Understanding of happiness - Essay Example

Understanding of happiness Daniel Gilbert a of psychology at Harvard is a renowned and influential social psychologist and has contributed immensely in the topic of happiness through vigorous research in happiness and the factors that might be attributed to happiness currently and to the future. Gilbert is much concerned on issues that may guide us to realize our future happiness and identity and how one can utilize these factors to achieve their happiness. According to Gilbert, we learn from others and to achieve our future happiness, the experience of others might prove to be of utmost importance as compared to individual’s experience. Gertner on the other hand is a famous writer having immense contributions in leading dailies such as the New York Times, and is concerned with issues that directly affect populations and the real identity of the human kind in determining what they really want in life in defining their real identity (Gertner, 397). Largely, the two writers are deeply involved in issues are related to how individuals can attain happiness and defining their lives now and in the future through rigorous research and experiments. However, Gilbert proves to be a more senior writer as compared to Gertner, and the latter largely utilizes the ideas and the arguments by the former to extend his argument. Gertner introduces his argument by revisiting the argument by Gilbert and explaining the effectiveness of Gilbert’s arguments in daily lives of individuals. Both texts have a clear thesis that the authors try to defend and this amounts to be an essential aspect of academic writing in both texts. Irvin (9) examines the various requirements that have to be met by any essay that has to be considered to be academic. One of the requirements is that an academic writing has to be an argument. This relates to a carefully supported and arranged presentation of viewpoints that resembles the conversation between two people who may not be sharing the same opinion (Irvin, 9). This means that the author has to carefully arrange facts with supported evidence so as to convince the audience to their side of the argument. This would require introducing the argument and then systematically offering the supporting evidence to the argument. The two articles by Gertner and Gilbert clearly portray this requirement. Gertner initiates the argument by explaining his side of the argument to the audience and supporting the arguments about happiness as expressed by Gilbert. Gertner goes ahead to present a set of statements that explains his argumentative side such as, “you are wrong to believe that a job loss will be crushing” and “you are wrong to believe that a new kitchen will make you happy for as long as you imagine” (Gertner, 397). It is these questions that form lay the basis to form a thesis in Gertner’s argument and explain to the audience his argumentative side, which is a requirement in academic writing as explained by Irvin (9). On the other hand Gilbert initiates his argument by expressing the sentiments expressed by the lyrics of Doris Day, upon which he tries to disapprove the notion that the future can never be foretold and is better if left to happen automatically (Gilbert, 170). It is upon this argument that Gilbert forms his argumentative side and continues to offer immense supporting evidence to prove the fact that the future happiness can really be experienced before hand and we need the experience of others to determine our own future. For example, Gilbert states that ,”accurate beliefs give us power , which makes it easier to understand why they are so readily transmitted from one mind to another”(Gilbert, 172). This proves that fact that we can learn about our future through the experience of others and do not have to rely on our own experiences alone. This is a major requirement of in academic writing. Irvin (9) further explains another aspect of academic writing to be a critical analysis. This implies the use of concepts that enable the writer to engage the audience in an open inquiry process and indentify the meanings of the various parts that make up the writing itself. The questions ‘How’ and ‘why’ are more important in this case. Gertner critically analyzes the validity of Gilbert’s assertions regarding how individuals forecast their feelings and the implications of these feelings to their future happiness and emotional states. For example, Gertner analyzes the discovery by Gilbert and company that “we falter when it comes to imagining how we will feel about something in the future” (Gertner, 398). It is through this analysis that Gertner explains the meaning of this discovery to the audience. On the other hand Gilbert offers systematic analysis to support his arguments on how happiness can be achieved and the factors that are attributed to this happiness. For example, Gilbert uses the idea of declining marginal utility to analyze how poor to super wealth nations fair in the happiness index (Gilbert, 173). These analytical devices are important in academic writing in that they offer a wider scope in which the author breaks the subject apart, and offers the audience a close and detailed applicability of the subject in question. Irvin (13) further elaborates that academic writing requires that the writer choose a clear and interesting question in which they have to investigate and then narrow down to facts supporting these questions and justifying the thesis. This is clear in the two articles by Gertner and Gilbert in that the question has been narrowed down to how individuals can experience future happiness now, and how the experience of others can be useful in knowing about their future happiness. Irwin further argues that in academic writing particularly where the general audience is targeted, the use of jargon is better avoided in favor of simple language with clear flow and right punctuation. These statements are short and coherent in expressing the ideas of the writer as is the case with the above texts. Both Gertner and Gilbert have utilized simple language and short and clear statements that are easy to understand as required in academic writing. Gertner sticks to the use of objective language and chooses to use third person reporting, an approach that is common in academic writing. Gertner avoids imputing his opinions to the audience and sticks to the rule of academic writing where he utilizes the work of Gilbert and other philosophers to support his arguments in an objective way. This as Irvin explains is the most common approach in academic writing especially when utilizing both primary and secondary sources. However, as Irvin (5) argues this is not a rule in academic writing and sometimes the use of the first person ‘I’ is appropriate. Such is in the case of Gilbert who is an expert and having a great command in such a subject. This differentiates the two writers where Gertner utilizes the third person approach while Gilbert as an expert in this field settles on the use of first person subjectivity in some cases, and still maintains a varied tone and style in academic writing. Both Gertner and Gilbert are experts in the field of sociological issues having contributed immensely in diverse publications and with high caliber training in social psychology. One aspect that is clear about the two authors is that they are great researchers in social issues and are real interested in discovering about happiness and the human desire to understand what they really want in life (Gertner, 397 and Gilbert, 169). However, Gilbert proves to have a higher command in the field of social psychology. This is portrayed in Gerdner’s text that entirely utilizes the facts by Gilbert to prove his as supporting facts to his argument. Both the articles might be suitable for the general audience in that simple language and expressions have been used. However, Gertner in his analysis critically synthesizes the argument by Gilbert and this article is more elaborated for use by college level students as compared to the one by Gilbert that requires a critical evaluation of facts. The articles portray an academic style and tone in that various references have been used to support arguments in both cases. Both the publications are interesting and offer varied facts that have been obtained through research and experiments to support the idea that future happiness may be experienced currently, and the various factors that contribute to individual’s happiness. Therefore, the articles portray and extended use of academic writing requirements though Gertner’s article might be considered to be a news reporting approach as compared to an academic style as employed by Gilbert. Work cited Gilbert Daniel. Stumbling on happiness. Montreal, Knopf, 2007. Irvin L. Lennie. What is academic writing, 2010. Adapted from Irvin L. Lennie ‘Writing spaces: Readings on writing’ Vol.1 CA: Parlor Press. http://wac.colostate.edu/books/writingspaces1/irvin--what-is-academic-writing.pdf. 14 Jan. 2012 Gertner Jon. The futile pursuit of happiness. 2003, Sep. 7, New York Times. Pg 44 Read More