The Pursuit of Happiness
A Philosophy of Building Better: Chapter 2 - The Purpose of Building is to Further Human Flourishing
“It is clear then that all men aim at happiness and the good life, but some men have an opportunity to get it, others have not. This may be due to their nature, or to some stroke of fortune, for the good life needs certain material resources (and when a man’s disposition is comparatively good, the need is for a lesser amount of these, a greater amount when it is comparatively bad). Some indeed, who start with the opportunity go wrong from the very beginning of the pursuit of happiness.”
Aristotle, Book 7 of The Politics
Today we continue our series outlining the Philosophy of Building Better:
Chapter 2 - The Purpose of Building is to Further Human Flourishing
Chapter 3 - There is an Objectively Correct Way to Build
Chapter 4 - Building is Fundamentally Contextual
Chapter 5 - The Builder Must Learn from the Great Builders of the Past
Chapter 6 - Building Better Supports People’s Best Impulses
Chapter 7 - The Better Builder Refuses to Ethically Compromise
Chapter 8 - The Better Builder Strives to Repair
Chapter 9 - The Builder’s Oath
Chapter 10 - The Building Better Checklist
One of the most misunderstood phrases of all time may be “the pursuit of happiness.”
These words were enshrined in the Declaration of Independence of the United States on July 4, 1776, when Thomas Jefferson wrote that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
The pursuit of happiness has been a fundamental part of the American ethos ever since. It is easy to see how this drive to “be happy” defines so many of the decisions we make in modern society from where to live, to whom we marry, to what to do on our weekends, to what we do for work.
How is it that this phrase that is so etched into the cultural fabric of America is so misunderstood?
As the starting quote of this post shows, it is Aristotle, not Jefferson who originally coined the phrase “the pursuit of happiness.” It is hard to imagine that someone with Jefferson’s educational background is not being intentional when he uses the same phrase for one of humanity’s unalienable rights. We must assume that Jefferson understood the source and context of this phrase and chose it, not despite, but because of that very meaning.
So why is this phrase so misunderstood?
When Aristotle says “happiness” he does not mean “happiness” as we conceive of its modern definition.
Aristotle’s original Greek word which we translate into “happiness” is eudaimonia. As with so many Greek words, eudaimonia is much more complex than its common translation would suggest.
Eudaimonia literally means having “good spirit” in Greek. In English, it is often translated as happiness or well-being, but it has a more holistic meaning compared to either of those words. Perhaps the best English word that captures the more holistic connotation of eudaimonia is flourishing.
Eudaimonia encapsulates the holistic welfare of the human being. Someone has eudaimonia when they are flourishing.
When we think of happiness, we generally think of it as a momentary feeling. We think of “feeling” the emotion of happiness often in relation to a specific event or some kind of entertainment. But a life characterized by true eudaimonia will certainly contain a range of emotions, not just happiness. In fact, a life that optimizes to feel the emotion of “happiness” as much as possible may easily end up being a life that does not contain much, if any, eudaimonia.
When Aristotle, and therefore Jefferson, discuss happiness they are referring to happiness in this more holistic sense. A happiness that captures the entirety of the well-being of a person, not just their emotions or what feels good in the moment but what is good for their long term well-being.
In this context, the pursuit of happiness isn’t a hedonistic pursuit of pleasure or even the positive emotion we call happiness. Instead, the pursuit of happiness is seeking the things that enable us to flourish.
This isn’t just for individuals either.
Aristotle claims that the purpose of the state is to enable its citizens to pursue their happiness. In other words, the purpose of the state is to facilitate human flourishing.
In my last post, I wrote about how we are all builders and that one of the things we participate in building is the institutions and society of which we are a part.
If the aim of building the institution we call a state is to further human flourishing can the same not be true for other building projects?
What else could the aim possibly be when we build a home for a family to live in? To provide them, not only with four walls and a roof to keep the rain off, but a sense of place and an environment to flourish.
What else could the aim possibly be when we build an organization? To accomplish some specific goal or test yes, but also to provide the members of the organization with an ideal to strive towards. A path towards self betterment, shared connections, and ultimately, flourishing.
What else could the aim possibly be when we build a product? To solve some sort of problem or provide some kind of value to a customer. What is that value or the solution to that problem if not an aim at their flourishing?
I contend that the fundamental aim of all building should be the same: to further human flourishing.
Building takes effort. That effort is never applied without an aim in mind. In many of the examples we discuss, that aim is directed at someone else, such as a user, customer, or resident. This doesn’t necessarily mean that there must be some economic rationale. There are other examples like with art or a hobby where the aim of building may simply be the enjoyment of the process as reward unto itself.
So does all building promote human flourishing if we accept that as its aim?
Obviously not. In fact, I think most of our modern building does just the opposite.
We need only to look around us to see how often we get building wrong.
Apartments that make us feel claustrophobic and separated from our neighbors. Tech products that riddle us with anxiety and the fear of missing out. Societies increasingly feel strained at the seams between competing ideologies. Cosmetics filled with harmful chemicals. Food filled with cost cutting preservatives. Entertainment meant to consume as many of our waking hours as possible and to keep us tethered to our screens. Financial products designed to keep us in a cycle of living paycheck to paycheck. Appliances that are purpose-built to fail more frequently.
More and more it seems hard to find anything but companies selling us products we don't need, that make us worse off, and in increasingly creative ways designed to get us to pay more than we expect.
That doesn’t mean we are destined to suffer from bad building. Most of the things I mentioned above were built initially with good intentions, but they strayed from the aim of furthering human flourishing. Maybe their incentives got hijacked by short-termism. Maybe they had to race to the bottom of quality in a highly competitive environment. Maybe they justified their business model behind convoluted half-truths like their users making “rational purchasing decisions”. Maybe they started thinking of the people using their product simply as economic “daily active users” instead of real, unabstracted human beings.
Whatever the reason, just because some have strayed from the path does not mean that all those who wander are lost.
I believe that there is a way back.
We can get our acts of building working for us again.
We can construct buildings that help their residents to thrive.
We can offer services that support people’s best impulses, not exploit their worst.
We can charge our customers a fair price for a high-quality product that isn’t designed to become obsolete.
The way to do this isn’t a secret. If it is hidden at all, it is done in plain sight. We all know good quality products from bad. We all have the experience of feeling good about something we buy and we know all too well its inverse; the sinking feeling in our stomach that comes from knowing we were taken advantage of.
In my next post I will argue that there is an objectively correct way to build. That it doesn’t require fancy tools or a special degree. That you and I can start doing it in all our various acts of building.
But as we embark on this journey to build better we must always keep the end of building front and center. We must follow the north star and set our compass heading.
If we are to successfully build better, the ultimate aim of our building must always be to further the flourishing of the real human beings impacted by it.
Let’s Build Better,
Erik
