Stratum of the field of happiness

1. Happiness literature undoubtedly refers us to the field of happiness. However, we must not make the mistake of assuming that the field of happiness encompasses homogeneous contents bound together by harmonious and mutual relationships. We must keep a critical distance from this idea of homogeneity within the field of happiness.

On the contrary, the contents within this field are very heterogeneous, so that the field of happiness cannot be thought of as defined by homogeneity. But the constitutive heterogeneity of the happiness field supposes that such contents stand in opposition to each other; so that the dialectic relative to the happiness field implies that the different processes and relationships found within it give rise to results capable of restructuring the field of happiness itself. In other words, “the ‘unity’ to be attributed to the contents of the field of happiness does not guarantee a homogeneous unity of these contents” (Gustavo Bueno, The Happiness Delusion, p. 45).

The diversity found within the field of happiness – a diversity that makes some contents irreducible to others –  becomes evident in two ways, namely: the immediate way and the mediated way. According to the immediate way, from the ethological-psychological domain, happiness appears in relation to unhappiness. From this point of view, happiness is structured in a binary manner (a field, paradoxically, of unhappiness, and a field of happiness). Thus, the traditional contrarian principle sunt circa eadem faithfully conveys the paradox of the happiness field having an immediate binary structure.

According to the mediated mode (that is, through the mediation of opposite contents) the contents of the field of happiness are also multiple and heterogeneous: from the joy we experience at meeting with a friend, to the pleasure of good digestion or the receipt of an honorary award. These are heterogeneous, distinct and discrete specifications of contents that we consider generically as happiness-related: pleasant, joyful, delightful, &c. – happy (or unhappy) contents, but not continuous from one another.

2. Taking into account what we have just said about the multiplicity, variety and heterogeneity within the field of happiness, one might be tempted to understand it as a structure formed by a set of strata. A set of strata interpenetrated according to different forms of intrusion, giving rise to a primarily anomalous structure, which does not prevent us from being able to identify the different strata.

A first stratum (Stratum I) would be the stratum of phenomena (ethological-psychological and others). We must also single out the stratum of concepts (Stratum II). This last stratum cannot be separated from phenomena, though it can be dissociated from them. But, in addition to phenomena and concepts, in the field of happiness we find Ideas (which in turn encompass concepts) and Ideas of Ideas, or “second-degree” ideas (Stratum III). Of course, although inseparable from phenomena and concepts, ideas are also dissociable from them. With respect to concepts, as contained within the second stratum, we find theories (Stratum IV). These are constituted around concepts (classifications, correspondences, implications) and also involve phenomena. Finally, we must refer to the doctrines of happiness (Stratum V). The doctrines of happiness are constituted by concatenations between Ideas. It is important to note that the stratum of doctrines must be understood by virtue of incorporating the field into the enveloping space of that field. When theories and doctrines are interwoven, “conceptions of happiness” appear.

Thus, the contents of the field of happiness are organized according to five strata: phenomena, concepts, ideas, theories and doctrines.

3. It is important to clarify, in order to avoid confusion and misunderstandings, that the stratiform structure of the field of happiness is abstract, so should not be thought of as the tabular, horizontal, geomorphological structure of a sedimentation bed. We assume the existence of the strata, but the materials manifest themselves in a discontinuous way, being the result of ideological failures, epistemological intrusions, nematological issues, philosophical carry-over, &c.; processes that presuppose such a structure, but also that it cannot be thought of in a simple and orderly way.

The field of happiness is a battlefield in which phenomena, concepts and Ideas “fight” one another by way of theories and doctrines: there is a heterogeneous (categorical) multiplicity of phenomena and concepts, but also of Ideas, theories and doctrines. Accordingly, “the confrontation often perceived between a group of phenomena and a theory is actually immersed within a confrontation between a theory (concealed amidst phenomena) and another theory” (Gustavo Bueno, The Happiness Delusion, p. 52).