I do not think it is possible to sustain happiness without strong goals, purposes, and strong opinions. Not necessarily to say that we only need to have these in order to be happy. So in addressing Nietzchea's proposal in having strong opinions as being necessary for happiness I will have to agree, but with conditions.
My thought is that we live in a society where it is easy to fall into a trance. I mostly mean that people make choices that fit within current trends. Sadly, if one is the type that blindly follows the latest trend without any thought or knowledge of why or how it came to be and by not participating you experience self pity, I cannot say that those people are happy. The reason is because they do not have any opinions for themselves. They are just adpoted and accepted without question. This is not so terrible when it concerns material things, but for ideas, I believe has a much worse affect on a society.
Having strong opinions can be somewhat necessary to happiness depending on the subject at hand. Standing firm that purple is the prettiest color may make me happy, but someone else could easily deny and say orange is the prettiest. Although this is much like an argument between 9 year olds it is an essential part of being an individual. Sometimes having strong opinions cover a much more controversial subject, for instance, abortion. However, with topics like these, it is especially important to know the source of your opinions towards the subject because decisions are made that affect entire populations. I think it is essential to make sure you have heard all sides of a story before strong opinions of an individual or group affect laws especially if it imposes upon other individuals rights. Meaning just because one has strong opinions about a topic that is important to their happiness does not mean it's the same for others and therefore cannot be treated as fact.
Finally, concerning the dangers of strong opinions to happiness. One cannot be the holder of a strong opinions when it concerns questions of fact. The very reason a fact is a fact is because it cannot be debated through opinions, yet, especially in politics, people continue to trample facts with strong opinions. It is completely ridiculous. For example, saying global warming is not real as a difference in opinion as to it being real is incorrect to say because it crosses a line of fact.
As human beings we all tend to have strong opinions and usually there are questions of right/wrong and best/worst, but it is crucial to know when to compromise and when to accept a difference in opinion. As long as you can live in a society alongside strangers and neighbors and as long as you can keep your opinions essential to your happiness then that's the least one could do. However, feel free to change your mind. That is growth.
What makes living with each other bearable, and civilization possible is the willingness of all parties to limit the exercise of their rights - Daniel M. Haybron
Agreed, we're entitled to our own opinions but not to our own facts. But how about having a strong opinion as to the priority of fact? That seems a potential source of conflict, but also of personal satisfaction. Think Richard Dawkins, for instance, who seems quite contented with himself and his worldview... and is widely perceived (misperceived) as arrogant. Should he "limit the exercise" of his right to a strong opinion in support of the fact of evolution?
ReplyDelete