The Essence of Happiness

Within any organization, (including the organization of 'me' as an individual being), its essence is hard to find but typically hides in, around, between, and behind the varying degrees of its inner peace, exoteric goodness, compassion, communal responsibility, and work ethic; while its humanity is typically understood (though not always openly acknowledged) by the member or members of the organization through its 'in your psyche' everyday actions and behaviors. To be human is lazy. To be essential requires principled perseverance and sweat.

I believe in this context that 'essence' must be defined as that which gently and productively advances organizational learning, growth, and (ultimately) survival; and 'humanity' must be defined as that which does what it sees as necessary (including artful manipulation and brute force) to encourage cooperation that will in turn advance organizational agendas. The essence of any organization (be it one individual being or the entirety of our global community) is played out through its humanity and because this is so, some claim that they (humanity and essence) are one and the same. Others delusionally maintain a strict separation between the two, believing that passive thoughts and supercilious tolerance comprise the whole of organizational essence, thus excusing organizational humanity.

It is difficult to consistently practice essential humanity, because in a sense they (humanity and essence) are opposed. Organizational humanity pulls us toward an easy comfort, while organizational essence drives us toward reasoned confrontation. Organizational humanity seeks power and control, and denies uncertainty, while organizational essence practices compassion and goodness, and embraces uncertainty. Organizational humanity dresses up or conceals the pain of imperfection, while organizational essence strips it bare and pulls it into the light for closer examination. Organizational humanity cowers in the dark and prances in the light, while organizational essence respectfully explores the dark, dances with the shadows in the light, and listens to learn from both Dark and Light. Opposed but not opposites, organizational humanity and organizational essence are inseparably intertwined, but without the gentle, productive, intimate coaxing of organizational essence (as defined above), organizational humanity will dominate; (this is applicable if the organization is one individual, the entirety of our global community, or points in between).

It is interesting that the word 'soul' or the word 'spirit' is seemingly synonymous with 'essence' when applied to an organization consisting of multiple individual beings, but when applied to an individual being these words suddenly become full of religious significance. Even the word 'essence' when applied to an individual can encourage a more spiritual or religious interpretation. Without casting aspersions on anyone's beliefs, I believe a more secular perspective of this concept will more likely guide us to a common ground that will have the potential to satisfy many spiritual or transcendental yearnings. After all, when we speak of the spirit or soul of a community, or of a social organization, or of a corporation, even the most devout religious adherents don't expect to meet up with the single embodiment of (for example) Time Warner Cable in heaven; yet they still embody a spirit. So why can't we simply concern ourselves with personal goodness and compassion and communal responsibility and hard work without the loaded, controversial, often adversarial excess baggage of religious doctrine and belief.

I have previously claimed (here in the post Quantum Happiness and here in the post Free-Floating Happiness) that in this world there is no such thing as an intrinsically, absolute entity. I have also alluded to this above by repeatedly referring to 'me' or any individual being as an organization. I have done so for many reasons previously stated, and also to allow for a practical differentiation between one's essence and one's humanity; ('one' referring to an individual being or any other single organization consisting of any number of individual beings). We need this practicality to clear the fog of fear from which myth forms. This is not to say (again) that there is no practical basis for myth, but once the fear is seen for what it is and acknowledged for what it does perhaps we have simplified the equation to enable a proximate empirical (as opposed to a supernatural) basis for transcendental consideration. Perhaps instead of x + y = some number greater than 100, we can agree that x + y = some number greater than 100 and less than 200; (assume the representative numbers are merely parameters and not a reflection of value). To create and define this common ground, as opposed to the current open-ended hodge-podge of infinite impossibilities, is (I believe) of great value.

(Note - 'Impossibilities' as used above may sound harsh, judgmental, and even adversarial, but there are many who would claim 'if something is conceivable, it is possible' so in a sense I am giving a respectful nod by acknowledging extremes.)

I have made this appeal for a common ground before (most notably here in The Spirit of Happiness and here in Challenging Happiness); but this week I have added organizational responsibility to the calculation by encouraging a practical and productive application of organizational essence. It is within an organization consisting of multiple individual beings where my thoughts this week began. Power, control, bureaucracy, and groupthink are reflective of organizational humanity. "To be human is lazy. To be essential requires principled perseverance and sweat."

This entry was posted in Philosophy. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to The Essence of Happiness

  1. Pingback: Musical Happiness | hopelesshappiness.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *