Happiness: A History

by Darrin M. McMahon

Today, human beings tend to think of happiness as a natural right. But they haven’t always felt this way. For the ancient Greeks, happiness meant virtue. For the Romans, it implied prosperity and divine favor. For Christians, happiness was synonymous with God. Throughout history, happiness has been equated regularly with the highest human calling, the most perfect human state. Yet it’s only within the past two hundred years that human beings have begun to think of happiness as not just an earthly possibility but also as an earthly entitlement, even an obligation. In this sweeping new book, historian Darrin M. McMahon argues that our modern belief in happiness is the product of a dramatic revolution in human expectations carried out since the eighteenth century.
In the tradition of works by Peter Gay and Simon Schama, Happiness draws on a multitude of sources, including art and architecture, poetry and scripture, music and theology, and literature and myth, to offer a sweeping intellectual history of man’s most elusive yet coveted goal.

Genres: History, Philosophy, Nonfiction, Psychology, Sociology, World History, Self Help

560 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2005

About the author

Darrin M. McMahon is a historian, author, and public speaker, who lives in Tallahassee, Florida, and the Ben Weider Professor of History at Florida State University.

Reviews

[Sense of History]

On happiness you can produce a library and still not get beyond generalities; that's the problem with container concepts, such as 'love' and 'peace'. This book on the history of happiness is quite an extensive study, and yet it covers only what great thinkers in Western history have written about the subject. This is intellectual history in the narrow sense of the word, at most a study of the "intellectual concept of happiness". For those that love this kind of approach, this certainly is a successful book, with refined text analysis and a broad overview of the Western philosophical tradition(s). But this certainly is not a true history of mankind's search for happiness. Perhaps that is as elusive as the goal of this search itself?

[Private Account · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this book. Couldn’t put it down. But here are my complaints:

The author

1. has obviously not read Joseph Campbell or Ayn Rand and any book analyzing happiness from Every Different Perspective Ever that hasn’t read those authors is just sloppy.

2. tried way too hard to see something that wasn’t really there. It is clear to me by reading the excerpts that most of the thinkers thought very clearly and thoroughly about happiness—there was much less development over time than he claims there is. His book contradicts itself in this way, claiming there was a new development in the concept of happiness when I could turn back 200 pages and see that, nope, actually that had been around for a long time, like happy endings to stories. No dude, they were not invented in the 1800’s, off the top of my head—Shakespearean comedies?

3. His writing style killed me. He was full of random metaphors that pulled me out of his book like, “Strong black coffee to clear the head of an evenings wine, his work served as a sobering reminder of the ancient wisdom of the Christian Fall.” Why he feels the need to say such a simple sentence in this way is beyond me. The entire paragraphs dedicated to “setting the mood” just destroyed this book. Before he quotes someone, he feels the need to set the scene: “There may have been an occasional cough as Lequinio took his place at the pulpit, the scratch of a workman’s boots, perhaps, side-long glances, the rustling of clothes…” WHAT??? Just friggin give me the quote!!! Do I really need twenty pages telling the life story of everyone you want to quote? It could have been relevant, but it wasn’t. This book could have been 100 pages, more focused and clear. Author needs to read The Elements of Style.

Famous ideas about happiness (but keep in mind these thinkers were not nearly as one-sided as these summaries make it seem):
-Ancient Greece: Any happiness anyone experiences is a miracle since as all life is tragic, happiness is pure luck, we are victims of fate
-Aristotle: The goal is to be happy in this life, here and now.
-Plato: Happiness is the ideal that does not exist, Heaven
-Epicurus: Pleasure is the goal (though keep in mind pleasure is defined by him as minimizing pain by living a simple life in the country)
-Stoics: Just be happy, whatever your circumstances, just decide to be happy and be happy *note this is like today's Positive Psychology movement!
-Zeno: Learn to not desire anything and then you will be happy
-Dark Ages: Bear the pain of life now and be rewarded in Heaven—the only possible happiness is suffering now so that you can be happy in death, embrace suffering, suffering IS happiness!
-Aquinas: happiness is the process of fully realizing ourselves, happiness is the hope of Heaven, i.e. the hope of happiness
-Martin Luther: heaven and hell are actually psychological places - God wants us to be happy!
-Renaissance: Good people are happy. Bad people are unhappy. You’d better be happy or we will know you’re bad
-Rousseau: intellectual people can’t be happy, only dumb people, the only happiness is trying to make other people happy i.e. self-sacrifice, people can be forced to be happy if we control their needs, let us create a new man and a new nature! Then we will be happy
-The Romantics: happiness is god, have you noticed how happy kids are? Let’s be like them! Be one with the world. No ego! Savages are happy too!
-Schopenhauer: Art is the only happiness i.e. the escape we feel when contemplating art i.e. not actually being alive is the only happiness, drugs are the only happiness
-Kant: Plato and Renaissance repeat—our duty in this life is to act in a way that renders us worthy of happiness, only good boys and girls get to be happy
-Locke and the Libertarians: One must assume responsibility of being happy for oneself
-Mill (and Rand if the author had read her): Happiness cannot be the goal, an emotion cannot be the goal, rather, happiness is what happens when you are pursuing your goals, you cannot “catch” an emotion, the minute you focus on them they are gone, liberty trumps happiness
-Industrialists: wealth is happiness
-Marx: work is happiness (similar to stoics, learning to love what you have to do anyway)
-Nietzsche: self-esteem is happiness. And power.
-Freud: unhappiness is life. The only goal is to eliminate gratuitous suffering (like Schopenhauer) And stop being delusional and preaching about happiness. You may find satisfaction in life from being loved.
-Modern Science: happiness is genetic, you have no control over it, so if you are not happy you should take drugs
-The Author's Conclusion: The idea that we can find happiness is a modern invention, as are the feelings of failure when we do not succeed. “On the whole the momentum of modern culture has been in the direction of earthly content, accompanied by a steady expanding sense of prerogative, entitlement, means, and due… God was happiness, happiness has since become our god… And happiness, we might say, has proved a taskmaster as hard, at times, as the God it has sought to replace.”

Other Notes
-What the intellectuals write about and leave for posterity often does not reflect reality for the masses.
-Since Ancient Greece man has been writing an endless stream of self-help books. I mean endless.
-Aristotle believed that only those who were wealthy enough to have leisure, education, and indepence could be happy. Only those who have organized their lives so as to escape its ordinary conditions (of slaving away for survival) can be happy. I am inclined to agree!
-Many people throughout history have idealized simple country life as a happier life
-Commies seeking to level the playing field (how can anyone be happy if he is jealous of his neighbor?!) have been around forever too
-Great Schopenhaur quote: Accordingly optimism is not only a false but also a pernicious doctrine, for it presents life as a desirable state and man’s happiness as its aim and object. Starting from this, everyone belives he has the most legitimate claim to happiness and enjoyment. If, as usually happens, these do not fall to his lot, he belives that he suffers an injustice, in fact, that he misses the whole point of existence; whereas it is far more correct to regard work, privation, misery, and suffering crowned by death, as the aim and object of life.”

Other notes: If you liked this review you might like this blog post -
http://roslynross.blogspot.com/2015/0...

[Marc Lamot · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book contains a kaleidoscope of views on the importance of happiness in a human life, and how best to achieve it. McMahon limits his study to the great philosophical traditions of the West, starting with the Greeks, which thus narrows his viewpoint considerably, but of course this is interesting on its own.

What you can learn from this historical overview is that the pursuit of happiness in the West is considered to be the core of human existence, but the concept of happiness has been filled in in many different ways, and also about the way to achieve this blessed state very divergent opinions exist. As we come closer to our present era, it is also clear that in our culture happiness has become a real obsession, and often this pursuit is itself a source of frustration and misfortune.

In his conclusion McMahon enumerates as one of the causes of that 'culture of unhappiness' the disappearance of the great narratives: Western people do not see any final goals anymore that are worth seeking out, which can make life meaningful, and therefore Western man has to put up with a hedonism that will never satisfy him. As McMahon himself points out, this unsatisfactory way of always striving for the higher, the better, the richer and the deeper, belongs to the core of human existence in the West, and consequently happiness is at most an ephemeral, temporarily state of being.

So, it may be better to join another, lately rather fashionable look at happiness: namely that happiness is "overrated", that we must get rid of that obsession that makes us unhappy. Or surely get rid of that exaggerated, too absolute concept of happiness that we have been cherishing since the Enlightenment and Romantics in the West. Perhaps, instead, it is better to focus on what is good enough, on the small achievable things, the ordinary existence with a minimum of welfare and a minimum of standards and goals that are attainable.

But while I'm writing this, I feel the hunch that this is too little and too small and petty-bourgeois, and perhaps it is better to aim a bit higher. Nope, I guess mankind will never give up!

[Melanie Fritz · Rating 4 out of 5]

McMahon investigates how the concept of "happiness" came to mean what it means today. Starting out in Ancient Greece, where only a few godlike men were believed to be chosen to achieve happiness in this world and a happy life could only be judged in hindsight after a person's death, up until today, where science promises to discover the genetic secret to a happy life. The idea of happiness shifted throughout history, along with its perceived relevance and McMahon shows the different philosophical concepts at work in this detailled and well-reasearched book. This is NOT a self-help book and I was very glad that McMahon is not looking to tie everything up with a bow and his own definition of what happiness is today. For us, living in the Western world in the 21st century, it is important to keep in mind that neither "happiness", nor the pursuit of it, was always considered to be a human right. Struggle, anxiety and uneasiness are features that were always assumed to be eternal companions of man's search for everlasting peace and bliss. I don't believe there to be anything everlasting in human endeavours, especially not happiness. What's new in our capitalist society where most people don't have to struggle for their daily existence, is the unhappiness about being unhappy. Constantly comparing ourselves with other people, we wonder if we are happy enough . And this is such a silly notion that this book was able to put into perspective for me. In fact, after 500 pages of people trying to define and achieve happiness, I'm rather glad that Shakespeare didn't write for an audience that expected a happy ending, and I'd even side with the character John in Huxley's Brave New World and claim my "right to be unhappy". It might not exist for much longer.

...

"But I like the inconveniences."
"We don't," said the Controller. "We prefer to do things comfortably."
"But I don't want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin."
"In fact," said Mustapha Mond, "you're claiming the right to be unhappy."
"All right then," said the Savage defiantly, "I'm claiming the right to be unhappy."
"Not to mention the right to grow old and ugly and impotent; the right to have syphilis and cancer; the right to have too little to eat; the right to be lousy; the right to live in constant apprehension of what may happen to-morrow; the right to catch typhoid; the right to be tortured by unspeakable pains of every kind." There was a long silence.
"I claim them all," said the Savage at last.
Mustapha Mond shrugged his shoulders. "You're welcome," he said.

Brave New World

*This book completes task # 10 of the Book Riot Read Harder Challenge 2015:
A microhistory

[Joshua Buhs · Rating 3 out of 5]

As a technical achievement, this is amazing: McMahon coordinated a great deal of learning and very specific histories of eras covering the last 2.500 years. So much thought must've gone into it.

As a history of happiness, though, the book is less invigorating. McMahon's thesis--that there was a fundamental change about the nature of happiness, going from something that may have been universally desired but not controlled, to something we thought we could control--but it's hard to keep track of that argument, as he gets very much into the weeds of the eras he covers and loses sight of the story he's trying to tell.

It reads very much like a book on Western Civ that incidentally hits upon the way verious historical actors conceptualized history.

[Dan Rivas]

What I learned:

People have never been happy, that's why there's a God.

[Chris · Rating 3 out of 5]

For the philosophically inclined, I'd recommend this book. It goes through the Western history of the concept of happiness, focusing mostly between the medieval and renaissance time-frames giving a more limited focus on 18th century and classical Greek lines of thought. It doesn't, however, cover any thinking from other traditions, which is a slight weakness of the book.

The book does a good job of going through the ages. Classical Age being about virtue, Medieval being about Christian piety, Renaissance about expansion into more secular perspective, romanticism rebounding on the person as an entity and finally post-romanticism taking a focus on community and the side effects of industrialization. Then a last chapter pointing out post-industrial/utopian thinking. This focuses more on my personal favorite topic, genetics and more scientific approaches to happiness (though this is definitely less pronounced or qualified in this book).

Not a bad read for those that like more classical thought or western tradition. I'm a bit less inclined wanting to see a more science-based perspective, but then this book never ports to being that! Definitely worth reading to get a general historical feel to the concept of happiness.

[Gloria · Rating 2 out of 5]

We from our selves alone, and not from Fate,
Derive our happy, or unhappy State....
If Fates Inconstancy we wou'd prevent,
We, in all States of Life, shou'd seek Content...
~William Wycherley

I've found one thing that doesn't make me particularly happy--
reading about happiness.
Or at least what those from all walks of life, all branches of history, and all realms of faith define as "happiness."

While some of the history in this book was interesting (especially the ancient Greeks' and Romans' take on this God-given state), it began to irritate. Especially when one cannot figure in circumstances or stations. Happiness knows no classes or boundaries. A poor man can be content, while a rich man can be plagued with dissatisfaction, correct?

So, Shall I try and explain to you why a sunset is beautiful?
Why a pounding ocean surf is stirring?
Why a song can give me goosebumps or bring me to tears?

No. You will know it when you feel it yourself.

[Soliloquios Literarios · Rating 4 out of 5]

¡Librazo! Definitivamente vale la pena leerlo.

En realidad son 4.5 estrellas ;). Le puse cuatro porque le faltó un poquitín de estructura y en varias secciones sentí que el autor estaba bastante sesgado (cofcof... cuando hablaba del comunismo XD), pero fuera de eso es un libro excelente =).

Un texto súper recomendado para cualquiera interesado en la historia, la filosofía, la ética/moral, la religión, la economía y/o la psicología. Mezcla historia, arte y las ideas de los exponentes más representativos del pensamiento occidental, es de verdad una delicia.

En pocas palabras: ¡léanlo!

[Jim Leckband · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is not a history of happiness and welfare of people through the ages. This is the story of "Happiness" as thought of by dead white European males (well, Camus makes an appearance at the end). I'm not using the DWM epithet only as a politically correct barb, but more as a warning the book has a narrow focus towards what can be gleaned from the researches of an academic historian.

"Happiness", it turns out, is like Narcissus. It reflects the age as it wants to be seen by itself. The Greeks and Romans tended to reflect that happiness in life can only be recognized once the man's life is over and judged by the gods. (Well at least in their writings they did, I think the average Georgios or Georgius probably thought happiness was a bit closer to home, as did Odysseus.) And of course the Christians thought happiness was to be deferred until everlasting life.

The Enlightenment seems to be the time when thinkers came to the thought - "Hey, happiness can be here and now and attained through reason." Of course that meant if you weren't happy then you weren't thinking correctly. Plus ça change. These thinkers set the stage for the rest of happiness thinking - in that now it was an internal challenge, the "Don't Worry, Be Happy" school. An interesting diversion from this is the Communist/Marxist strain where happiness is a class struggle (hammer, nail).

The author at the beginning did check his bias towards DWMs and stated he was Western focussed. Buddhism at the very least has a lot to say on the attainment of happiness (or the uselessness of the struggle), as well as Liberation theology and modern cults (he does have a section on the 1800's religious cults). McMahon's style is easy to read, he seldom falls into academic jargon. The propulsion of the chapter's themes make for a quicker read than I would have thought. In the end, he does do some tallying of psychology and sociology's research on happiness. It may turn out that happiness is attained by doing, not by thinking, believing or "being" something. In other words "Don't just sit there and be happy, DO something!"

[James Henderson · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you are looking for answers to the questions of how or where to find happiness this is not the book for you. However, if you want an expansive discussion and history of the idea of happiness in many, if not all, of its forms then this is the book for you. The author catalogues many of the most interesting interpretations of this elusive subject, while he avoids concluding precisely what it should be. This is a good place to look for beginnings to the search for answers rather than the answers themselves. One example from the Symposium of Plato links happiness with Eros:
"Agathon, in a grand rhe­torical flourish befitting a poet, concludes [the early portion of the discussion by saying] that though all the gods are happy, Eros is 'the most happy, since he is the most beautiful and the best."
The author is a professor of history at Florida State University and he can't avoid some subjectivity, but the success of the book is founded on its encyclopedic and accessible presentation of this most evasive idea.

[Ted Morgan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Darrin M. McMahon is a discursive writer which makes summarizing his books difficult. He is a philosophical historian who explores histories of speculation in wave of themes and variations. I own this one a good review in future.

[Heidi · Rating 3 out of 5]

I came across this when i was working on my thesis. The author really has a wonderful idea with this book--investigating what has defined happiness throughout history across cultures.

[Kirsten · Rating 2 out of 5]

Glücklich zu sein ist etwas, von dem wir glauben, dass es uns zusteht. Doch das war nicht immer so. In seinem Buch führt uns Darrin McMahon durch die Geschichte und zeigt, dass die Menschen das Glücklich sein nicht immer für selbstverständlich hielten. Die Suche nach dem Glück ist so alt wie die Menschheit selbst.

Gleich am Anfang stellt der Autor eine interessante Frage: wenn wir alle nach dem Glück suchen, können wir dann überhaupt glücklich sein?

Glück ist etwas, das uns mehr oder weniger "passiert" (Happiness is something which happens to us). Das war zumindest die Ansicht der Philosophen im alten Griechenland. Aber gilt das nur für wenige Privilegierte oder für alle Menschen? Wendet man sich dagegen nach Rom, so kann man einen eher lockeren Umgang mit dem Glück. Glück kann auch ein Segen sein. Die ersten christlichen Märtyrer waren glücklich, wenn sie sich für ihren Glauben opfern konnten.

Daraus entwickelte sich die Meinung, dass Glück nur von Gott kommen kann. Der Mensch selbst ist schmutzig und verdorben, sobald er auf der Welt ist. Deshalb weinen die Kinder auch, sobald sie auf der Welt sind. Weltliches Glück kann man wenn überhaupt als Pilger oder Märtyrer erlangen. Aber auch hier bleibt die Frage offen, ob es echtes Glück ist oder "nur" ein Segen. Erst mit der Reformation wurde den Menschen auch das Glück außerhalb der Kirche zugestanden.

Im 18. Jahrhundert ändert sich die Einstellung. Luxus ist Glück, deshalb die Armen per Definition unglücklich. Wenn man im Luxus lebt, fühlt man sich gut. Ist man dann aber auch ein guter Mensch? Es gibt sogar mathematische Formeln, um das Glück zu erklären. Je weiter wir in die Moderne kommen, desto deutlicher wird, dass die Suche nach dem Glück immer schwerer wird. Es gibt immer mehr Einflüsse von außen und mehr als einmal kommt die Frage auf, ob man bei dem Elend um einen herum überhaupt Glück empfinden kann. Eine Zeitlang scheint die Traurigkeit das wichtigere Gefühl zu sein, dem in der Literatur mehr Bedeutung zugestanden wird.

In der neuen Welt ist die Suche nach dem Glück dagegen noch einfacher. Freiheit bedeutet Glück. Aber ab dem 20. Jahrhundert gibt es keinen Unterschied im Empfinden mehr. Glück ist harte Arbeit und ist oft von einer Person abhängig. Anscheinend fühlen sich die Menschen nicht mehr in der Lage, Glück selbst zu finden. Es gibt unzählige Selbsthilfebücher für die unterschiedlichsten Gruppen.

Die Frage, was Glück ist, hat der Autor in diesem Buch nicht beantwortet. Aber das ist auch gut so, denn Glück ist für jeden Einzelnen etwas anderes. Mich persönlich hat sein Buch nicht überzeugt, das liegt aber hauptsächlich daran, dass ich kein Freund von solchen Betrachtungen bin.

[D.A. Cairns · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an impressive book, very impressive. Really well researched and organized in well woven threads, Happiness: A History is a book of philosophy written for well educated readers...and amateur philosophers like myself. If you're afraid of deep thinking and big words leave this on the shelf.

I would have enjoyed Happiness more if if were less dense. On numerous occasions I was forced to re read passages which contained awesome assemblies of wonderful words; syntactically daring and thought provoking. I kept comparing it to Weiner's Geography of Bliss which was very accessible. I probably should have made that comparison though, as Bliss was a layman's sociology book whereas Happiness is an academics philosophy book. It's apples and oranges really, but as I'm quite fascinated with the subject of happiness and especially the human obsession with it, I've read both and naturally compared them. I would have enjoyed it more also if McMahon had have started earlier than the 5th century. I guess he would argue that happiness wasn't a topic of discussion prior to the advent of the time rich and loquacious Greek civilization. Finally, it should have been subtitled a history of happiness in the west. Its Europe and North America and...oh, that's the whole world right? I didn't like it.

On the positive, I found it utterly fascinating to read quotes from, and backgrounds of, most of the biggest names in western philosophy. I learned so many new things in this mind broadening book, I shall no doubt have to read it again. Multiple times. I pass most of my books on to others, or exchange them, but McMahon's Happiness will stay on my shelf.

As a Christian, I was amazed to see how hard people who refused to bow to God's sovereignty tried to write him out of the picture-with varying levels of success. reading the book reinforced my view that the Bible is the ultimate book of philosophy and all philosophies built on its foundations are rock solid and eternally so. The rest...communism for example. I rest my case.

I waited a long time to read this book, and it was definitely worth the wait.

[Catherine Alexandra · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a fun read. The book goes through a basic scope of the Western ideals happiness. Starting from the pre-socratics, it is a basic history of philosophy in some sense since a good deal of philosophical inquiry has a lot to do with the humans desire for all things good and meaningful. We assume that once these things are found, happiness is achieved. But as we all know, almost no one has it, no agrees what happiness is, and no one has the same answers on how to achieve it.
Mcmahon is good. In this book, its largely build on a sequencial progression toward a greater understanding that we know nothing about happiness, except that everyone wants it. It is a completely Western focus, which he states and explains from the beginning.
Its simple and easy to read. Some insightful information that I think anyone could benefit from. Pretty good perpectives on difficult thinkers like Schopenhauer, Nieztsche, and Freud.

[Cal Davie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely stunning.

McMahon brings the reader on a journey through how the concept of happiness has been understood from Ancient Greek times to modernity. Happiness has been tied to morality throughout history, but it has also been understood simply as pleasure. The tension between a flourishing moral life and a pleasurable one has been wrestled with by many philosophers. In the modern day happiness has become an obsession with self-help books on how to be happy still selling like no tomorrow. What's lacking is the nuanced view of what happiness is and ought to be. This historic overview allows the reader to really reflect on what they really want to pursue with happiness.

[Diana · Rating 1 out of 5]

An interesting but very ethnocentric exploration of the evolution of the concept of happiness. From the research conducted by this author it would appear that more than 3/4 of the human population has had no awareness on the subject. "A" history is the operative portion of this title, perhaps A Christian History would have been more precise albeit the tome does include pre-Christian philosophy; it is definitely not a definitive history, especially to readers knowledgeable in non-Euro, non-Christian experience.

[Boudewijn Hogeboom · Rating 4 out of 5]

Een fascinerend overzicht van de geschiedenis van het denken over geluk. Wat is geluk? Is het universeel of individueel? Kan een mens gelukkig zijn terwijl zijn medemens lijdt? Was er geluk is Auschwitz’? Kunnen we naar geluk streven? en bereiken? Hier en nu of in het hiernamaals? Hebben we een -genetisch afgestelde- geluksthermosthaat? Die na ernstig ongeluk of het bereiken van je ultieme droom na een half jaar weer in de fabrieksinstellingen staat? Of gaat big pharma gelukspillen verschaffen? Soma, uit brave New world?

[Tarah Luke · Rating 4 out of 5]

While I enjoyed this as a whole, there were parts that I liked much more than others. I was fascinated about ancient conceptions of happiness, and I enjoyed the section on the French Revolution/Napoleon (I had to laugh because while I knew about Napoleon’s happiness essay, I didn’t realize it was so completely not about happiness at all). As a rule, I don’t generally care about religion, so I skimmed those parts. All in all, a very good read.

[Ozgur Deniz · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting history , explains how meaning of happiness changed from period to period

[Will · Rating 3 out of 5]

"To maximize pleasure and to minimize pain - in that order - were characteristic Enlightenment concerns. This generally more receptive attitude toward good feeling and pleasure would have significant long-term consequences. It is a critical difference separating Enlightenment views on happiness from those of the ancients. There is another, however, of equal importance: that of ambition and scale. Although the philosophers of the principal classical schools sought valiantly to minimize the role of chance as a determinant of human happiness, they were never in a position to abolish it entirely. Neither, for that matter, were the philosophers of the eighteenth century, who, like men and women at all times, were forced to grapple with apparently random upheavals and terrible reversals of forture. The Lisbon earthquake of 1755 is an awful case in point. Striking on All Saints' Day while the majority of Lisbon's inhabitants were attending mass, the earthquake was followed by a tidal wave and terrible fires that destroyed much of the city and took the lives of tens of thousands of men and women. 'Quel triste jeu de hasard que le jeu de la vie humaine,' Voltaire was moved to reflect shortly thereafter: 'What a sad game of chance is this game of human life.' He was not alone in reexamining his more sanguine assumptions of earlier in the century, doubting the natural harmony of the universe and the possibilities of 'paradise on earth'; the catastrophe provoked widespread reflection on the apparent 'fatality of evil' and the random occurrence of senseless suffering. It was shortly thereafter that Voltaire produced his dark masterpiece, Candide, which mocks the pretension that this is the best of all possible worlds.

And yet, in many ways, the incredulity expressed by educated Europeans in the earthquake's aftermath is a more interesting index of received assumptions, for it demonstrates the degree to which such random disasters were becoming, if not less common, at least less expected. Their power to shock was magnified accordingly, but only because the predictability and security of daily existence were increasing, along with the ability to control the consequences of unforeseen disaster. When the Enlightened Marquis of Pombal, the First Minister of Portugal, set about rebuilding Lisbon after the earthquake, he paid great attention to modern principles of architecture and central planning to help ensure that if such a calamity were to strike again, the effects would be less severe. To this day, the rebuilt Lisbon of Pombal stands as an embodiment of Enlightened ideas.

Thus, although eighteenth-century minds did not - and could not - succeed in mastering the random occurrences of the universe, they could - and did - conceive of exerting much greater control over nature and human affairs. Encouraged by the examples of Newtonian physics, they dreamed of understanding not only the laws of the physical universe but the moral and human laws as well, hoping one day to lay out with precision what the Italian scholar Giambattista Vico described as a 'new science' of society and man. It was in the eighteenth century, accordingly, that the human and social sciences were born, and so it is hardly surprising that observers turned their attention to studying happiness in similar terms. Whereas classical sages had aimed to cultivate a rarified ethical elite - attempting to bring happiness to a select circle of disciples, or at most to the active citizens of the polis - Enlightenment visionaries dreamed of bringing happiness to entire societies and even to humanity as a whole."

[Tami · Rating 5 out of 5]

The pursuit of happiness. If you browse the shelves of your local bookstore or library, you are sure to find a couple dozen titles that claim to have the secret to happiness. Surprisingly though, when you look past the cover these books don't seem to agree on THE way to gain happiness. After reading a few of these titles it becomes very apparent that no one seems to even agree on what constitutes happiness. Some believe that material possessions are proof of happiness while others think that happiness is a state or mind. Still others say that happiness is merely an illusion.

The conflict over the definition of happiness, how to achieve this goal, and whether happiness is even attainable isn't new. The questions and the quests are likely as old as human life. Happiness: A History looks at these questions in more detail from a historical perspective.

The journey starts with the Greek world where happiness was seen as grace (primarily abundance of material possessions) from the Gods that could easily be taken away. There's an interesting little story that basically illustrates the notion that only at the end of one's life could it be determined that the life had been happy. Other cultures, as evidenced at Pompeii, viewed happiness as synonymous with physical pleasure.

Then the philosophers, the religious practitioners, spiritualists, and eventually the scientists join in on the discussion. Some wonder if we deserve to be happy; others see it as our divine right. Many produce solid plans about how to gain enlightenment, material wealth, or success- defining each as true happiness. Others suggest that happiness is a journey not a destination. Together, they set the stage for the confusion in our own present.

[Bookmarks Magazine]

Today bookstore shelves are stocked with encyclopedia titles like Salt, Zero, The Pencil, Cod, Chocolate, and One Good Turn (A Natural History of the Screwdriver and the Screw). Happiness follows in suit but delivers a surprisingly rounded view of its subject. True to his subtitle, McMahon is more interested in cataloging the manifold interpretations of his slippery subject than in delivering a decisive conclusion of what it should be. A few critics wanted some answers; instead, McMahon raises many questions. Certainly, this professor of history at Florida State University presents some thinly veiled opinions, but the success of the book is founded on its encyclopedic and accessible presentation of this most evasive idea.

This is an excerpt from a review published in Bookmarks magazine.

[Michael Fong · Rating 2 out of 5]

There are those who say "You can never be sure" and "There's so much to know before you can be sure". Such folk, when scaffolded by education, become Darrin McMahon. I've for long thought of most historians as the librarians of the intellectual world, sweeping together the dusts of knowledge into nice big mounts, while physicists and philosophers chuck spears of thoughts at the ideas that stand tallest, clearing way for a rising humanity. McMahon has put together a book with such sweeping scope you marvel at the lowly consistency of his findings: Happiness is unknowable, till death are we sure. But then, when you take a broomstick to a war of ideas, you'll always be left in the dust. Those who must frame their world by a preponderance of facts and factoids for the simple point to rise may enjoy this read. For me, I like to keep my spears easily near, to fight when needed, and not in a shapely system of cluttering.

[Kay · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's extremely challenging to undertake a topic as broad as happiness and what human thought has been from Socrates up to the present time. For the various schools of thought in this area from philosophers to religious leaders to scientists, this book covers all of this ground although I found it both too long and not enough of a deep dive. I think this is simply because it's such a challenging topic to tackle. As always, happiness proves elusive. I have to admire an author even willing to tackle this. I find the topic interesting but I was also happy to finish reading this book. I think this book is only for those with a great interest in the topic of happiness and how it's been defined throughout history.

[Bumbierītis · Rating 4 out of 5]

A wonderful book, it takes you on a journey from the start of humanity to today, always searching for happiness. Happiness that is never to be found. Approached, yes, seized, never. A very thorough research of the Western ideas of happiness. The one star I took off from the rating was for how difficult it was to read. I bought the book in 2008 and been reading it on and off since then. But I guess in a way it makes sense. It is so full of ideas and information, that reading it all at once might lead to overload and confusion.

Now all I want is another book like this, but focusing on the Eastern ideas of happiness.

Well done, Mr McMahon!

[Tyler Hurst · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had to skim to finish this book because of timing not the book's quality. It is an enjoyable read and quite helpful for a research project on flourishing or happiness. I think if you read this and Jonathan Haidt's the Happiness Hypothesis you pretty much have the spectrum of ancient and contemporary answers to the question of happiness. That being said, further study would need to be done to guide you to the correct understanding (maybe J. Bud... book How To and How Not To Be Happy), but for the various views and historical development you'd be on sure footing.

[Paul Patterson · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is from my retreat talk and I am reworking the ideas I had there. It is an intellectual history of happiness. The first chapter deals with the Ancient views of happiness in Greek Tragedy, Platonic, Aristotle, Epicurus, and Zeno traditions. The shift if from happiness as a product of fate and gods, to happiness for the elite, and finally a democratized from of happiness in Stoic thought. The various conditioning of happiness is well discussed.

[Tim · Rating 5 out of 5]

McMahon's big book made me far more happy than I expected it would. It is an intellectual history of the idea of happiness in the West that ranges from the Greeks, through Christian thought, to the Enlightenment and 19th century philosophy and science, to modern psychology and pharmacology. I had expected more on the latter, but it mainly came in an epilogue to an engaging, well-written dive into what the ages have thought about happiness.

More later . . .