"Self-evident"? Historically, this country, long after its founding, still withheld Liberty from a class of people held in bondage, and to this day wrestles with issues regarding the right to Life of the convict, the unborn, and the decision to end Life when it may be done with determination and dignity. "Self-evident" was a pretty ballsy term for the Founders to use when those words don't really necessarily mean obvious things to all people and still don't, really. And as for the "pursuit of Happiness"?We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That's a tough one. From "happiness is a warm gun" to "happiness is a warm puppy", there are a lot of ways this concept is expressed. I have thought of it myself as a synthesis of Life and Liberty--the Liberty to live one's life in the way that maximizes one's own potential. Some people view it through the lens of economic potential, others through the civil rights and social justice movements to have their individual differences be free from persecution. (I tend towards relating to the latter view.)
But is happiness an easily defined or even quantifiable thing? I'm tempted to say "not really", taking for granted that there really are different strokes for different folks and that happiness is an aspirational goal that we do not all have the same potential for. We can work at equal treatment under the law, as the Constitution requires, and we can "tend to our own garden" as Voltaire encourages in Candide. But happiness, like love, spiritual awakening, and peak experiences, is ultimately a subjective thing. I think we may be better off if we think of "happiness" as "contentment". Or maybe "satisfaction"--not that that's easy to come by...oh well.
So I've always found it interesting when they come out in different fora with a countdown list of "happiest countries". There are things that can be indexed as contributing to ease, peace of mind, and the ability to achieve economic and intellectual goals. It's always been interesting to me, also, that the US is not in the top ten of happy countries. We're usually back in the teens somewhere.
But who is happy? Seems like Scandinavian countries are.
For many reasons, this interests me. For one thing, your Scandinavian countries are Democratic Socialist-leaning, and for another, they are great big secularists. But I think there is something in the idea that people have to believe in something larger then themselves to have contentment. Sometimes, it is about the freedom to speak out. But also, it is about caring as a community, for all of one's fellow citizens. The happiest countries often have a strong social safety net. There is this wonderful box in Finland that all babies have an option to receive that makes me feel kind of touched when I think about it, really. It's like every new citizen is told upfront "We have your back, little person". That is an awesome thing--a government that cares that mothers and babies have basics to survive and, practically, gives them knowing that this is crucial to helping people get started in the great business of being people.
But also, these cultures are a bit better off, anyway. They have high literacy and health that go with those conditions. But let's take a look at another nation that regularly shows up in these happiness indexes--Bhutan. They aren't a rich nation. They are relatively homogeneous and have a deep and ancient Buddhist culture. But the thing is--they work at it. They actively perceive happiness as a good to be achieved, and they put their minds to doing what makes them happy--nationally.
Huh.
This happiness question kind of makes me think about one of my other fascinations--longevity. People in my family can live long--into their nineties. Same for my husband's family. Genetics plays a role, but you often hear of pockets of people living in some Sicilian village or Russian mountain top or Okinawa or whatever, and realize there are so many long-lived people and what even is happening here? And some attribute the long life to diet--the Mediterranean diet or yogurt or what have you.. But I think community--that being connected thing--is what matters.
There is anecdotal evidence of people whose health failed after retiring from jobs that made them feel vital. There is evidence of people literally dying from heart break. I think having people to live for matters. Living for oneself is not so much--but living for one's family? Or if being happy about one's family wasn't enough--being connected to one's "village"? Or being actively political, or going to mass all the time or whatever the old people you know do? Being involved matters. Connecting to that bigger thing than you matters. As Carl Sagan, probable agnostic, once wondrously pointed out--We are star-stuff. Be impressed enough with that, Adam!
Meaning matters. I don't think, in the US, we will ever get all on the same page about what everyone wants or needs or likes, and we are by no means culturally or religiously homogenous. But as a great democracy, I have long wondered why there isn't more participation. Actively being the democratic people we're supposed to be and fighting for our own interests would act as a fantastic tonic to our cultural ennui and make for a better popular conversation than the latest pop music act or reality show.
But I was alive and at least partway in diapers when Nixon resigned, so maybe by now I am almost an "old". And have peculiar old folks' ideas about how we all could do better. I think what matters is caring about what is around you. Your people. Your environment. Whether your local government is corrupt, and so on. Whether you do your own job right. Whether you tend to your own garden. And sometimes, you just might find, you get what you need.
No comments:
Post a Comment