Happiness lies in making do with less, rather than always striving for more

Happiness lies in making do with less, rather than always striving for more

09 Jun 2009

The panel discuss what actually constitutes happiness, and whether we should simply be happy with what we’ve got.

Speaking in favour of the motion are Rosie Boycott and Dr Anthony Seldon. Boycott criticises our empty, wasteful culture of materialism, which embodies the philosophy “I own therefore I am”, instead promoting a return to nature, community life, and shared experiences. She advocates a more equal society, where “less is more” and where people create happiness for themselves and others by giving. She remarks on the irony that Man has reached the pinnacle of achievement in technological and cultural terms, but is more prone to depression and anxiety than ever. Dr. Seldon insists that happiness is connected with love, stillness and acceptance, not, as has been proven by psychological studies, with excessive wealth. As a headmaster, he has observed the increasing unhappiness of British children that is often caused by neglectful, over-striving parents. Environmentally, the argument about living within our means is no longer purely intellectual. He concludes by giving us the options we are left with: “consume less or die”.

Opposing the motion are Dominic Lawson and Christine Hamilton. Dominic Lawson insists that happiness is elusive and almost impossible to identify. Striving for more, he says, need not always be a material pursuit. Look at the horribly injured major who took 2 weeks to complete the London Marathon: he found positivity in striving. In contrast, observe the depressed children of the super-rich, who have nothing to strive for. Why should 2 billion starving Indians settle for less? One look at the opposing panellists’ remarkable CVs reveals that they certainly haven’t. Christine Hamilton believes that we would be nowhere if it had not been for the determination of our forbears to better themselves. Striving means determination, whether it be in war, education, or gardening, and is essential to all great achievements. Wealth has allowed the world’s greatest philanthropists and patrons to sponsor science, the arts, and education. Our world would be greatly impoverished without their ambition. Everyone’s concept of happiness is different, and they should be free to pursue it in whatever way they see fit.

First Vote: 372 For, 119 Against, 108 Don’t Know

Final Vote: 310 For, 257 Against, 24 Don’t Know

BUY THE DVD