SOC344 2020 Tut9 – Monday 12.30pm

It is through happiness, lifestyle, and subjective wellbeing that we can identify happiness, hope and empathy, despite it being difficult within a sociological context. Within Hutchison’s study (2014, p. 16), it highlights the social and political understanding of emotion through empirical studies that’s interlinked with emotions and contemporary humanitarianism on how “images and emotions frame international humanitarian aid cultures.” It is also mentioned that despite the humanitarian aid cultures captivate images and emotions, it also looks down on developing countries, making developed look superior. Despite creating programs that measuring well-being and progress, they do not create the most reliable outlook on happiness through sociology and to be able to view them within the World Database of Happiness, to view both the positives and negatives to wellbeing research (OECD.org 2020; Veenhoven 2005). References Hutchison, E 2014, ‘A Global Politics of Pity? Disaster Imagery and the Emotional Construction of Solidarity after the 2004 Asian Tsunami’, International Political Sociology, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–19. Oecd.org. 2020. Measuring Well-Being and Progress: Well-Being Research, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), . Veenhoven, R 2005, ‘Inequality of Happiness in Nations’, Journal of Happiness Studies, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 351–355.

The emotion of happiness is often described as the ultimate state for an individual, but this can be dependant on factors outside of the individuals control. Factors including country of origin, political state and overall GDP. Levels of happiness is also a point to consider. Quick happiness (potentially superficial happiness) vs Long Lasting happiness can be also dependant on the individual due to personality and/or nationality. To the point that Roger makes (in reference to his previous research) that Americans would consider themselves less happy with living the Australian lifestyle. If we then take a look at Hutchinson's 2014 work on empathy (A global politics of pity), does the viewer feel superficial or fufilling happiness by giving alms in the wake of a disaster? Also is this true empathy that he/she is feeling or simply pity disguised as empathy? Hutchinson also raises the the point that media creating an "empathetic" emotion (regardless of this being a true state) is in fact a power play of those in western society on those in disaster ridden areas and/or developing nations. Stephanie Moore - 4268751

happiness is possibly one of the most difficult emotions to study as a research project in sociology as well as psychology because most of these fields focus is on negative aspects such as mental health and social problems. the origins of happiness and in particular optimism described in the essential reading by Holmes originates from early nineteenth century sociologists such as Comte, Durkheim and Marx as their optimism is viewed through a social order compared to Weber who saw order and organization as taking happiness and optimism away from people. Most happiness research has been through surveys that are either qualitative or quantitative but because some responders may not have been truthful the results may be unreliable which is a challenge of limitations that sociologists face when undertaking happiness research.

The notion that happiness has the ability to reflect the social circumstances of a person is often studied in sociology. Ogihara and Uchida (2014) claim that happiness is not an emotion prompted through individualistic values but rather a result from both positive workplace and personal relationships. In this sense, can happiness truly be an individualistic emotion? Robert Waldinger (2015), who spoke about a 75-year study to assess what makes people happy throughout life found that good relationships kept people happier and healthier (https://bit.ly/2ZveRcd). He continued to add that social connection is extremely beneficial to human happiness, while its negative counterpart of loneliness is toxic. This connection also stems to the community that surrounds a person, with Patulny (2020) noting that what makes ‘us’ happy reflects how society affects us, while what makes others happy is how ‘we’ affect society. In today’s society, happiness is considered a measure of social progress. Frey and Stutzer (2012) demonstrate this in discussing how happiness is researched to highlight the basic themes which companies and politicians can then use to increase the subjective well-being of the community, and in turn strengthen political competition. Does knowing how happiness can be measured impact our levels of happiness itself?

Emotional Reflexivity: (Homes 2016) “an embodies cognitive and relational process in which social actors have feelings about and try to understand and alter their lives in relation to their social and natural environment and to others”. (As quoted by King 2005) In considering emotional reflexivity, “the process through which emotional work is conducted” (King 2005, p. 152), it can be surmised that sustaining one’s state or experience of happiness is not an automatic process, it takes deliberate intent. King (2005) highlights Hoschilds argument that “emotions are associated with the internalisation (whether interpreted as truth or not) of social norms”. This is posed by King as an initial way that a positive and ‘happy’ activist identity is constituted through being built around disintegration from social norms, or social “dissonance” (King 2005, p. 152). This introduces general thought regarding happiness as something that can be interpreted as subjective as it is based around one’s emotions as a response to social norms. For some, reaching a state of happiness might involve internalising dominant social norms as personal truth and consciously living that out. For others, such as those who are activists striving to ‘liberate themselves…of the emotional ties that bind them to the values and ideas of dominant society” (King 2005, p. 151), their happiness, as an emotion, is built upon a stance of rejection towards the internalisation of societal norms as truth. In considering that achieving happiness may be carried out through deliberate processes rather than automatic ones, would you way that the activists approach of striving towards social change is the answer to a sustained and general sense of happiness within the popular consciousness and throughout human experience? REFERENCES King, D 2005, ‘Sustaining activism through emotional reflexivity’, in Emotions and Social Movements, Routledge, New York, pp. 150-169

Over the past decades, happiness was explored in biological factors due to the prevalence of empirical science, however, the challenge to this through the sociology of emotions demonstrates how they are not mutually exclusive. Further, the notion of happiness has been interpreted and understood in many ways, from the obtainment of physical object, to the quality of life, to self-fulfilment or self-contentment. Often happiness exposes or is exposed by somatic markers, a biological reaction. Currently society demonstrates how the changing understanding of values and social structures influence an individual and society’s perception of happiness. Crucially, happiness has been interpreted in a Western perspective and lacks cultural diversity in interpretation. The post-structuralist challenge to a unilateral understand (despite change over time) demonstrates the importance in agency in pursing or feeling happy. Indeed, idioms such as “It’s the journey, not the destination” which demonstrates how it’s a state or mood, which is not willed into being or achieved in a set instance, but through various stages of experiences. This reaffirms the importance of the individual in interpreting how happiness can be conceived and understood, albeit informed by social structures and context. Happiness can be triggered by physical sensation, like touch or smell, showing how there are various experiences which can trigger happiness; it may even be some which can be developed or extracted, such as when recalling a treasured memory.

What makes someone happy differs depending on many factors. In one of the further readings this week, by Helliwell and Putnam, they showed how many variations of social capital, socio-economic status, age, gender etc all have a significant influence on an individual’s happiness. But even still, two people from low socio-economic backgrounds may have different outlooks of life, with one being content and happy with what they have, and the other being depressed and unhappy with what they don’t have. Due to this it is incredibly difficult to have a true definition of the concept of happiness as everyone has their own personal interpretations and requirements for this.

Building a truly happy society might not be as easy as seem while trying to understand the meaning of happiness in the today’s society, we first need to know what makes individual ‘happy’, as emotion is different to everyone and there is no “one box fit all”, even though Holmes has mentioned that the bodies and emotions are shaped by the social expectations, it doesn't necessary means to blindly follow the standard for the purpose of being a part of the community.

The perception of the concept of happiness is different for everyone. According to Holmes happiness relates to the expectations and patterns of society. These are not constant but moving over time. Understanding of concepts like happiness is difficult to follow due changing expectations of the society. Even attitudes to displays of primary emotions like anger, fear, sadness and happiness are changing also roll of these feels is important to reach to happiness.

The emotion of happiness is a difficult concept, even when it involves defining what creates it as that becomes individualised. Happiness is a highly sought after life experience which can be brought to a negative notion because people are on the search for this emotion and nothing else, they don’t properly experience what they have as they are in need for more to satisfy their perception of what happiness means to them, which is why this ideal has become more and more investigated on differing levels of grasp and importance. The social structure in relation to happiness, which is explored in Barbalet's Emotion Social Theory Social Structure Rationality, explores how society and societal standings influence ones happiness as it is a persons social status, income, family age and other factors which impact ones happiness. The issue of the ‘other emotions’ is important as to experience the emotion of happiness one needs to experience such things as sadness, anxiety and anger as a comparison but also to be aware that emotions are momentary, as life changes for a person so follows their emotions, one cannot be in a constant state of happiness. Holmes’s emotional reflexivity can be used to understand this concept. Happiness is also ever changing and evolving as it follows the patterns of society which is also ever moving.