three levels of happiness:On the first level, happiness is not what most people expect, it is from money and health, in fact, more long-term and obvious happiness comes from the interpersonal relationships we are in, such as warm families, close lovers, or friends who help each other, These can bring us more happiness than money and health. The second level, happiness does not originate from external objective conditions, but lies in whether the subjective desire and objective conditions are consistent. It is only when we have been satisfied that we have met or even exceeded our expectations that we can feel happy. On the third level, happiness is determined by our own biochemical system, and human beings have spent thousands of of years changing the world to pursue happiness, until now only to discover that what is needed to change is our own body. But there seems to be a bit of a problem in this discussion, do you mean that the ultimate way to get happiness is to inject more serotonin and dopamine? What are you calling a fucking conclusion? In fact, the conclusion comes from a basic hypothesis that the pleasure of the body is the same as subjective pleasure. If that is the case, then there is no way, the only way to allow a long, high-intensity feeling of happiness is the use of drugs. do we seem to think that just thinking about body-level pleasure is too superficial? Right? Then we'll go up another level. We continue our discussion on the fourth floor of happiness.--The meaning of life. give an example of raising a child, if you have children, you will have a deep experience. If we really want to calculate a thing to bring you happy time more or more painful time, in order to judge this thing is happy or painful words. It would be a very unpleasant thing to raise a child. Because most of the time, raising a child is changing diapers, feeding and handling the child's crying and temper, right? This is definitely a chore that no one is willing to do. Why, however, most parents would say that children are the main source of their happiness, how can this be explained? Did they have a broken head? Through this example we will find that happiness is not simply the feeling of the body is more pleasant than the pain felt more so simple. On the contrary, happiness depends on the whole of our life, is not meaningful, there is no value. Isn't it a little hard to understand? It's like someone who thinks raising a child is turning himself into a miserable slave, waiting for a little demon all night and night. And more people feel that they are full of love, is nurturing a new life. That way, the same thing is given a different meaning. There is a word to say,if life has meaning, even in the midst of adversity can be starch syrup, and if life is meaningless, even in prosperity is the days. So happy fourth floor explanation, we are to discuss the meaning of life. After the discussion of the previous episode we can now reach the consensus that the biochemical system in which our bodies feel joy and pain is the same regardless of the age. There's no doubt about that, is it? But what is not the same? Is that we have a great difference in what life gives us. And it doesn't mean that people in our time are more meaningful. For example, we put modern and medieval people under a microscope, one after the other for each minute of their lives, to see who is miserable, it must be the Middle Ages than we modern people more miserable. But when it comes to the question of death, the medieval people believed that if you could go to heaven and have eternal happiness after the death of your doctor, would that belief in itself give them a meaningful illusion of their present life? And we modern people such as I do not believe what heaven, what hell this set, then I can now be sure that the meaning of my life is ultimately to meet death, is to be completely forgotten, then because there is death this forever lingering problem exists, so we can not think so, Are people in the Middle Ages more able to feel the meaning of life than we do in modern times? So if the middle Ages were to do a survey, the "You are satisfied with your entire life process," I reckon the Middle Ages may score higher than we are modern people. How to face the example of death, this is not an isolated extreme hypothesis, we think Ah, if the medieval kind of death can enter the paradise of eternal life meaning is an illusion, then modern scientists believe that their knowledge for human development of the new Frontier of life is also an illusion? Some soldiers feel that they are defend, so his life is meaningful, but we have said that the country is only in the common imagination of all of us a story, the state and God's underlying concept is no essential difference, that like the meaning of defend is not the same as after death to heaven is an illusion? Similarly, entrepreneurs want to open a new company that is the meaning of life, the same people believe in God, read the Bible, participate in jihad, build temples He also thought this is the meaning of life, but these are not all the illusion of one after another? if so, the so-called happiness is probably just our own illusion of the meaning of life and the collective illusion reached a kind of synchronization. Can you hear me, okay? It means that I go to the army to be happy because we all feel that doing so has defend meaning. I go to the company to be happy, this is because we feel that this has contributed to the social and economic strength of the significance. So as long as my own ideas and the expectations of all around me can be agreed, then I can convince myself, my life it is meaningful, and I can get happiness from this belief. does this conclusion sound a bit sad and helpless? Plainly, the fourth level of happiness, the so-called meaning of life, is only a kind of self-deception. We concluded in the third layer that if happiness is the pleasure of the body, then to be happier, we can only manipulate our biochemical system. The fourth layer concludes that if happiness is to give life meaning, then want to be more happy, you have to deceive themselves repeatedly. I think we must not be satisfied with this conclusion. Is there a third possibility to explore happiness besides the two possibilities mentioned above? Is there a fifth level of happiness? Are our discussions getting deeper and harder to understand? But I think this issue is very exciting. Let's think about it again. The above two conclusions are based on a common assumption that both the physical feeling of happiness and the meaning of life are subjective feelings. Right? If you want to judge the most concise standard of fast unhappiness is to ask the client directly when you are not happy, right? It seems logical. You're saying this isn't nonsense? I'm not happy myself, I'm not asking who is that? However, this subjective authority is the product of modern liberalism, we have been brainwashed from a young age to be loyal to themselves, listen to their own voice, to obey their desire, I feel good is good, I think bad, he is bad. but for this kind of personal subjective feeling mantras authority, today we want to call shouting truth, see what will happen. If we have not been instilled in these slogans since we were young, is happiness still not the clearest thing for each of us? That is not necessarily the. Most religions and ideologies in history believe that there are objective standards for good, for evil, and about what should be done. In their view, the average person's own feelings and preferences are rather unreliable, not credible things. From Lao Tzu to Socrates to Freud told us"Be aware of yourself!" "The implication is that the average person does not know the true self, and therefore ignores the real happiness. every one of us knows that if we can make our own choices, most people are willing to devote their time to sex rather than to a great national renaissance. This choice is absolutely obedient to your desires, but does that mean that you should have sex if you want to be happy? If we look at those who are addicted to drugs, we will find that they absolutely have one thing in common, that is, all people will say that drugs are their happiest time, then our authoritative psychologists should send a report, tell everyone want to be happy to go to drugs? If we look at our subjective feelings like this, will we find it very unreliable? in the book "Selfish Genes", written by British biologist Dawkins, he said that human behavior, even if it is against itself, is still trying to keep his genes alive. If we look at this level of logic, most men toil and worry all day long, and there is no way to enjoy a peaceful happiness. Actually, it's because of biology.DNA is manipulating us, DNA is like Satan, using fleeting orgasms as bait to spread our genes, so that all men surrender. In summary, it is precisely because our subjective feelings do not represent absolute authority, so most of the religion and philosophy of the way to treat happiness, and we agree with the subjective feeling very different. The most important question of happiness is Buddhism. In the previous episode of the global Fusion religion, I focused on the Buddhist ideas. Buddhism believes that happiness is neither subjective feeling of pleasure, nor subjective sense of life, but rather a matter of letting go of the pursuit of subjective feelings. The similarities between Buddhism and modern biochemistry lie in the recognition that happiness does not originate from external conditions. The deeper insight of Buddhism is that true happiness does not lie in our subjective feelings. The more we emphasize subjective feelings, the more we feel pain. The advice that Buddhism gives us is not to pursue external achievements, but also to not pursue those feelings that feel good. I'm not going to start talking about it, I'm going to say a little more about the history of mankind as a Buddhist brochure. In summary, we will now use the questionnaire of subjective happiness, hoping to find out when we subjectively determine when there is happiness, and that finding a particular emotional state is to find happiness. On the contrary, many traditional philosophies and religions believe that the key to happiness lies in the pursuit of self and true understanding of oneself. Most people think that their feelings, thoughts, likes and dislikes constitute our own, but this is a big mistake. When they feel angry, they think"I'm angry, it's my rage." So this life is to do things, are trying to avoid this feeling, and to pursue the joy or comfort of other feelings. But they have never found that the real source of pain is not the feeling itself, but the constant pursuit of feeling. If that is the case, we may have all been wrong about the historical perception of happiness in the past. Perhaps, whether the expectation is satisfied, the feeling is not happy is not the focus, the really important question is whether humans know themselves. What evidence do we have that today's people know more about themselves than ancient collectors or medieval farmers? We don't have an answer. What is happiness in the end? What is happiness? Is Money and right? Or a family member or a friend? Is your heart that the desire to drive or your brain small and medium current? Or you should seek the meaning of life, or you should put aside everything in exchange for peace of mind. How can we find out who we really are? I think this question is going to haunt us all the time. The author has shown us that the answer seems to be no, and that I can give an explanation of what I have to persuade myself, but I can't give you your own answer.
"A Brief History of mankind" 13. Keep searching (under)--re-recognize yourself
