Not when it is based on the above preconditions, no.
If happiness was defined as “experience maximum pleasure” then yes, I’d be afraid that I would end up in abject hedonia. But when it is based on things that lead to meaning, as SDT has shown that autonomy + relatedness + competence do, then that is not currently a fear of mine.
Does that make sense? Or did I miss your point? :-)
This autonomy looks a bit like utopia to me, or the definition needs to be more precise. Autonomy: making decisions and taking responsibility for these decisions? The most stressful thing in life. Autonomy: the choice to say ‘no’ to one’s decision? Something that we always have, only the results vary depending on the circumstances and will not always make us happy. Autonomy: financial and physical ability to own and do what we want? Something that we have little influence on. Apart of that, aren’t autonomy and sensitive relatedness mutually exclusive? To have sensitive relations, ” You need to take genuine interest in who they are and what they want, not judge them for it, and help them. ” first thing will be limiting our autonomy. If we look back, what are our happiest moments? Early childhood: security, love, attention, adoration, lack of competition and almost total lack of autonomy. Holidays: safety, love or friendship and you don’t have to make many decisions. We need a choice to say ‘no’ to someone’s decisions, but the times when we feel safe, to say ‘yes’ to someone’s decisions are the happiest moments in our lives. It’s really amazing how happy we are to give up our autonomy when we feel safe to do so. Maybe because making decisions and taking responsibility for these decisions is the most stressful thing in life, same with competences, competition causes constant stress. Is stress what we need to be happy or how much stress do we need to feel happy?
A lot to unpack here! Three statements catch my eye:
Autonomy: making decisions and taking responsibility for these decisions? The most stressful thing in life. Autonomy: the choice to say ‘no’ to one’s decision? Something that we always have, only the results vary depending on the circumstances and will not always make us happy. Autonomy: financial and physical ability to own and do what we want? Something that we have little influence on.
Autonomy in the SDT-sense is not defined by whether we’re making decisions, nor whether we can own what we want. To make it as specific I can, it’s scoring high on the BPNSFS which contains the following items on autonomy:
I feel a sense of choice and freedom in the things I undertake
I feel that my decisions reflect what I really want.
I feel my choices express who I really am.
I feel I have been doing what really interests me
Most of the things I do feel like “I have to”. (R)
I feel forced to do many things I wouldn’t choose to do (R)
I feel pressured to do too many things. (R)
My daily activities feel like a chain of obligations. (R)
Where (R) items are reverse scored.
As you can see, every item contains “feel”. Autonomy is about whether you feel like you can do what you want to do.
It’s really amazing how happy we are to give up our autonomy when we feel safe to do so.
Having the ability to give up autonomy and take it back at will is, in itself, incredibly autonomous! It also satisfies relatedness.
Is stress what we need to be happy or how much stress do we need to feel happy?
I highly doubt that stress has an independent effect on happiness, but I find it extremely likely that many of the activities that satisfy competence, relatedness and autonomy to the highest degree are also stressful :-)
″ As you can see, every item contains “feel”. Autonomy is about whether you feel like you can do what you want to do. ”
So autonomy is not something we need, but something that we always have, we just need to gain the awareness that we have it, and the awareness of what we can, and the awareness of consequences of our choices. “Everything is permissible for me,” but not everything is beneficial. “Everything is permissible for me,” but I will not be mastered by anything. “ or ”the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me.”
Aren’t you afraid that happiness as a goal is a recipe for an unhappy life?
Not when it is based on the above preconditions, no.
If happiness was defined as “experience maximum pleasure” then yes, I’d be afraid that I would end up in abject hedonia. But when it is based on things that lead to meaning, as SDT has shown that autonomy + relatedness + competence do, then that is not currently a fear of mine.
Does that make sense? Or did I miss your point? :-)
This autonomy looks a bit like utopia to me, or the definition needs to be more precise.
Autonomy: making decisions and taking responsibility for these decisions? The most stressful thing in life.
Autonomy: the choice to say ‘no’ to one’s decision? Something that we always have, only the results vary depending on the circumstances and will not always make us happy.
Autonomy: financial and physical ability to own and do what we want? Something that we have little influence on.
Apart of that, aren’t autonomy and sensitive relatedness mutually exclusive? To have sensitive relations, ” You need to take genuine interest in who they are and what they want, not judge them for it, and help them. ” first thing will be limiting our autonomy.
If we look back, what are our happiest moments?
Early childhood: security, love, attention, adoration, lack of competition and almost total lack of autonomy.
Holidays: safety, love or friendship and you don’t have to make many decisions.
We need a choice to say ‘no’ to someone’s decisions, but the times when we feel safe, to say ‘yes’ to someone’s decisions are the happiest moments in our lives.
It’s really amazing how happy we are to give up our autonomy when we feel safe to do so.
Maybe because making decisions and taking responsibility for these decisions is the most stressful thing in life, same with competences, competition causes constant stress. Is stress what we need to be happy or how much stress do we need to feel happy?
A lot to unpack here! Three statements catch my eye:
Autonomy in the SDT-sense is not defined by whether we’re making decisions, nor whether we can own what we want. To make it as specific I can, it’s scoring high on the BPNSFS which contains the following items on autonomy:
I feel a sense of choice and freedom in the things I undertake
I feel that my decisions reflect what I really want.
I feel my choices express who I really am.
I feel I have been doing what really interests me
Most of the things I do feel like “I have to”. (R)
I feel forced to do many things I wouldn’t choose to do (R)
I feel pressured to do too many things. (R)
My daily activities feel like a chain of obligations. (R)
Where (R) items are reverse scored.
As you can see, every item contains “feel”. Autonomy is about whether you feel like you can do what you want to do.
Having the ability to give up autonomy and take it back at will is, in itself, incredibly autonomous! It also satisfies relatedness.
I highly doubt that stress has an independent effect on happiness, but I find it extremely likely that many of the activities that satisfy competence, relatedness and autonomy to the highest degree are also stressful :-)
″ As you can see, every item contains “feel”. Autonomy is about whether you feel like you can do what you want to do. ”
So autonomy is not something we need, but something that we always have, we just need to gain the awareness that we have it, and the awareness of what we can, and the awareness of consequences of our choices.
“Everything is permissible for me,” but not everything is beneficial. “Everything is permissible for me,” but I will not be mastered by anything. “
or
”the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me.”
In principle, yes. In practice, many external circumstances modify perceived and factual autonomy :-)