What are the major theories of happiness and which theory leads to a

more fulfilling life?

Kaitlyn Dunn

Senior Project Advisor: Sara Price

Abstract:

Happiness is a universally valued truth and is a constant goal of humanity. As the longing for
happiness continues, a variety of new theories are beginning to arise. In this paper, I analyze the
two major theories of happiness and interpret which method provides the most fulfillment for the
individual. The research I used is primarily human observational studies as well as critical
analysis of happiness in general. It was found that eudaimonic happiness provided the most
fulfillment for the individual and subjectively increases happiness levels. It was also concluded
that hedonic theory only produces surface level happiness within the individual. Therefore, if
happiness is desired, the individual should follow the ideals of eudaimonic theory in order to
maximize personal fulfillment.

12th Grade Humanities

Animas High School
5 March 2018
1
 Part I:

The idea of happiness presents itself in various ways: for some it is the feeling you get while

listening to the calming breath of the ocean, for others it is the humbling insignificance of a

starry night, or maybe the fragility of a broken sunset​. ​Regardless of its origin, happiness defines

our modern existence and has recently become the most common measurement of success​. ​For

centuries, happiness has baffled the societal discourse of humanity and only now is it becoming a

commonality among the general population​. ​However, even with the rising popularity of “the

good life” a universalize path ceases to exist and probably never will​. ​The advancement of

societal morals continues to shape our idea of happiness and the boundaries of cultural influences

are beginning to deteriorate​. This is due to the fast growing innovation of technology, which

allows happiness ideals to blend cross culturally and provide insight like never before.

Most of the happiness discourse debates the differences between external pleasure and meaning,

which can easily be solved with a universally accepted definition​. ​The commonality of the

pursuit of happiness has sparked research into the complexities of happiness and the theories that

surround it​. There are two main models that categorize happiness, hedonic and eudaimonic​. ​In

order to live a more fulfilling life, the physical definition of happiness must be manipulated to

reflect the ideas of eudaimonic theory.

2
 Part II:

The two theories of happiness are derived from neurological stimulus versus internal

contentment, or, in simpler terms, happiness versus meaning​. Eudaimonic happiness is

associated with long-term and subsequent meaning compared to hedonic which measures

simplistic pleasures throughout the short-term (Eric 1).

Hedonic happiness is the belief that fulfillment comes from an increase in pleasure and a

decrease in pain (Ryan 1). It is based on the idea of simplistic pleasures and increasing the

amount of neurological serotonin stimuli within the brain​. Everyday tasks such as exercising,

eating, listening to music, etc​. ​can increase these internal stimuli and according to hedonic

theory, make you happier. It is self-based and focused solely on increasing the amount of

simplistic pleasures that you experience throughout the day​. ​Hedonic takes a more singular event

approach and instead of focusing on future outcomes, relies on happiness in the moment​. With

an accumulation of simplistic pleasures, it is believed that well-being will increase​. ​This version

of happiness allows for a surface level outcome and measures its success off the quantity of

pleasures rather than the quality​ ​(McMahan 5).

Theories rooted in hedonic ideals include: bottom up theory, desire theory, and objective list

theory​. Bottom up theory is essentially the accumulation of positive moments and other objective

life experiences​. ​Bottom up is the opposite of top-down theory, which states that happiness is the

3
ability to perceive life events as positive or negative without letting those events affect overall

self-esteem​. ​Desire theory branches off hedonic theory and states that happiness is rooted in

receiving what you want and increasing the amount of pleasurable feelings throughout your day​.

Finally, objective list theory is about achieving pleasurable goals and checking off a list of

worthy pursuits (Seligman 1). All three theories build off hedonic theory and the idea of

maximizing pleasure, the main concept of hedonic happiness.

On the other hand, eudaimonic happiness is a result of long term self-realization and the gradual

increase in an individual's relationship to self and one's environment​. This perspective of

happiness focuses on bettering the individual’s internal self instead of the external environment​.

When interacting with the external world, instead of seeking pleasure, the eudaimonic pursuit

would process the information and utilize the facts for self improvement​. ​The theory in

particular, focuses on building up self-esteem and working out the innermost meaning in ones

daily life to help affect the future in a positive manner​.

The eudaimonic approach is currently the most popular pursuit of fulfillment since it

encompasses longer lasting happiness for the individual​. However, just because it is the most

popular way of thinking about happiness does not mean that it is always utilized successfully​.

Within modern day society, short term happiness and consuming fast entertaining media, is

quickly becoming a substitute for longer term happiness​. When humanity is being bombarded

with information every second, our brains are so desensitized to stimulation, causing people to

4
demand progressively more and more pleasure in their daily lives​. This desire has resulted in

more people taking the hedonic approach to happiness instead of a longer term solution​.

Part lll:

Hedonic vs Eudaimonic Happiness

After analyzing the two traditional theories of happiness it is obvious that eudaimonic happiness

is the more beneficial way to achieve well-being and therefore should be adopted into everyone’s

prior definitions of happiness​. ​The idea of hedonic happiness sounds great in theory, but in

practice it disregards the importance of longevity​. Hedonic happiness undermines the

relationship between self and society, and it blankets surface level self-esteem​.

Longevity is the root of deeper level happiness and should be a main factor when considering a

happier, healthier lifestyle​. Hedonic happiness focuses on a day by day outcome which closes

out any opportunity for long term growth​. Without any regard for the future, it is nearly

impossible for short term pleasure based happiness to manifest long term meaning​. When people

think about happiness it is usually portrayed in a longer term sense and a state of mind that you

develop over the course of your life time​. ​The issue with hedonic happiness is its basic day by

5
day approach​. ​It uses the principle of neurological pleasure that deteriorates over time, not

giving the same lasting effect as eudaimonic happiness​ ​(McMahan 7).

The relationship between individuality and society is extremely important in the development of

human happiness​. ​The environment shapes the individual’s mindset and the way in which the

world is perceived. Without a relationship to society, the individual would not be capable of

processing and interpreting the chaos around them​. ​This causes severe unhappiness and

correlates to a damaged sense of self​. Having a sense of community and connection to the

surrounding environment is extremely impaired by hedonic happiness​. ​When solely focusing on

what your environment can provide for you, instead of what you can learn from it, a false sense

of happiness starts to form in the individual​. A simplistic pleasure based outcome makes the

individual look towards society as constantly needing a product to give, which is an

inappropriate approach​. Society as a whole shapes the individual into the person they will

become, and can be used to improve ones inner qualities as well as project the desired individual

positivity​.

The third significant fault with hedonic happiness is the disregard for self esteem​. ​When an

entire theory is based upon increasing pleasure and neurological stimuli, it completely disregards

the meaningful tasks of the day that will help improve long term meaning in life​. According to

6
the hedonic theory, things like meditation, familial relationships, etc​. ​are not deemed to improve

happiness levels. However, things like binge eating and drug use fit the criteria of increased

pleasure, regardless of whether or not those activities are good for you in the long term​. This ties

into the hedonic paradox which is the contradiction saying that we fail to attain pleasures if we

deliberately seek them ​(Kanow 2). The real way that people obtain happiness is by setting and

achieving life goals that help better the individual and their relationship to the environment​. ​In a

study by Western Oregon University, which looked at the two definitions of happiness, showed

that: “This finding is consistent with previous theorizing and empirical research indicating that

meaning in life is an important positive outcome of a eudaimonic, but not necessarily a hedonic,

approach to well-being” (1). The lack of meaning implemented into the theory makes hedonic

incomparable to eudaimonic.

Eudaimonic happiness incorporates all aspects of human nature and focuses on the bigger picture

of the individual's life, making it the superior theory​. When thinking about happiness it is easy to

get caught up in the pleasures of the now and forget about the long term effect of unhealthy

actions, however, eudaimonia attempts to encompass a wide variety of pleasures, maximizing the

benefit to the individual​.

Hedonic Paradox and Pursuit of Happiness Critique

7
As previously defined, the hedonic paradox is the claim that a person who deliberately seeks

pleasures will secure less pleasure then they would have otherwise received (Moore 2). While it

directly relates to hedonic theory, it can be held true for all pursuits of happiness. Not only does

it hold true for hedonic and eudaimonic happiness, it relates to the overarching theory of positive

psychology.1 The fundamental idea of positive psychology revolves around the study of what

makes humans innately happy and how one can strive to achieve happiness as a standard for

daily life. While goal setting is certainly a positive trait, it can become quite contradictory in the

sense of happiness. The problem with the pursuit of happiness and positive psychology is the

high standard that it sets for the participant as well as the disregard of a balanced emotional state.

If happiness is constantly desired, the individual will begin to feel dissatisfied with the natural

ups and downs of life. This causes an unnecessary amount of stress and disappointment directly

associated with the desire to be happy. An article critiquing positive psychology states, ​“People

who highly value happiness set happiness standards that are difficult to obtain, leading them to

feel disappointed about how they feel, paradoxically decreasing their happiness the more they

want it” (Mauss 1). It is human nature to feel a variety of emotional states throughout the day,

therefore, setting a standard of constant happiness is a set up for failure. ​Without the variance of

emotion, the individual creates false expectations and eventually becomes disappointed with the

outcome.

1
The scientific study of human happiness and flourishing
8
The second problem with the pursuit of happiness is undermining the importance of balancing

positive and negative emotions. With positive psychology, the focus is based on increasing

overall happiness and striving to obtain constant pleasure. Instead of a healthy balance of the

two, positive psychology focuses solely on increasing happiness, forgetting to incorporate

sadness as a valid human emotion. In another critique of the pursuit of happiness, Dr. Wong

stated, “​The positive-only focus is based on binary or dichotomous thinking; that is, one can

either focus on the positive or negative. In reality, the positives and negatives cannot be

separated; they often co-exist in various combinations” (Wong 2). An individual's well being is

dependant on a healthy balance of both positive and negative emotional states. Think of positive

and negative emotions as the Yin and Yang; even as complete opposites, each side is necessary

to coexist (Roy 1).

Negative emotions are necessary to human life and a complete removal of negativity is

unrealistic at best. In reference to the famous quote: “They say there is no light without dark, no

good without evil, no male without female, no right without wrong. That nothing can exist if it's

direct opposite does not also exist” (Hamilton 1). This is in direct relation with positive and

negative emotion; without hardship, happiness would cease to exist. It is the constant state of

emotional fluctuation that make positive emotions meaningful to the individual. The major fault

with the pursuit of happiness is the disregard of negative emotions often benefiting overall

happiness levels. According to Diogo Costa, a professor of positive psychology, there are three

potential benefits of negative emotions: motivation, awareness, and acceptance (Costa 1).

Negative emotions motivate the individual to generate positive changes in life and provide

9
insight into the direction of the individual’s path of life. With a constant flow of positive

emotion, the individual would also lack to ability to be self aware. Negativity allows humans to

react to dangerous and or less than ideal situations and provide an outlet for the individual to fix

it. In a life with constant positivity, the individual would become carefree and unaware of the

potential harm that surrounds them. As far as the acceptance of negative emotions, it is simply a

natural human emotion that everyone needs to come to terms with in order to be happier. Costa

eloquently states, “If we always tell ourselves to smile when all we want to do is cry, we are

psychologically mistreating ourselves, which on the long run will negatively impact our

psychological welfare” (Costa 3). Even if negative emotions causes a panic response

neurologically, it is important to accept these feelings and use it to the individual’s advantage in

order to be truly happy.

One misconception about negativity is the idea that feelings of sadness, anger, etc have some sort

of direct correlation to becoming unhappy. In reality, with the exception of the presence of a

mental illness, humans tend have incredible resilience to hardship. A psychological observation

called the hedonic treadmill proves just that: “​The Hedonic Treadmill (also known as hedonic

adaptation) is a theory that proposes that people return to their level of happiness, regardless of

what happens to them” (“The hedonic treadmill” 1). Hedonic adaptation proves that despite

major positive or negative life events or emotions, the individual with quickly return to a stable

level of happiness, meaning negative feelings have little effect on our overall happiness level and

do not make the individual unhappy.

10
That being said, even though the fundamental idea of positive psychology is flawed, that does

not render it useless. If the individual focuses on a eudaimonic pursuit, they are more likely to

reap the benefit that is so desired. Since eudaimonia focuses on bettering the internal self and

less on pleasure based outcomes, the hedonic paradox does not apply. The pursuit of happiness

typically refers to the hedonic approach which makes it inherently flawed. If the individual

desires happiness, the definition surrounding happiness must be changed to reflect the ideas of

eudaimonic theory, opposed to hedonic. Hedonic happiness and the stereotypical pursuit of

happiness share many parallels including the value of positive emotion and the disregard of

emotional balance which is why hedonic is ineffective.

Overall in order to be happy, the individual must throw out any preconception about becoming

happier and work on bettering the internal self and the relationship between self and society,

ironically the very ideals of eudaimonic happiness. Eudaimonic happiness does not focus on

becoming happy and increasing pleasures, it simply focus on bettering the individual. If the

pursuit of happiness itself is ineffective, as stated prior, then eudaimonic happiness is

undoubtedly the better option and will ultimately lead to a more fulfilling life.

Definition Inconsistency Regarding Happiness

One major critique of happiness research is the inconsistency of definitions along with the pure

contradiction of seeking happiness itself​. Without a solid definition some may view happiness as

increasing external pleasure, similar to hedonic, and others may view happiness as long term

11
meaning, similar to eudaimonic​. No matter which definition one prefers, it would be more than

ideal to universalize one singular definition for the masses​. However, happiness is so subjective

to the individual, that a consistent definition becomes very difficult​. The article, ​Happiness:

Hedonic and Eudaimonic defines happiness as, “A positive state that is subjectively defined by

each person​.​” Then later goes on to explain, “The term is rarely used in scientific studies because

there is little consensus on its meaning” (Shinde 169). This shows the contradiction we face as a

society by defining happiness as a subjective state of well being while still expecting each

individual to achieve it the same way​. In the article ​Happiness vs Contentment? A Case for a

Sociology of the Good Life the author compares our societal definition of happiness against that

of modern ideals and cultural influences by stating, “Terms like happiness, contentment and the

good life are not reducible to cultural universals, rather they act as a reflection of the values,

morals and ideals of a culture within a specific time and place” (McKenzie 253). It is hard to

believe that such an integral part of western society could be so difficult to define yet has

become a common debate among many​. ​The controversy that exists between happiness and

meaning will most likely never be resolved until a universal definition is implemented.

Theories of happiness differ greatly depending on the beliefs of the individual, however a few

theories shared similar constructs throughout these articles​. In the article, ​Ways of Being Happy:

Discerning Sources of Happiness Among Young Adults and Adults​, the author aligns with the

theory that happiness is “the basic result of many small pleasures which have accumulated

bottom-up​.​”(Singh 208) Bottom-up theory suggests that happiness is based on collecting positive

12
emotion and using it to become happier​. This belief shares many parallels with hedonic

happiness from the article ​Happiness: Hedonic and Eudaimonic​. The hedonic view of happiness

is stated as “an individual’s global assessment of positive/negative emotion… people who

experience an abundance of positive emotion and few negative emotion are defined as happy”

(Shinde 170). These two theories share the same basic principle that happiness is a collection of

positive emotions over a long period of time​. ​However, this is not the only similarity between

theories​. ​In the article ​Happiness vs Contentment? A Case for a Sociology of the Good Life​, the

author defines happiness as “Long lasting and involves a form of selfhood or self-understanding

that becomes a source of satisfaction or fulfilment” (McKenzie 254). This definition is very

similar to the second theory in ​Happiness: Hedonic and Eudaimonic ​which states eudaimonic

happiness as, “positive or optimal functioning and the fulfilment of basic needs and inner

potentials” (Shinde 170). Both theories suggest that true happiness comes from the full

understanding and acceptance of self rather than positive experience​.

Happiness In The Modern Era

With the implementation of new technology, achieving happiness in the modern era has shifted

towards materialism​. This is the result of the generational influence of the crave for fame and the

competitive culture manifested by social media​. Happiness has always been a lifetime goal of the

13
general population and floods the media as the end all be all of human life​. However, happiness

has recently become rooted in materialistic values and centered around becoming better than

those around you​. The central idea of happiness is based around community and bettering the

society as a whole; however, with the goal of happiness shifting, it is becoming harder to

understand the direction of happiness in the future​. Individuals are becoming less and less

interested in the happiness of the society and are more interested in their own benefi​t. External

property and pleasures are becoming a central idea of happiness. Modern society seems to be

shifting toward a hedonic approach with fancy cars, massive mansions, craving more followers,

getting more likes, etc. True happiness does not come from external influences and if modern

day happiness eventually becomes parallel with hedonic theory, authentic happiness will never

be achieved.

Part IV:

Happiness is an extremely complex subject and it is nearly impossible to determine the right path

from the wrong path, however, eudaimonic happiness is the most diverse and useful theory of

happiness​. ​The absence of longevity, self-esteem and societal relationship, makes hedonic

happiness an inferior theory​. ​The individual's definition needs to be changed to reflect the ideas

of eudaimonic theory and build off the ideas of bettering the self. As far as implications for

today’s society, it is obvious a universal definition needs to be reached to further happiness

research in the future​. ​The subjectivity of happiness makes it nearly impossible to obtain a

14
singular path, but eudaimonic happiness is the best theoretical framework of the human pursuit

of happiness​.

It is human nature to want to be happy, but in reality, there is no singular answer to living a more

fulfilling life​. In order to be happier, it is the individual’s responsibility to create their own

definition of happiness that encompasses the person’s lifestyle and morals​. This is one possible

reason for the definition inconsistency and accounts for the subjectivity of happiness​. ​Not only is

it incredibly difficult to universalize, it is also nearly impossible to achieve. Happiness looks

different depending on the individual and personal values . However, eudaimonic happiness is by

far the best route to follow if one is looking to become happier. Eudaimonic happiness is long

lasting, focuses on the individual, and betters the individual’s relationship to society, three very

important factors to consider when looking at obtaining a happier lifestyle.

Nevertheless, it is important to understand the consequences of pursuing happiness. Sometimes

searching for happiness can be contradictory and undermine the work that the individual puts

forth to become happier. To avoid this paradox, happiness should never be looked at as the goal;

instead it should be seen as stepping stone along to way to self betterment, much like the ideas of

eudaimonic happiness. True happiness is derived from the individual’s relationship between self

and society without exterior influences. The praise that hedonic happiness gives to external

influences undermines the theory as a whole and makes it inferior. On the other hand,

eudaimonic happiness looks at the betterment of the internal self and the environment which has

proven to be more effective in leading a fulfilling life.

15
Overall, the two main models that that categorize happiness are hedonic and eudaimonic​. ​In

order to live a more fulfilling life, the individual’s personal definition of happiness must be

manipulated to reflect the ideas of eudaimonic theory. Eudaimonic happiness leads to the most

fulfilling outcome for the individual and betters the society as a whole. Hedonic theory produces

surface level happiness and is ultimately less fulfilling to the individual. As far as the pursuit of

happiness, it is important to note that happiness should never be the end goal of the individual.

Instead the focus should be on the individual's self-betterment and the individual's relationship to

self and society. Out of the two major theories, the implementation of eudaimonic happiness will

lead to the most fulfilling life for the individual.

16
Works Cited:

Böckerman, Petri, et al. "The Biometric Antecedents to Happiness." ​Plos ONE​, vol. 12,

no. 9, 15 Sept. 2017, pp. 1-13.

Chaudhary, Nisha, et al. "Quality Of life: Life's Essence." ​Indian Journal of Health &

Wellbeing​, vol. 8, no. 6, June 2017, pp. 518-524.

Costa, Diogo. “The Benefits of Negative Emotions: 3 Keys to Wellbeing.” ​Positive

Psychology Program​, 10 Mar. 2017,

Eric. “The 2 Types of Happiness in Psychology.” ​The Brain Flux​, 5 Sept. 2015,

Hamilton, Laurell. “A Quote from Incubus Dreams.” ​Quote by Laurell K. Hamilton:

"They Say There Is No Light without Dark, No Goo..."​, 5 Dec. 2011,

Mauss, Iris B., et al. “Can Seeking Happiness Make People Happy? Paradoxical Effects

of Valuing Happiness.” ​Emotion (Washington, D.C.)​, U.S. National Library of Medicine,

Aug. 2011,

McKenzie, Jordan. "Happiness Vs Contentment? A Case for a Sociology of the Good

Life." ​Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour​, vol. 46, no. 3, Sept. 2016, pp. 252-267.

17
McMahan, Ethan A, and David Estes. “Hedonic versus Eudaimonic Conceptions of

WellBeing: Evidence of Differential Associations with Self-Reported Well-Being.”

Western Oregon University Digital Commons​, 2011,

Moore, Andrew. “Hedonism.” ​Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy​, Stanford University,

20 Apr. 2004,

Kern, Margaret L. et al. “A Multidimensional Approach to Measuring Well-Being in

Students: Application of the PERMA Framework.” ​The Journal of Positive Psychology

10.3 (2015): 262–271. ​PMC​. Web. 1 Feb. 2018.

Konow, James, and Joseph Earley . “The Hedonistic Paradox: Is Homo Economicus

Happier? .” ​JEL Classification​, July 2006, pp. 1–54.

Kringelbach, Morten L., and Kent C. Berridge. “The Neuroscience of Happiness and

Pleasure.” ​Social research​ 77.2 (2010): 659–678. Print.

Mineo, Liz. “Over Nearly 80 Years, Harvard Study Has Been Showing How to Live a

Healthy and Happy Life.” ​Harvard Gazette​, 11 Apr. 2017​,

18
Ryan, Richard M, and Edward Lee Deci. “On Happiness and Human Potentials: A

Review of Research on Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being.” ​Annual Review of

Psychology​, Feb. 2001,

Seligman, Martin E. “Happiness: The Three Traditional Theories .” ​Penn, Authentic

Happiness​, University of Pennsylvania , July 2003,

Shinde, V. R. "Happiness: Hedonic and Eudaimonic." ​Indian Journal of Positive

Psychology​, vol. 8, no. 2, Apr. 2017, pp. 169-173.

Singh, Varsha and Prerna Goyal. "Ways of Being Happy: Discerning Sources of

Happiness among Young Adults and Adults." ​Indian Journal of Positive Psychology​, vol.

8, no. 2, Apr. 2017, pp. 208-213.

“The Hedonic Treadmill – Are We Forever Chasing Rainbows?” ​The Hedonic Treadmill

- Are We Forever Chasing Rainbows?​, Positive Psychology Program, 10 Mar. 2017,

Wong, Paul, and Sandi Roy . “Critique of Positive Psychology and Positive

Interventions.” ​Dr. Paul T. P. Wong​, 20 Dec. 2017,

19