know whether I would fall under a very strict biological definition of being human. Maybe I am a cyborg

If you keep that value of being human in the next 50 years you will get major moral problem with technogolgy.
In the 20st century that value might had value, but in the 21st century it is obsolate.

Instant of having the goal to be human, have the goal of being nice to other people. That is a much better standart.

[Mark Lapierre]

Originally Posted by RT Wolf

The other thing that you're talking about in terms of how much control we have, I think that the buddhists have found a good answer to this, which is total acceptance. You might like to read the Power of Now about this sort of thing. Acceptance is not approval, rather just blatant acceptance. The other thing is that we find ourselves happiest when we are striving towards something. The flow state outlined in the book Flow is about this doing which makes us happiest. Happiness is a huge and incredibly complex topic. From lasting joy to transitory happiness and everything in between.

It sure is complex, as is illustrated by the apparent paradox of total acceptance versus striving towards something. To totally accept the current moment means to not desire anything to be different. Yet striving towards something implies desire for that something. Steve has written about this particular paradox before (feel free to track down the article(s) on my behalf ).

Originally Posted by RT Wolf

Also, I'm not talking about positive versus negative emotions, I'm talking about overall happiness. You see, we have "baselines" of happiness which we tend to return to if something good happens or something bad happens...

I am simply trying to raise my baseline happiness, as well as better control the "swings" of emotion from this baseline, especially those that happen to negative emotions.

Interestingly, in considering the implications of a constant high level of happiness, I thought of our tendency to, over time, make any emotional state our "baseline", and our tendency to see that baseline as normal, and therefore lacking the appeal it initially had. Jed McKenna writes about it in Spiritually Incorrect Enlightenment. He uses the analogy of a hammock swinging in the breeze on a warm summer's day. Sounds great, but if that's your entire existence, while it's comfortable, you become accustomed to it and start to wonder what the initial appeal was. The grass doesn't looks so green anymore.

Mind you, the version of enlightenment he describes is not at all the perpetual happiness you seek. None the less it's a question to ask, will you be happy with your happiness, or will you always be seeking more?

Originally Posted by RT Wolf

Alright, so I've identified the key belief that's causing this issue, which is that I would be uncaring if I was in the state of Joy. Especially towards the lives of those close to me. Of course, adopting the belief that death does not mean the end of consciousness because we're all of one consciousness is an option, however I'm wondering if anyone can anyone offer an explanation or alternative belief other than that? I'm also going to think about this and see what I come up with and I'd appreciate any help.

Does it matter? Through empathy and expression of sympathy, which you've acknowledged you'd still be capable of, you can still console others. Why does it matter if you don't feel the loss? Feeling empathy and sympathy requires an understanding of what the other person is going through, and a willingness to share, or attempt to relieve their burden. That rules out being uncaring. You don't have to be sad to care. In fact I would say you are more capable of helping others if you're in a happier frame of mind. What good does it do for you to be sad too?

I think, in many cases, the question of humanity detracts from the more important point of evolution. Not evolution in the purely genetic sense, but in terms of gradual change. In that respect I agree with Brutha. He would be disadvantaged if he had to be 'pure' human. So would I; I have a couple of titanium bolts in my jaw holding them together after from after I had major jaw surgery. I wouldn't be able to eat without them. Would I be any more human with a disfigured jaw, cutting up everything into tiny pieces before I could eat it?

We are human until we evolve into another species. Period. (Read the Night's Dawn trilogy, by Peter F. Hamilton. There's another true race of humans in there, genetically distinct from regular humans. The series also covers a lot of interesting philosophical, spiritual and social topics. Truly epic in scope, both in spacial terms and breadth of material covered; it's not just your average sci-fi...)

So what it comes down to is an argument of morals and beliefs. Some people believe it's wrong to not show sorrow, and label that as inhuman. Other people believe it's wrong to show sorrow, and label that as unmanly. And that's the problem with labels, they mean different things to different people, and we rarely explain what we mean, especially when emotive topics are being discussed.

All we can do is ask ourselves if we hold those same beliefs, and are they worthwhile? (Here, have another link to Steve's post about effective beliefs)

[Brutha]

We are human until we evolve into another species.

It is arbitary to put make such destinctions.
In addition we won't evolve, we change ourselfs. If the descends of someone who lives today change a large portion of their gens (the amount that seperates us from apes), that wouldn't they probably won't get there by evolution but through human intelligent design.
After your definitions those people would still be humans, because they didn't evolve.
That human intelligent design is not only visible in techniquel advancements but also in cultural advancements like feeling happy all the time.

Even if you make a very strict definition of being human, whats the problem with being a non-human?

From a biological standpoint I would think that having bolts in a biological system is quite a shift.
A x-ray picture of me looks more different from the normal human than a x-ray picture of a tiger looks from a lion.

[Mark Lapierre]

Yes, it is arbitrary, to a degree. But only because of the ambiguous nature of the human language; some limits have to be imposed otherwise we have no chance of understanding each other. And here we see the problem of lack of terms clearly defined. So I'll share my definition. To be human is to be a member of the species Homo sapiens; the biological definition. That definition includes all the emotions and behaviours we're capable of. My point in mentioning morals, beliefs, and labels, was that quite often more appropriate terms than 'human' could be used, because the term 'human' carries connotations which often don't apply to the specific argument.

As for evolution, well, I said before that evolution meant gradual change. And again we see the problem with differing definitions. You think of evolution as something not aided by intelligent design, whereas I see evolution as gradual change, whatever the cause. And that includes human design and evolution via the mutation of genes, which is inevitable unless we figure out how to stop it effectively. However I now see that dramatic change could also be evolutionary, but I'll leave that alone for now, I don't want to muddy the waters any further.

And I don't see any problem with being non-human. If you did take that message from my post (and weren't just addressing that point to everyone), could you please point out what I said that gave you that impression, so I can be clearer next time?

[Lauxa]

I didn't read the other responses, but I just wanted to share a thought on empathy.

I have been listening to Wayne Dyer's podcasts recently (rebroadcasts of live radio shows), and the thing I love about them is how he is able to really empathize with all his callers and be so caring and compassionate towards them. He does say that his own struggles have given him some of this ability to empathize, but one thing he stresses is that you can never be depressed enough to make another person happy, but if you can be happy, you can bring that higher energy to others and make them feel better, too.

[Eagleshavebettersexlives]

You fear your only worthwhile goal being taken away from you because you cling to it as being your only hope of happiness. This is causing the conflict and anger.

Yet actually the acceptance of your materialistic side is the key to arriving at the totality of yourself and thereby attaining the state of happiness.

Just remember, everyone is a mirror of ourselves. One day you might be sat on a bus and some spiritual person comes on with a look of wonder in their eyes and says, its all wonderful and to be happy is the only goal.

And you'll look at them with wisdom and say, maybe. And you can see the two worlds, you can see their belief system, you can see their goal of happiness, simultaneously creating excitement and also the fear of losing it. And you can see the view of others, you can see the pleasures of the flesh, of drugs, of beating someone you dislike, of winning and selfish victory, and you can taste the relish of that.

And more than anything, you see the folly of it all, and thats a form of happiness so pure because it just snowballs. It grows under all conditions. It flourishes effortlessly into an unconditional enjoyment more full than the one sided games of the world. Not that you are going to refuse participation because such a possibility does not exist. No, the world goes on and your choices are then reflections only of your predilection.

[RT Wolf]

Thank you everyone who responded, I've found plenty of food for thought in your posts.

eagleshavebettersexlives, I'm not sure what you are talking about. I would ask you to read the entire thread if you have not already done so.

Just to clarify, turns out that my inner resistance wasn't to the idea that I wouldn't be able to empathize, but rather that if someone close to me dies, it seems inappropriate for me to be and show happiness. I don't believe in absolute grief, but I don't want to have a smile on my face, THAT seems inhuman. There's little to empathize with in dead people, so that's not the issue.

I don't believe one should fall to the ground crying and wailing, however I do believe that smiling would be dishonouring the passing of someone close to me. I'm still working through this, so my notes are probably incomplete. One thing is that I'm defining how I believe would be an honourable and congruent way to react to the death of a loved one. Another thing is to realize that death is inevitable and to accept that. Another thing is to redefine how I feel funerals happen. The funerals I went to as a child included people (especially women) crying and wailing. I'm sure there are some other memories I've forgotten that defined that for me. So I want to redefine funerals as a time to celebration of a person's life, rather than mourning their loss (although that is a part of it, too). I read in Happiness (great book) that Tibetan funerals are incredible uplifting, so I'd like to read up more about what they're like.

Looking back on this thread, I was often incorrect about what was really affecting me, but that is what makes life interesting.

Essentially, I'm going through the process described in this entry:

http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/200...ut-resistance/

Where I take the goal I want, imagine I've achieved it and recognize my fears about it, thus eliminating them now. My friend's comments acted as a catalyst to bring those fears out before I started this as a conscious process.

Again, thank you for your thoughtful responses and for reading.

[chris614]

I wrote an article on this very same exact topic. I hope it adds value to this discussion. Here it is:

I Should Be Happy All The Time


The article is also accompanied by a community page that asks a number of questions about being happy all the time and allows you to submit your answers that will be displayed on this community page. That community page is:

Community Content Page: I Should Be Happy All The Time


Check it out and let me know what you think.


Best,

Chris614
The Philosophy of Change.com

[Chinese Dragon]

I would go for it She's not to say what's human and what's not.
Society teaches us to be sad when something happens like when someone dies, but for me when something bad like that happens my automatic response is to feel good that they had such a good life! Death is a part of life, and it's inveitable, so I don't bother being sad about it. Sure if it's someone I know I miss them, but I wouldn't want my own death to make people sad. Just accept it and move on

I can't imagine why anyone would want to be unhappy, even some of the time. If I can make unhappiness go away in an instant (which I can) I do it. I don't feel guilty because happiness isn't a zero-sum game. All unhappiness is self inflicted.

When I am happy I find that I radiate the feeling to the people around me too. Why turn that off?

Originally Posted by RT Wolf

I mean, if you have a biological definition of human beings, then you remain human.

I agree completely, I have no idea what kind of spiritual being I am, but as long as I have a human body I'm a human.

One of the strangest things about me is that I can feel unhappiness and happiness at the same time. It's strange, but true. I find it all the time when achiving goals. If I experience a setback I may become a little discouraged but I'm still glad that I'll eventually reach the goal regardless.