Inteligence and happiness

[theawesometrain]

This is a section from something I wrote today in study hall, it really was just me hurriedly capturing a small portion of my thoughts. I particularly liked these two paragraphs because I thought they could spark some interesting, stimulating, conversation. If you would like to hear the rest of these ramblings, just read my journal every now and again.




One's intellect, if hardly present at all, would limit the abilities and happiness of the individual as a whole. In a given situation, the person of higher intellect could summon more options and a greater number of outcomes, both good and bad, than the person of lower intellect could. This does not happen conciously, it happens simply because that person has the ability to think more deeply about the problem at hand than the other. So with fewer choices, and a tendency to be less able to think deeply about an instance, a person of lower intellect would have limited sucsess. Thus, with limited sucsess comes limited hapiness.

However, how can one truly and acurately measure happiness? If a person of lower intellect has allways had fewer choices than the one of higher, one would think that they could not ever be as happy as the latter. Take a step back and look at it from a different light. The lesser of the two minds makes a decision, which, if the mind had been a bit greater, they would not have made because a different option would have been formed in the mind with a better outcome attached to it, and gotten chosen instead. True, things could have turned out "better" for this person had the thought arose, but if this person has never known anything different, then how can they be any less happy than that person of higher intelect? That said, how could one argue that a more intelligible person's life is better than an unintelligible person's, when both are truly content and happy with their own lives in every way? One will only become unhappy with a decision when they realize that something better could have been acheived.  

[Phaeton]

It's just an odd take on the whole "ignorance is bliss" argument. If someone is oblivious to hardships and difficulty in the world they might be happier. You can also lump that in with "What you don't know won't hurt you." Now if life has proven something time and time again it's that what you don't know WILL hurt you, SEVERELY.

Well, arguing who gets a better life is a bit of an odd thing. Perspective seems to be most of the measure. It's not so much intellect that determines how happy one can be, but desire. More unfulfilled desires lead to more stress and some other things. It's a Buddhist argument I won't bring up.  

[theawesometrain]

Phaeton

It's just an odd take on the whole "ignorance is bliss" argument. If someone is oblivious to hardships and difficulty in the world they might be happier. You can also lump that in with "What you don't know won't hurt you." Now if life has proven something time and time again it's that what you don't know WILL hurt you, SEVERELY.

Well, arguing who gets a better life is a bit of an odd thing. Perspective seems to be most of the measure. It's not so much intellect that determines how happy one can be, but desire. More unfulfilled desires lead to more stress and some other things. It's a Buddhist argument I won't bring up.

yes I know it does seem a bit cliche, keep in mind this was just a small section of something I wrote in study hall. I was trying to express one thought, but spiraled into this one. and yes, both what you know AND what you don't know can hurt you, but the people who sit and ponder and try to figure it out are typically of the more intellectual type. its not that the lesser of the two decides not to think, its not that they are striving to be ignorant and naive, they just don't have the capacity TO have deep thoughts as such. but that can always change  

[God-Raped-Me]

The fact that they COULD go out and change that they're ignorant but won't means that they DO strive to be ignorant, and it is that they decide not to think. They are choosing the option to not learn from things. There is nothing stopping someone from picking up a book and reading from a store, liabrary, friend or family member. And these days with having the internet information on everything is so much eaiser to get now. You can also learn from simply listening to other's life stories. You can't tell me that there isn't at least ONE old person in every retirement home who wouldn't love to just sit down and share their life with someone.

There is no excuse for ignorance these days, well maybe from some old people and others who truly CAN'T learn becasue of wahtever condition. But those of us who can learn should!

As for being happy, being smart has nothing to do with being happy. Knowing how and why the world turns doesn't mean you're going to get the life you want or the one you're working towards. Not only that but being happy in life is different to everyone. To some working hard at a job is what keeps them happy, for others it's sitting down and reading book after book. Some are happy to simply teach others about life lessons, and some are happy if they all they have is their family.

In short YOU can't measure someone else's happyness no matter how smart you may be or how stupid they are. The only one who can measure happyness is that person living in that life.  

[Slim95]

What I have to say on this matter is essentially a blended and condensed version of what Phaeton and GRM had to say: It's all about perspective. Perspective can determine the "quality" or "amount" (etcetera. use whichever word you'd like) of happiness. Heck, perspective can determine the "amount" of intelligence an individual has. Intelligence doesn't necessarily have to be complexity of thought, or the capacity for many thoughts; it could be simplicity. Simplicity is often the wisest of ways.

Words and concepts are more often than not as bendable as the flexable ruler in my backpack. Rarely as glittery, though. <.<

I've said it two million times before, and I'll say it two million times more: Whatever floats your boat.

On another note: I'm relatively acquainted with that Buddhist arguement Phaeton brought up, and am in agreement with it.