I never said anything about depression. I said "understanding" life. I'm not completely satisfied with my station in life, but I'm quite content with who I am. But that's not the point. What I am addressing is your ignorance of philosophy, or rather the philosophical implications that can be derived from understanding "happiness" . . . or any emotional context for that matter. For you to be all: "Don't worry, be happy!" without question shows complete ignorance of the objective goal of: what is happiness? And for you to attack us by making fun of our "self-applied depression" (which, I grant you, is a common thing amongst teenagers, which there are a few here), only further proves my point that you are, indeed, ignorant.

And by the way, I'm not a teenager, I don't wear all black, I'm not middle-class, and I don't even have television, and I'm not depressed.

I am not a teen-ager, I am middle class, I own a couple tvs, I also am not depressed, I sometimes wear all black, I am very happy.
I was always very happy even when I was a teenager wearing all black back in the early eighties This whole sad idealogy began I think in the early to mid-nineties. You know... the equating all black clothes to a depressing lifestyle. bunch of wankers if you ask me. You can be perfectly depressed wearing all pink for fucks sake

Happiness is a temporary chemical imbalance of the true state of mind.

How very . . . scientifically unjustified.

to the working class


my boss thinks i cant do it. what a shithead.

I am not sure what happiness is, though I do have one theory (see custom title), but the key to unhappiness is trying to please everyone or spending too much of your life trying to achieve perfection.

the scientifically unjustified kid could have at least gone along the lines of endorphines----weee!

Most people who are depressed have nothing to be depressed about. If you lost your wife and children in a terrible car accident, sure, be depressed - You have a right to be!

But if nothing bad has happened to them, why do people still walk around pretending to be depressed? Cutting themselves, draping themselves in black, trying to act 'spooky' etc etc. I don't understand it!

Call me ignorant all you like, I simply couldn't give a toss, they have no right to be depressed. If it was up to me I'd have the bloody lot of them hanged & put 'em out of their misery.

And yet you felt the need to reply so passionately.

Look, who gives a fuck about teenage depression? It's so 1995! And it happens. Physiologically speaking, one just wouldn't be a "average/normal" teenager if they weren't all mopey and depressed. Their brains are being rewired and they begin feeling new sensations/emotions. All of which, are like a drug in that it's new, it's different, and it's something to experience. Ever wonder why most teenagers fall in love ever so hard? Because they never fuckin' felt that type of emotional state before! Same thing with depression! So who gives a rats fuckin' ass?! Why don't you add something philosophically profound to the conversation? Such as:

Happiness is the emotionally-symantic definition of a feeling that is derived from certain chemical states (such as endorphines) within the "physical" brain which is a direct result of a particular stimuli (in this case, being rewarded for a job well done).

OR:

Happiness is the link between one's own self (that is: his own peculiar subjective quality to the objective question of: what is a man?) and his relationship to peculiar experiences brought forth from society, and in understanding this individual's peculiarities which bring forth his happiness, he is able to portray this peculiar aspect of his own nature, that in which is his self, more so than in any other emotional state.

a conditioned response to set variables. Which is why society today is significantly less happy on a per capita bases.

Happiness is different for every person, what one person considers being truly happy could be what another considers less than.

I think happiness is what we make it and if we are "happy" with whatever path we have chosen then no one can put a label on that sort of thing

No label huh? Well then, rape, torture and murder makes me happy. But don't label me . . .

And how is happiness "different for every person?" I imagine that quite a few suburbanite mothers are quite happy with their mini-van's full of kids on their way to soccer practice. Such a shared feeling of joy surely isn't individualistic . . . ergo, is it universal?

Rape, Torture and murder make you happy so be it, its "your happiness" . So they mothers with their mini vans full of kids.... All im saying is that how can a label be put on happiness when its different to every single person?..... Sure it has a universal meaning, but to each of us its something different and it strays from that meaning.... Make sense or not really

I agree wholeheartedly... the assumption made on such physical expression is a buch of Bollocks!!! From my own experience, the sickest people I've known were the inconspicuous types.

How can you not put a label on the "act" of that which brings forth any emotion?! If we didn't, we wouldn't have any a priori comprehensions . . . tone, connotations and understanding of things (such as music, or poetry) wouldn't even exist. Ergo, to say that act A (say murder) brings forth emotion X (say happiness), which isn't the general consensus, must be labeled in some form. It isn't universal . . . that's the point. To proclaim something as universal, means it's a truth, and forever shall be (such as 2 + 2 in a base ten mathematical system will always equal 4). Thus, the subjective qualities of what it is to be happy is of crucial importance . . . but, in understanding the subjective, one will start to see a "universal-trend." For example: people are generally happy when they get married, or become parents, or have make-up sex. But the act of murder doesn't really denote happiness . . . even, then, if one were to proclaim "Killing my wife because she cheated on me made me happy," it can really be construed as "I was happy being married with my wife, but then she cheated on me, and that made me sad, so I found a way to right that sadness . . . by killing her."

I'm an existentialist, and I can comprehend your logic, and as an absurdist I can also abide by the logic of "ALL POSSIBILITIES ARE POSSIBLE," but to say that happiness can't be defined subjectively is purely illogical and negates the very essence of philosophy.

How would you fit the mentally ill into this equation? ie- a mental disorder characterized by symptoms, such as delusions or hallucinations, that indicate impaired contact with reality. In such a case thier is no subjectivity and how would one differentiate?

Just curious...

I think some of you don't quite understand the definitions of OBJECTIVE, SUBJECTIVE, and UNIVERSAL.

Take, for example, the number 5. That is the objective . . . 5. Every conceivable equation that can lead to the number 5 (such as, 1 + 4 . . . or 2 + 3 . . . or 10 - 5 . . . or 20 / 4 . . . and etc.) is the subjective. They also happen to be universal (that 1 + 4 = 5 [in a base ten mathematical system]).

So how is there no subjectivity? There's always the subjective quality to anything. That's how one understands the objective. In this case, the fact that they are mentally ill could be the subjective aspect of their happiness . . . the fact that they were abused as children is the subjective aspect of their mental illness . . . the fact that their father was an alcoholic is the subjective aspect of the abuse . . . and so on and so on and so on.

I Fully understand what you are saying but what im saying is thats how i feel, and how i see happiness, does it matter not that my opinion although it seems stupid at times (more times that id like to admit) is actually what i feel to believe is true, and while all facts and things you have brought up are true i think i would like to go on believing that happiness is different for everyone. =D
Oh and thanks for i dunno being willing to actually get into a debate like this its refreshing

Opinions and philosophical theories are not the same thing. I'm not asking you to believe, I'm really just trying to get you to understand philosophy . . .