Sei sulla pagina 1di 6

Brickus 1

Emily Brickus

Professor Beadle

English 115

September 30, 2019

The Cause of Happiness

Have you ever pondered the question of what creates genuine happiness in a person?

Everyone has had different experiences thus far in life, which undoubtedly leads to very different

personality types and different outlooks on life. Questioning what constitutes the happiness of

each individual person is a very convoluted idea. With so much contradicting research out there,

it can be extremely difficult to determine what ​it really comes down to​. Perhaps there are several

truths, maybe there doesn’t need to be just one. The argument of nature vs nurture is a popular

one amongst theorists but what many fail to consider is that perhaps it’s both. The articles of

Graham ​Hill, ​David​ Brooks and ​Sonja​ Lyubomirsky all have solid arguments that answer these

questions, however Lyubomirsky’s article​ “How Happy Are You and Why?”​ most effectively

utilizes the usage of ethos, pathos and logos.

Though the article ​“Living with Less. A Lot Less”​ by Graham Hill establishes ethos

through research done at UCLA, he fails at thoroughly forming a sense of logos and pathos

through his personal experience. His logic is far past invalid because not everyone is the same as

him. Having less material items surrounding him might in fact make him happy, but that’s not

the case for everyone. His statement “It took 15 years, a great love and a lot of travel to get rid of

all the inessential things I had collected and live a bigger, better, richer life with less” is simply

not applicable​ to everyone (Hill 309). ​This strategy in seeking happiness may have worked for
Brickus 2

him but it is bold of him to assume that this will work for everyone. ​He claims that he

experienced​ pain even though he was surrounded by material objects but that’s clearly inevitable,

that’s to be expected. The logic and emotion severely lacks here. This doesn’t make the reader

want to apply what he’s saying to their own life ​because it’s a pretty unrealistic thing to ask​.

Now, that’s not to say that someone couldn't be happier with less, but ​his argument lacks a sense

of logos in claiming ​that getting rid of what isn’t absolutely necessary will make ​Everyone

happy. This is a very specific and difficult thing to expect from a great amount of people and it’s

definitely not something that just anyone can do. Happiness is different for everyone and the

cause of an individual's happiness isn’t the same as anyone else's. As shallow as it may seem to

one person, another person’s happiness could easily be found in material things. Some might

argue that ​this isn’t​ genuine ​happiness​, but who’s to say what genuine happiness really is? It’s

safe to say that it’s different for everyone.

On the other side of it, Brooks ​has the opposite problem. He ​does an excellent job of

establishing logos and pathos​,​ but fails to incorporate a good sense of ethos in his article ​“​What

Suffering Does.”​ The recurring conversations he has with people supports his claim that the goal

in life for most people is to be happy, which he explains in a way that makes sense ​and provides

his argument with a strong sense of Logos​. He uses devastating life examples to appeal to the

reader’s emotions such as the loss of a child ​which is an excellent usage of pathos​. This was a

good strategy in making his point relatable to the reader however ​and putting things in

perspective emotionally and logistically. However,​ he doesn’t provide any statistics or data​, he

doesn’t use a single outside source.​ When he makes the claim that “many people don’t come out

healed” when referring to ​instances of suffering​, he doesn’t​ really ​back this up (Brooks 287). ​To
Brickus 3

create a better sense of ethos, he should have addressed the counterargument that sometimes

people do come out of suffering healed and that it’s not always the end of the world. ​Some might

claim that his degree in history, as well as his experience in journalism adds to his credibility, but

that’s very debatable. Looking at his ​background information​ it reads that he “has written a

regular ​opinion​ column” which ironically enough ruins his credibility because he doesn’t even

write about actual facts in his daily life, it’s all just his own opinions. It’s easy to ​make the claim

that a common goal for people in life is to be happy, which is why there are so many books about

it sold, but that doesn’t even support ​his attempted claim​. His ​claim​ is that pain is ​necessary​ for

personal growth, which logistically makes sense however that’s completely irrelevant to the

desire of happiness. Furthermore, ​since his job is to write about his own opinions​, it leaves his

argument questionable ​and takes away every sense of ethos from his examples. Ultimately he is

making an​ empty claim that many people could potentially resonate with, but that doesn’t change

the fact that ​it’s not the case for everyone.

Finally, there’s Lyubomirsky who most efficiently uses ethos, pathos and logos in her

article ​“How Happy Are You and Why?”​. ​For starters, she is a professor of psychology at the

University of California, Riverside which already provides her claims with a sense of ethos.​Her

usage of analytics and data shown in graphs supports her idea of where happiness ​actually​ comes

from.​ She includes a pie chart which classifies intentional activity as 40%, circumstances as 10%

and “happiness set point” which is a person’s natural happiness as 50%. Including these

percentages adds to her sense of ethos by providing the reader with specific numbers of what she

theorizes makes up a person’s amount of happiness.​ She effectively uses the tragic stories of

other people to appeal to the reader’s emotions and make it understood that happiness hardly has
Brickus 4

anything to do with their circumstances. She explains how some of the most happy people

actually come from the least ideal situations. This leads us to believe that a large portion of

happiness is genetic since it’s clearly not all circumstantial. She introduces ​this​ idea of a

“happiness set point” which takes into account ​these​ outside factors. She concludes with hope for

the reader and gives a sense of logos by claiming that “happiness can be found in how you

behave” ​which shows that changing certain behaviors can lead to a happier life​ (Lyubomirsky

196). Meaning that people can create their own happiness through their decisions which is ​a very

logical claim that resonates with a lot of people​. Simple things such as yoga and self reflection

can really impact the mind in a healthy way and create a mindset that allows for genuine

happiness to grow. ​This article puts emphasis on how​ as individuals, different things make

different people happy. Along with this, people have the ability to change what some would

believe is their destiny. The human brain is so susceptible to change that it only makes sense for

it to be influenced by more than a singular occurrence. Everyone has the ability to rewire their

brain and basically trick themselves into being happy. Blaming everything simply on genetics or

simply on environment is an unhealthy way of looking at it because everyone is in control of

their outlook on life. Lyubomirsky ​provides a sense of pathos by giving​ the reader hope in saying

that even though some situations are uncontrollable, how one reacts and allows a situation to

make them feel is ultimately in their hands.

To conclude, there are a lot of factors ​to take ​into account when evaluating a person’s

happiness. There couldn’t possibly be a singular thing that defines such a huge aspect of who a

person is. Clearly not everyone's the same, so each person should be looked at individually when

evaluating such a wide spectrum of an emotion. Happiness and the way that it’s defined can only
Brickus 5

be done so on a case to case basis. The best article to read in determining what happiness really

comes down to is the one by Lyubomirsky. She understands these concepts and reassures the

reader that even though happiness is greatly made up by genetics, it’s not everything. Everyone

has the ability to increase their happiness through conscious decisions and should try their best to

do so.
Brickus 6

Works Cited

Brooks, David. “What Suffering Does.” ​Pursuing Happiness,​ edited by Matthew Parfitt and

Dawn Skorczewski, Bedford St. Martin’s, 2016, pp 284-287.

Hill, Graham. “Living with Less. A Lot Less.” ​Pursuing Happiness,​ edited by Matthew Parfitt

and Dawn Skorczewski, Bedford St. Martin’s, 2016, pp 308-313.

Lyubomirsky, Sonja. “How Happy Are You and Why?” ​Pursuing Happiness,​ edited by Matthew

Parfitt and Dawn Skorczewski, Bedford St. Martin’s, 2016, pp 179-197.

Potrebbero piacerti anche