An article in the April issue of Reader’s Digest has the provocative title: “Happiness: It’s Not All
It’s Cracked Up to Be.” The article is reprinted from one written by Emily Esfahani Smith a couple years
ago in The Atlantic. Smith, a writer and
editor for several publications, has written a number of articles on the place
of happiness in relationships. This one really caught my eye.
Smith relies heavily on the work of Victor Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning, a seminal book
on the topic by one who honed his understanding in German concentration camps
in WWII. Smith records Frankl’s assertion that, “It is the very pursuit of
happiness that thwarts happiness.” Smith further quotes Frankl: “Being human
always points, and is directed, to something or someone other than oneself.”
Smith reports, “In a new study, which [has been]
published in the Journal of Positive Psychology, … the
researchers found that a meaningful life and happy life overlap in certain
ways, but are ultimately very different. Leading a happy life, the
psychologists found, is associated with being a ‘taker’ while leading a
meaningful life corresponds with being a ‘giver.’” The authors write, "Happiness
without meaning characterizes a relatively shallow, self-absorbed or even
selfish life, in which things go well, needs and desire are easily satisfied,
and difficult or taxing entanglements are avoided."
This sounds eerily like the slogans of recent years: “You
deserve a break today” and “Have it your way.” Michael Harper in The Love Affair identifies a
narcissistic self-love that he calls “personalism.” He believes that, “In the
Western world it has become a multi-million dollar industry, offering to meet a
need previous generations did not know existed…. It is so obviously
self-centered that one wonders why so
many millions have been taken in by it.” Why indeed?
One could argue that the elemental statement in our premiere
founding document declares the pursuit of happiness to be a God-given right. Does
this lead people to seek personal happiness to their detriment? There are those
who think that even the Founders realized this; that perhaps we have been reading
the document wrongly. Pardon a descent into the deep weeds of punctuation:
there is a belief that the period after “happiness” in the Declaration of Independence was not in the original. This would
make the clause affirming God-given rights relative to that which precedes and follows
it. In other words the central point is about the social contract to protect
the common good rather than a declaration of the personal pursuit of anything.
None of this should be surprising to any serious student of
the Bible. The core principle driving all appropriate actions is to be
self-giving, agape love as demonstrated by Jesus himself. Submission, deference
and sacrificial giving, principle virtues recommended throughout Scripture, all
fly in the face of personalism of any kind. The proper attitude is that
identified by Frankl and the psychologists as that which leads to a fulfilled,
if not happy life: giving. As for my current condition, I can learn from Paul’s
declaration in Philippians:
“I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation.” For
the Christian it’s all about life (in Christ), liberty (being freed from sin)
and the pursuit of being content in any and every situation. That’s my
declaration of dependence.
No comments:
Post a Comment