Nathan Saper <natedog@well.com> wrote:
Yes, this was my assertion. However, my assertion was accompanied by my stating that I really don't feel too sorry for the rich-ass Insurance Co. CEO. If his losing a small percentage of his millions causes him to be as unhappy as a poor person dying slowly of cancer, than I guess you have an argument. Yes, you could say that "happiness is subjective," and you would be right. However, I was stating "right to be happy" as a generalization, not as something concrete.
This is inherently flawed. It follows from this "right to happiness" that the government or some other regulatory body tells people what makes them happy and what doesn't---or, at the very least, it tells them if their happiness is unimportant. "Killing you, your family, and your dog shouldn't make you unhappy. You've all had long, productive lives already. If it does, well, too bad." -- from 'The Handbook of the Ministry Of Happiness', Appendix A: Handy Phrases for Public Relations -- Riad Wahby rsw@mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105