Stephen wrote:
"Dear Lung Zhi & Anthony,
Thanks for your questions. You both have raised some very good inquiries for all of us to reflect or meditate.
First of all, those people that Lung Zhi described thought they were pursuing happiness, but actually it's not. They were accumulating wealth, power and fame, which by itself has nothing to do with happiness. As we all know, accumulation of certain material means are of prime importance to our survival, and there is no two ways about it (after all, we need to bring bread to the table). But as Abraham Maslow has taught us, once we have acquired the lower needs, self-actualization is the holy grail for us to pursue. That's why history praised great artists, scientists or musicians for their contributions to humanity, rather that some rich billionaires.
Anthony has found a new hypothesis about happiness. But I wonder if happiness is a moving target, or is it just us, our mind, which is moving second by second, chasing dreams after dreams, day in day out?
I'm not totally convinced about Martin Seligman's theory either. But to be fair to him, he is advocating the optimum 'flavor' for sensual pleasure (not addiction), 'flow' for engagement (not obsession) and 'fit' for gratification (not aggressiveness or over-stretched ourselves). But most important of all, his emphasis is on combining these goals in 'particular' ways so as to achieve its optimum levels (best fit for ourselves); only then can we achieve satisfaction in our life.
Hope the above clarify some misunderstandings. (or create more confusion?)
Your pal,
Stephen
--
No comments:
Post a Comment