...Assignment A: 1. Give an outline of the views on the relation between wealth and happiness presented in texts 1 and 2. In text one, David Brooks presents that marital happiness is the utter most important when we pin down personal welfare. He also tells us wealth is nothing compared to personal relations, such as marriages, with studies to stand behind his statement. However, he also states that the relation between wealth and happiness is questionable. He believes assumes this because of the fact that, once you have the essentials required for a well-being, the association between higher income and happiness is poor. Brooks windups text one by saying that personal relations are more important than material goods but also adding that we people weigh wealth too highly, as the way of accomplishing happiness. In text two, Stephanie Rosenbloom presents that here is a definite association between wealth and happiness. Nevertheless, according to Rosenbloom there are things, which makes you happier than others. For example, spending gravy on adventures will bring more happiness than squandering money on material goods - which we buy to outshine the neighbours. We become happier spending money on experiences because we are most likely not going to identify our experiences with others compared to material goods. 2. How does David Brooks engage the reader in text 1? Give examples from the text. “Two things happened to Sandra Bullock this month. Frist, she won an Academy Award...
Words: 786 - Pages: 4
...presented in Ch. 6, explain what researchers mean by the paradox of affluence. Explain how the research on happiness and wealth relates to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. The term “paradox of affluence” explains the disparity that has developed over the last 40 to 50 years in America between material well-being and psychological well-being (Baumgardener & Crothers, 2009). While the American family is now making more income than ever before, the amount of happiness has not also increased. Leading to ask the question, can money buy happiness? Research on happiness and wealth indicates money does not buy happiness (Baumgardner & Crothers, 2009). The unmet basic needs in life can easily be blamed on lack of wealth and cause depression, stress, anxiety, and unhappiness. Yet if you were to ask anyone what one thing in their lives brings them the most happiness, most would not answer it would be any kind of relation to money or wealth, rather it would be love, family, or health (Baumgardner & Crothers, 2009). When we consider how happiness and wealth relates to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs the lack of wealth can lead to unhappiness when basic needs are not met. One could also wonder if happiness is achieved when all levels of Maslow’s hierarchy are met. One could also wonder if complete happiness can be achieved if just basic needs are met. For most people I believe happiness can be achieved when basic needs are met and they are not wealthy. These people value money for taking...
Words: 330 - Pages: 2
...outline of the views on the relation between wealth and happiness presented in texts 1 and 2. David Brooks who is the narrator in texts 1 telling us of how wealth is nothing compared to the relationship with other people. Out of some studies that have been made it has been proven that most people get more happiness by socializing with others then making lots of money. David Brook does not think that money has anything to do with happiness. He means that marital happiness is more important than anything else. It doesn’t matter how successful you are or how many triumphs you record career. It is the personal relations there are much more important than having a great career with lots of money. In this text David Brook makes an example with Sandra Bullock. Two important things happened to her in one month. Sandra won an Academy Award for best actress and afterwards came the news reports claiming that her husband is an adulterous jerk. David argues that marital happiness is more important than anything else in determining personal well-being. If you just have a successful marriage, you will be happy immediately. Text 1 ends with that personal relation are much more important than having a great career and lots of money. The relationships are the most important of all. Text 2 written by Stephanie Rosenbloom is more different then text 1. Text 2 has another focus. Stephanie Rosenbloom is looking at which way of spending money gives the most happiness in people’s life. According...
Words: 372 - Pages: 2
...David Brooks, who is the author of text 1, is undoubtedly of the opinion that wealth won’t make you happy. He actually describes anyone who would accept a severe personal blow in exchange for professional gain is: “…absolutely crazy.” He argues that if you are engaged in a happy marriage, then professional setbacks are much easier to endure whilst being reasonably happy, but no matter how many career triumphs you attain they will never feel satisfactory if you are in an unhappy marriage. He describes the relation between happiness and income as complicated, as there in poor nations who grow to become middle-class nations is an increase in overall happiness but with further economic ascent the effect on general happiness is greatly diminished, if it even exists. He bases this in research conducted by the Brookings Institute. It states that USA has become much richer over the past 50 years and has become a very unequal country but neither this growth in overall wealth nor the vast differentiation in income social classes in-between has had an effect on the general happiness of the country. Text 2 takes quite a different approach, looking at which way of spending your money gives most happiness. Stephanie Rosenbloom, the author of the text, emphasizes that using your money on experiences e.g. vacations or cooking-classes will produce a longer lasting happiness than the purchasing of materialistic things. The main reason for this being that experiences nearly always engages you...
Words: 292 - Pages: 2
...Wealth and happiness 1. Give an outline of the views on the relation between wealth and happiness presented in texts 1 and 2. Text 1: There are no connection between true happiness and income. It does not matter how many personal setbacks you endure, if you for an example does not have a successful marriage. If your life only is based on how many career triumph you record, you are always trying to reach another step further on your way to the top, which means that you will remain unfulfilled. An overall happiness is about being happy in the daily activities. Of course people gets happy, when they are taking a step up the salary ladder, but overall happiness cannot be found in climbing the income scale. Poor nations are going to be happier as they become middle-class nations, but once they are going to be used to the new and better conditions as follows a middle-class nation, their happiness falls once again. They are now trying to reach even better conditions, which means they will never find any kind of satisfaction. Text 2: People are happier when they spend money on social experiences instead of material objects. People today have a tendency to buy expensive clothing, new expensive cell phones or new cars. The problem is that there is a disadvantage in buying luxury goods, in form of an endless cycle of trying to outdo the neighbours all the time. For an example if the neighbour just bought a new car, you must buy a better one yourself. The alternative...
Words: 307 - Pages: 2
...Delprøve 2 - A: The study in the relation between wealth and happiness is a rather complicated matter, as it is very difficult to precisely define personal happiness. The central question in this research and discussion is of course if being wealthy increases overall life happiness. 1. Text 1 describes, with basis in several studies, how economical success is very insignificant when it comes to personal happiness. Nonetheless, an increase in wealth does undeniably influence happiness, but it is on a much more superficial level, where personal and social success influence overall happiness in a deeper and more important manner. The text also points out that money largely influences the level of happiness only when the basic necessities are being established, but after this point future increase in income and materialistic goods are not connected to overall happiness in a significant way. The last view in the text emphasizes how we tend to pay attention to the wrong things in life, as we overestimate the value of money, instead of valuing personal and social wealth higher. The primary point in text 2 is that spending money on experiences instead of luxury goods is proved to produce longer-lasting satisfaction. The reason for this is that materialistic wealth tends to aim at outdoing others, as you would always want to have the bigger flat screen, the faster car and the newer cell phone, while it is less likely that you would compare your experiences in such a fashion....
Words: 837 - Pages: 4
...Wealth and happiness The two texts The Sandra Bullock Trade and But will it make you happy is are both about the relation between wealth and happiness. In the first text The Sandra Bullock Trade the author David Brooks considers that marital happiness is an influencing factor in personal well-being. He is writing about how economic and professional success only exists on the surface of life and that interpersonal relationships are much more important. He uses the successful actress Sandra Bullock as an illustration on his hypothesis regarding why a successful marriage matters. David Brooks also thinks that the relationship between happiness and income is complicated, but he does not consider that a high income makes you happier. In the other text But Will It Make You Happy? Stephanie Rosenbloom is writing about how consumers are saving more and spending less and how it this affects the consumers. She is writing about how new research suggest that this new behaviour make the consumers happier and how buying luxury goods is an endless cycle of one-upmanship. She considers that spending money on an event makes you happier than luxury goods. David Brooks begins the text by talking about Sandra Bullocks personal life, with this intro he directs the text to a large segment of people because almost everybody enjoys some gossip and at the same time he gets the readers sympathy, in the light of the adulterous jerk and thereby has he used Pathos. aaaaalt for lang sætning – Skriv...
Words: 770 - Pages: 4
...trade" The text focus lies on money, David Brooks opinion is that money doesn't make us happier! Person relations are much more important than a career and a lot of money! In the start of the text he uses an example of Sandra Bullock that gives us a view on the relationship between wealth and happiness. Sandra won a big price and was ensured a good future with lots of money and acknowledgment, what many people would se as a dream future, but at the same time her husband turned out to have cheated on her. The question is know, what is most important? 1. A job with a lot of money or 2. A happy relationship Brooks own opinion is that the relationship is the most important, as he says in text it doesn't matter how many setbacks you go through in your life, when you just have a successful relationship and the other way if you have an unhappy marriage, does career triumphs not make you happier, you will always feel unfulfilled. Brooks says that the relationship between money and wellbeing is complicated, but the correspondence between relationships and happiness is not. We gain happiness through our daily activities like: having sex, socializing, having dinner with others and so on. Brooks uses an example in the text, which says that being married produces gain equivalent to more than 100.000 dollars a year. By this example Brooks also maintain his claim about how happiness doesn't come through money and well being but instead from personal relationships. We live on a surface...
Words: 384 - Pages: 2
...The functional argumentative strategy against capitalism is based upon the premise that capitalism does not fulfill the purpose for which it was created in the first place. Dysfunctionality, in this context, refers to the inability of a system to perform adequately the tasks for which it was established. As simply described by the author, “something is functionally deficient means that it is not functioning as it is supposed to be” (Jaeggi 48). Nevertheless, this approach to critique capitalism falls apart as it fails to define properly the purpose of capitalism. Capitalism main’s purpose is to enlarge the economic pie in order to allow every single person to be wealthier than he was in the past. Although there is a large gap in salaries between workers and the capitalists nowadays, people still earn more on average than their twentieth century counterparts. Thus, capitalism was consistent with its function of improving the economic situation of the overall...
Words: 1756 - Pages: 8
...An Orthodox Jewish Perspective On Happiness Toba Cohen March 8, 2015 Capstone Maalot of Baltimore {thesis} What is the secular goal of happiness and how does traditional Judaism define happiness and suggest its attainment? According to the Oxford Dictionary, the official definition of “happiness” is “the state of feeling or showing pleasure or contentment.” (Oxforddictionaries.com). There are two main forms of happiness—the physical, internal or sensory pleasure, versus attitudinal pleasure. Young people in particular, often feel that to attain “happiness”, they must have plentiful wealth, beauty, education, and physical relations. In fact, many people today feel that this is their reason for...
Words: 1268 - Pages: 6
...English A: Literature The conflict between social Status and individualism in A Doll’s House Candidate Name- Harssh Padharia Candidate code- School name- Vishwashanti Gurukul School code- Word count- The conflict between social Status and individualism in A Doll’s House A very common theme found in this play is the dominance of the strong and rich on the weak and poor. All the characters in the play are affected by the need of money and this itself has become the base of the sculpture of their lives and the way they think. There exists a barrier defined by money and social standing. The power dynamics in the play is such that the powerful characters in the play attempt to pass this barrier whereas the weaker class strives to come to a level closer to doing so, which indeed either pushes them towards individualism or pulls them away from it. Hence I am going to explore how Ibsen’s distribution of power amongst the characters in the play goes against the Marxist theory in this essay. In the beginning of the play Nora the protagonist returns from shopping with an “number of parcels” and a boy following her with a Christmas tree. This tells the readers that her material wealth and her financial condition dominated her thinking and her life. The society saw her as the wife of Torvald Helmer, therefore she had some regard and recognition in the society. She asks Helen to hide the tree from the kids and she also asks Helmer for more money. Helmer in response makes fun...
Words: 1564 - Pages: 7
...themselves through the process of gaining wealth and fortune. America was seen as a place full of opportunities and was an area to be free and prosper, this idea was known as the “American Dream”. However, this was also a time in which crime, racism and war were all still prevalent. The “American Dream” was an idea which moved passed the faultiness in society and focused more on personal gain and happiness. In the novel, The Great Gatsby, F. Scott Fitzgerald critiques the state of the “American Dream” through specific characters who demonstrate different flaws revolving around wealth throughout the entirety of the novel. An important character Fitzgerald crafts to support the claim would be Jay Gatsby. Formally known as James Gatz, Gatsby was just a regular country boy from minnesota who had high hopes of becoming rich from an early age. He has a hard working boy who honorably served his country and later...
Words: 898 - Pages: 4
...by Paula Davis-Laack, J.D., M.A.P.P. in Pressure Proof Happiness is having a large, caring, close-knit family in another city. George Burns How happy are you and why? This is a question I spend a fair amount of time thinking about, not only as it applies to my own levels of happiness, but also as it applies to my family, friends, and the people who I work with. Since graduating with my master’s degree in positive psychology, I’ve worked with and observed thousands of people in a wide variety of settings, and happy people just flow with the groove of life in a unique way. Here is what they do differently: 1) They build a strong social fabric. Happy people stay connected to their families, neighbors, places of worship, and communities. These strong connections act as a buffer to depression and create strong, meaningful connections. The rate of depression has increased dramatically in the last 50-75 years. The World Health Organization predicts that by 2020, depression will be the second leading cause of mortality in the world, impacting nearly one-third of all adults (Murray & Lopez, 1996). While several forces are likely behind this increase, one of the most important factors may be the disconnection from people and their families and communities. Related Articles Choosing the Object of Your Devotion Happiness Depends Upon Close Relations The Pursuit of Happiness--Or the Quest for Wealth The Key to Happiness: Focus on What You Need, Not What You Want Aloha Awareness ...
Words: 1678 - Pages: 7
...novel define that American dream changed by time; the first time for European living in America was American dream, and originally any discovery which gave them happiness was American dream, but in the ear of 20s mean for American dream has become perverted into desire for wealth by whatever means; thinking that money will bring happiness. The Great Gatsby, was published in this era; therefore; it gives us a vivid portrayal of that time by demonstrating symbols and character behavior the impossibility of American dream. The characters that Fitzgerald describes in his novel all tie in with many aspect of the 1920s lifestyle. The Jazz Age was a tendency toward materialism, and characters are described in the way that shows materialistic tendency. Callahan says “Critics from several different generations have noted how Fitzgerald used his conflicts to explore the origins and fate of the American dream and the related idea of the nation.” (Callahan). Fitzgerald describes Gatsby, the main character in the novel, as a dream achiever, who is looking for wealth and property even he compare Daisy as an object of wealth. He had dreamed since childhood to become rich and change his contemporary life during his childhood, thus he left his family and start looking for businesses. Gatsby ambition and enthusiasm for the wealth and property even led him to change his name from James Gatz to Gatsby to find a new identity for him. To reach his dreams and goals he start doing...
Words: 2280 - Pages: 10
...thwarted love between a man and a woman, but upon closer inspection it is obvious that the novel is much more than just that. The Great Gatsby is essentially a story that reveals the corruption and overall decay of what was affectionately known as The American Dream. The American Dream is described in Chapter 9 as originally being about moral values and the pursuit of happiness. In fact, it is written in the American Constitution that every individual has the right to “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” This right appears to have taken a twisted turn in the early 1920’s. Fitzgerald portrays this time of decay of social and moral values; these values being discarded for greed and pursuit of selfish pleasure. Jay Gatsby, the title character, is a man who more than anything craves the past. In his past, he fell in love with young Daisy and quickly became obsessed with her. The only problem, that he immediately realized, was that she would only associate or take interest in those with high social status and wealth. To gain her affection Gatsby lied about his family and social status, claiming that he was born into a wealthy family and was going to be attending Oxford after the war on their wealth. “’I am the son of some wealthy people in the Middle West-all dead now,’”(Page 65). Once convinced by Jay’s claims, young Daisy agreed to wait for Jay while he was out fighting the war. However soon after, Tom Buchanan, a very wealthy man from a family of established wealth and high...
Words: 1522 - Pages: 7
