| This question <122|127> overall <125|127> Tesa: <1836|482>. graded A– |
| Question 5: Can one say that happiness is the only true wealth? |
| [126] Tesa: The answer depends on how you define wealth. For example, if wealth is defined as “whatever makes you happy” then your monetary situation may have little bearing on your wealth. If you are happy, then you are wealthy, because that's how you've defined wealth. Tennyson said that happiness depends on the mastery of one's passions. For him, self-mastery is the thing that brings happiness. He might consider that to be wealth. |
| But for others, wealth may be defined as “whatever is of worth”, which may be accumulation of knowledge, or some other “treasure” that may be independent of happiness. Monks in a monastery may avoid personal pleasures and comforts, and consider the austerity of their life to be their wealth. (They're waiting for their treasure in heaven, maybe.) |
| Marx says “an increase in the quantity of use-values constitutes an increase in material wealth.” I think it's a stretch to describe use-values as “happiness.” |
| As for being swamped with propaganda... it doesn't seem to me that this is a case of brainwashing. But maybe I'm just brainwashed too well. I think happiness is a disposition; a choice. But that may just be a byproduct of being educated in a school system that was initiated and heavily funded by Carnegie, Rockefeller, and other capitalists. |
| Hans: I changed the last word in your second sentence from “happiness” to “wealth” because I think it was a writing error. Let me know if I am mistaken; then I will change it back. |
| Your honesty is very much appreciated. You seem to have read the arguments, but they have not convinced you. Thank you for telling us how you feel instead of saying the things you think I want to hear. |
| Please read my (partial) response to your message in [127]. |
|
|
|||||