Different people have or do not have different things. Defining happiness as having what you have. Up to the point of using this as one's subjective standard of happiness is fine. Don't consider those who don't have it to be unhappy. That's because I set my own standards of happiness for others.
The term "right to the pursuit of happiness" is a little low resolution. Person X has the right to subjectively recognize that he/she is happy? (Rights? have? put this aside for the moment). What others consider person X to be unhappy is Infringement? create conflict If we define happiness as "having A If you don't have one, I challenge you to define it.
Here's an abstraction. Belief that "I define happiness." What seems like a good idea to do so, certainty Each person who has it has a different form of happiness, but People who don't have it try to conform themselves to the "form of happiness" that others have decided for them. Mismatched areas cause pain. This seems to me to be a personal misfortune, but this should not be defined as misfortune as well.
remarks Happiness due to any "having" brings unhappiness due to "losing".
PS
.
1st paragraph:.
Second paragraph:.
Third paragraph:.
Remarks: 1.
4: Title the oracle. The Shape of Happiness: the Importance of Subjectivity and the Danger of Other People's Standards."
Soften the title.
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/幸せの風景:一人一人の色彩と他人の影 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I'm very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.