Some thoughts.... I think Snaggle is right as a whole; there are always exceptions, and the rich common man is going to be happier than the poor common man, and by common I mean the Philistine type of person. From my perspective, the more you want, the lesser you are. If you are rich and intelligent, you can pursue what you want in life (and what you want to give to the world) without worrying about being able to eat and having a roof over your head, that covers everything needed and is evidently a solid headstart re: being happy. But to say that money brings happiness in itself is just silly... the more we have of any thing, the more we want and the yearning for more has never brought happiness, desiring things outside of ourselves are nothing short of a recipe for catastrophe and a miserable existence. Having the courage to need little will make you happy no matter what your external circumstances are though, and in some cases, as I have observed, even if you can't properly feed yourself. As a general rule I would say that a creative life in poverty > a rich life in self-indulgence and as long as the basic needs are covered, the one who leads the most fulfilling life is going to be the happier, and while money might influence this it is definitely not that great a factor to put in consideration. The common rich man is unable to reach past a certain level of happiness because he's been distracted by the world's offerings all his life,he's like a blind man in a maze where happiness is at the other side. He cannot help but seek it outside himself and is therefore disadvantaged when compared with the poor and wise man who seeks nothing out of himself and desires very little, which is a trait more often seen in poor people than rich ones. The common rich man has become disabled in some way, devoid of the ability to obtain satisfaction from himself with intellect. I guess to sum it up, the materially poor who is rich internally is a happier individual, and some might even choose to live in poverty because it is easier to be happy this way.
We could say that freedom is the overall goal of everyone and the majority would agree I would think, and since freedom (always internal since there is no real objective and external freedom offered to us) is secured not by the fulfilling of desires but by the removal (or control) of desires [Epictetus], I believe the poor to be at an advantage here. Marcus Aurelius, the greatest Roman emperor, once said "even in a palace it is possible to live well", I think this one sentence speaks well of our self-indulgence, and we poker players are perhaps capable of relating to him more closely than most because we have a lot of temptations since more is in our grasp that comes with having money, and if we were to imitate him in his wise ways we would choose to be living more of an ascetic life on purpose. How many of us would or could, even if all the great men would agree that it is indeed the way to freedom and real happiness, though? |
Contact Users: 741 Active, 0 Logged in - Time: 12:49
,
,
,
,