What's more important- being happy or making a meaningful contribution

[NJmaverick]

This week's House Episode got me thinking about this. The story invovled a brilliant doctor, who was making progress toward curing a form of cancer. She gave it all up, because she realized she wasn't happy. Instead she decided to persue activities she enjoyed and made her happy, but did not make a positive contribution. So what do you think?

[GoddessOfGuinness]

1. Being happy can be a positive contribution...

or can lead to a positive contribution.

[NJmaverick]

2. True

but I have to tell you, I was strongly on the make a postive contribution side

[GoddessOfGuinness]

5. I didn't see the episode, so I'm not sure what all the circumstances were...

but I would think that a research scientist's work could be carried on by someone who is happy doing that kind of work. At the same time, particularly in a field like that, one's emotional state can profoundly affect one's ability to do their best work.

At the same time, I imagine most military personnel take no joy in killing people as part of their job, yet security sometimes demands it.

[NJmaverick]

6. Well I grew up reading comic books

learning messages like "with great power comes great responsibility". Reading about heros that help and save, but don't enrich themselves in the process.

In school I had a nun that signed by 8th grade year book with - "... use your fine mind for the betterment of yourself and others"

I have always tried to live by those words and the idea that we should all leave the world a little better place, for our passing. I feel happiness is a byproduct of doing the right thing and helping others. So I couldn't for the life of me see the doctor squandering her gifts, just to pursue personal happiness.

As House said after one diagnosis, "let's hope some other lazy doctor didn't give up before they came up with a cure for her disease" (I am paraphrasing).

[The2ndWheel]

3. I don't happen to think that we all have some collective destiny

Other than death. Although, the Ray Kurzweil's of the world do everything they can to not live to see that outcome. Not sure if that proves my point or not. Guess we'll have to wait and see if he dies one day.

So if you want to sit by a pond and waste a day away, I say go for it. I think some inefficiency is a good thing. I think being sort of wasteful keeps you from being a slave to the machine. Because we're not cogs. We're animals.

[redqueen]

26. ...

:thumbsup:

[NJmaverick]

4. Here is my own answer

I think it's more important to make a meaningful contribution. That contribution can be a ordinary as being a good parent to something as extrodinary as curing cancer. I am a strong believer in the concept that we should all make the world a little better place, for our passing. Happiness is a natural byproduct of doing something that matters, in my opinion.

[mnhtnbb]

7. Her cancer work will continue with others committed to the field. Life is short.

Not having seen the episode, I doubt she turned into a hedonist, but there is definitely something
to be said for getting out of bed looking forward to the day.

[NJmaverick]

10. Well she certainly embraced the hedonist philosphy

one I just never was able to wrap my head around.

[applegrove]

8. Sounds like a strange story to me. Finding a cure for cancer I would think would

be up there with the top jobs for scientists in terms of popularity.

[sniffa]

9. Other - a smug sense of accomplishment

[Rabrrrrrr]

11. I vote for a pretentious sense of superiority

[NJmaverick]

15. ...

:rofl:


L

[NJmaverick]

16. How about a false sense of superiority

especially over homeless and over weight people?

[DS1]

24. Bookmark this thread

If you ever find yourself wondering why you have no friends, come back here.

[NJmaverick]

27. ....

:rofl:

L

[sniffa]

49. It's a good thing you don't see many over weight homeless people

They'd get hated on twice as much.

[Drunken Girlfriend]

12. Hmmm

What a very tricky question.

I suppose ultimately,you have to do what makes you happy.

But at the same time,if you are making contributions to society
that can change the world/save a life,then perhaps it would be worth
it to put your happiness on the backburner for awhile,and think of others.

It really depends on the person,and the nature of their situation.

Great question!

[NJmaverick]

18. What happens to society if everyone goes the happiness route?

[Rabrrrrrr]

25. It would be a very good society.

Imagine a society completely devoid of pissed off, angry, bitter, empty, incomplete, unfulfilled, and hopeless people.

I should hope that a society of happy people is the goal of everyone.

[NJmaverick]

28. Then again with everyone pursuing their own happiness

nothing gets done and society crumbles and returns to the stone ages. Not every job is fun nor every needed task entertaining.

[Rabrrrrrr]

30. Oh, so it's just YOUR happiness that's relevant here.

People can be happy so long as the products you want are being made; or jobs you want done are getting done.

Okay there. :eyes:

Jeez.

Anyway, the above was merely me extrapolating to the absurd as you did, and is not to be taken seriously as a statement of my belief. It is *sarcasm*; and therefore, is not worth responding to because it's intentionally silly and over the top.

What is to be taken seriously is the statement that begins after this colon: Your conclusion from the premise is utterly unsupportable by any valid logical system and is laughably preposterous, ludicrous, and inane.

[NJmaverick]

32. well that was certainly a waste of time.

If you are going to be a troll, at least be funny or witty. This ham handed personal attack is pathetic. It lacks any humor or intelligence. not sure if it's more sad or embarrasing

[Rabrrrrrr]

34. I wasn't looking for humor - your conclusion is, as I said, ludicrous.

To suggest that a society of happy people is a society that will fall apart is laughably stupid.

[NJmaverick]

36. you should learn to read. I was talking about a society PURSING happiness

here is a hint zippy, if something sounds "ludicrous" read it again. Odds are pretty good you misread it or didn't understand it.:eyes:

[Rabrrrrrr]

41. Oh, then I stand corrected - if the issue is now that mere "pursuit" is a harbinger of social doom,

then your conclusion is Extra Special Ludicrous.

The addition of capital letters is a nice touch, don't you think?

[NJmaverick]

44. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

:rofl:

[Rabrrrrrr]

45. I checked the dictionary just to be sure, and it means just what I thought it means

lu·di·crous (ld-krs)
adj.
Laughable or hilarious because of obvious absurdity or incongruity. See Synonyms at foolish.

[NJmaverick]

46. ....

:boring:

[Rabrrrrrr]

13. Being happy might very well be the greatest contribution one can make

[FedUpWithIt All]

14. I think living a meaningful life can lead to happiness.

But sometimes giving can take a lot from someone. In those cases i think that a balance should be struck between the two. One can only give if they are functioning and able. Besides, i think that the individual is as worthwhile as the whole and to care for ones-self (in a do no harm way) IS a meaningful contribution.

Man, can i be :eyes: sometimes. :rofl:


:hi:

[NJmaverick]

17. It's a challenging question. I think balance may be the key

although I still think that doing meaningful things, leads to happiness. In fact I often see those that pursue only happiness tend to be doomed to failure.

[FedUpWithIt All]

20. Well happiness for it's own sake is fleeing. Only lasts as long as an attention span.

There is a deeper happiness that comes with contribution, IMHO.




:hi:

[NJmaverick]

21. I agree

:hi:

[bigwillq]

19. Being happy

Because I feel you really can make a meaningful contribution when you are truly happy.

If you're just doing something because you think it's the right thing to do or because you think it will make you feel good then you're probably not doing it for the right reasons.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

22. She just needed an excuse to allow herself to take a vacation.

She will be back to fight the good cause after some down time with surf, sand, and sun. Nothing wrong with that.

[PRETZEL]

23. She's being selfish,

I do plenty of things outside of my work that make me happy. What I do for a "living" is not the totality of who I am. She is making a positive strides that effect the lives of others. Sure others can take up her work, but can they make up for her insight and knowledge?

While her work would take up a great deal of her time and energy, there are things she could find to make her life "happy" while she wasn't working.

[dropkickpa]

29. For myself

I can't have one without the other. At least not fully. I did the whole "live only for myself" thing in my early 20's. I was unfulfilled. Had a blast, but unfulfilled. I make a meaningful contribution (in cancer research no less) and I lead a happy life outside of work. The woman on the show was more an example of a burned out person who'd never learned how to create a work/not-work balance. She'd lived to work, and that was all. She'll burn out on the chef biz, too.

[NJmaverick]

33. That's a very good point about burn out.

One does need to have balance. It just seems like she simply swung to the other extreme.

[TZ]

31. Okay I'm in this area to some extent

And let me tell you, this is an intense and stressful field. If you are NOT committed to it 100% you are going to burn out very shortly. And burned out scientists aren't noted for making significant discoveries.
I'm sure like any good scientist her research is documented so others can pick up where she left off. Also, I would assume that quitting her job, doesn't mean she's cutting herself off completely. She could also answer questions for other researchers or serve as a part time consultant.
The stereotype of the lone scientist making a breakthrough is actually not very common..usually important breakthroughs are made by lots of teamwork.
So no, she isn't being "selfish" to leave her profession

[NJmaverick]

35. Sue, what is the source of the stress in the research field?

What causes the burn out?

[TZ]

38. The nature of the work itself

Biology is very challenging. What works on paper doesn't always work the way its supposed to in the lab. Also in academic circles you have competition for publication in the private industry you have time/money pressures. I worked for 6 months at NIH and although I enjoyed some of my time there, alot of circumstances (politics) made it very very destructive to me personally. I had to leave, even though the job of helping support clinical trials on experimental malaria vaccines was very important to me....Sometimes just having the drive to want to make a difference is not nearly enough..:(

[PVnRT]

43. Repeated failures to reject the null hypothesis suck too

[Lorien]

37. I think that making a meaningful contribution can bring about happiness

and that not making any significant contributions can bring about unhappiness and regret in the end. Living selfishly may feel good in the short term, but it leaves a person pretty empty in the long term.

[NJmaverick]

40. I would agree

:thumbsup:

[LSdemocrat]

39. We shouldn't expect people to put themselves through a personal hell

Now it strikes me as difficult to imagine a medical researcher's life as a personal hell, but things happen. We need not force people to do something they hate. This reminded me of the first episode of Futurama, where it was revealed that in this fictional future, everyone's career was determined by a computer analysis of their individual strengths, but not their own desires. While such a system might result in greater societal achievement, the resulting unhappiness, in my opinion, would make this world a much less pleasant place to live in.

In terms of the necessity of making a meaningful contribution, I've never believed that your work is your life. While everyone should try to make a positive impact, that need not be through their professional career. Donating to charity, volunteering, raising a responsible child are all examples of perfectly legitimate ways to make a positive contribution that don't necessarily involve a career.

Ultimately in this person's case the questions have to go deeper into

[Locrian]

42. its all about being happy

If you are happy about making a positive contribution, then you make a positive contribution. If not, you dont.

Yeah, some people are "martyrs" about it - but that still is overriding the negative (ie they get "happines" or "fullfilment" out of it - it's just what you want to call "happiness").

[applegrove]

47. I think most people would find that making a meaningful contribution does make one happy.

[Deja Q]

48. A mix of the two. Productivity with a living wage so I can spend time doing happy things too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6WrluIjIR4

[Lucian]

50. Meaningful contribution.

It's selfish to pursue something for your own happiness. If I was on the verge of curing cancer, I wouldn't just walk away from it because I was unhappy. How fucked up is that?

[LanternWaste]

51. Without trying to be argumentative...

Without trying to be argumentative, I would imagine that almost everyone would actually be happy if we were making a concrete and meaningful contribution to society.

That being said, I think it's more important to contribute to society than it is to be happy with what you're doing.