Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...

[milefile]

NPR's Talk of The Nation did a show about this phrase from the Declaration of Independence today. I was surprised (or maybe not that surprised) at how many people simply presume "happiness" to be a thing that the government ought to provide. They supported this the statement "it was understood". No other evidence or support was provided. Any suggestion that happiness is a thing that is pursued by individuals of their own accord, and that happiness among individuals is often contradictory was referred to the ambiguous concept "common good". It was assumed that this so-called "common good" is always and automatically good for individuals, and will thusly provide happiness for them. I got angry listening to these people see the world through the eyes of tired old women who think they are owed something by everybody.

Well, hopefully this gets the ball rolling.

 

[Sage]

Originally posted by milefile
Well, hopefully this gets the ball rolling.

Um, how? I totally agree with everything you said, so there isn't really anything to argue about...

 

[Duke]

Ditto. It's the "pursuit" of happiness, not the "receipt" of happiness!

 

[Talentless]

People also define freedom by how much welfare services government provides them.

 

[milefile]

Are freedom and happiness synonymous, or is one just conditioned by the other? And which one?

It could be argued that one must be free to be truly happy. But it could also be argued the one must be happy to be truly free.

 

[SaleenASL]

Originally posted by milefile
Are freedom and happiness synonymous, or is one just conditioned by the other? And which one?

It could be argued that one must be free to be truly happy. But it could also be argued the one must be happy to be truly free.

Again, as it was said before, freedom and the pursuit of happiness are synonymous. You aren't entitled to happiness, nor is the government required to provide you with happiness.

 

[milefile]

I agree. But I don't see how quoting me relates to that statement.

 

[SaleenASL]

Originally posted by milefile
I agree. But I don't see how quoting me relates to that statement.

I misinterpreted your question.

But that aside, I think happiness has the prerequisite of freedom. The opposite is not necessarily true.

 

[Danoff]

I agree with saleen. You can be free and miserable.

If you consider what America has as freedom (which it's not but let's pretend) then you have a bunch of people who are not happy because they did not do as well for themselves as their neighbors. So they decide that freedom sucks because they're not as good at it as everyone else. They figure freedom means the freedom from failure rather than the freedom to succeed.

Many many many many many people forget that the phrase that this thread is named after is does not imply the freedom from failure. It protects the freedom to fail while protecting the freedom to succeed.

Responsability for one's own actions. Where the hell did it go?

The worst part about all of this is not so much the people who want the freedom from failure, but the people who want other people to have the freedom from failure. Those people are the real problem. The ones who have no problems making ends meet but who figure (conceit) that others will have that problem and that they should not have to suffer that burden (not a justifiable statement).

Few people seem to realize that it is impossible to have a society that is free of (from) failure.

 

[milefile]

The think "freedom from what" rather than "freedom for what".

 

[Danoff]

That's a much less abstract concept that is easily understood. The need to protect from a specific thing is more easily grasped and fought for than the need to protect general abilities.