Saying you're "just kidding" doesn't change the fact that you're acting like a dick.

Happiness: The Logical Choice

A professor once asked my class 

"Why should we be nice?" to 

which I quickly and incredulously 

responded  "Because It's nice to 

be nice!".  Condescending 

existentialist chuckling ensued.  

I was being sincere.  The 

instructor proceeded, "Do we 

have a moral obligation to be 

nice?  Or good?  Why should 

someone be a good person"?  

A religious person might respond

with a choice quote from his/her 

scripture of choice.  There 

were no religious people in 

that class.  The people 

in that class were atheists or, 

at most, agnostics.  All of them.  

Filthy philosophy majors.  

They had also, apparently, all
considered these ideas before.  

I had not,  thus my lame-ass response to the professor's original question.  I honestly didn't get
that his question was - at least a little - rhetorical.  I was young and a wide eyed optimist.
What can I say?

I had always liked myself more when I was nice to people verses when I was mean.  

From this, I developed into what you might call a "polite person" or "considerate".  

Beyond this, though, I had never actually considered why I ought to be good.  

It just seemed to make sense;  you get what you give, what goes around comes around, 

the golden rule; that sort of thing.   Again, a religious person could give reasons why 

to behave this way or that based on some cause and effect argument, for example, 

if you don't obey you will be punished or denied some reward after death.  This 

seems to be effective guidance for many people.  None of those people, however, 

were in that classroom back in 1992.  My class was populated with people who 

wanted to discover their own answers to life's questions, not to simply accept their 

parents' ethics or that of the rest of society.  They would use reason and 

logic to determine the most likely/best answer to a given question, 

even the biggest questions.  I wanted very badly to be one of them.

So I started to consider the question in this way and realized that my previous thoughts 

on the matter were, well, cute. You can read Kant to get a complete philosophical 

breakdown of exactly why we, as humans, ought behave this way or that.  He has a 

tight little theory in his Categorical Imperative.  I highly recommend it to any of you 

would-be philosophers out there.  My own theory on the matter is quite different, 

however.  My ideas about why a person might choose to be a "good" person vs. 

being a "bad" person were born out of utter agnosticism.  

In technical terms: I didn't know shit.  

One of the most important things I have ever learned is that it is possible to doubt 

everything and impossible to truly know (almost) anything.  Socrates' famous quote, 

'I know only that I know nothing' and Descartes', 'I think therefore I am,' are good 

encapsulations of this frustrating/liberating little paradox.  If you're not picking up 

what I'm laying down, consider this:  your senses can and have been deceived, 

at some point in your life.  Have you ever been to a magic show?  Your eyes were fooled.  

People sometimes have olfactory hallucinations for various reasons, smelling things 

that aren't there.  You have probably had a vivid dream that convinced you that you 

had a wide variety of sensory experiences only to wake to the reality that 

'it was all a dream'.  So, before you respond that 'I know the table is there because, 

I can see it, touch it, taste it, smell it',  remember that your senses are perfectly imperfect 

and you have examples from your own life that support this.  'Ever see The Matrix or 

that season of Dallas when Victoria Principle found Patrick Duffy in the shower in the 

last episode?  It could all be bogus.  Everything.  It probably isn't, but it could be.  

Long story short, we do not KNOW if there is anything after this life.  All that each one

of us can know is that we individually exist in this life.  So, living toward some other 

potential reality at the expense of this actual reality, to me, has always seemed, well, cute.  

Why then, should a person choose to be good in this life if not to receive eternal life or 

72 virgins in the hereafter?  Why not be a serial killer?  So many times, this sort of question 

is posed rhetorically or a faith based answer is the only acceptable response.  But I have an 

answer that is based on reason: I like people.  I like being nice to people.  I like when 

I do or say something nice and someone smiles or is appreciative.  It makes me feel 

good to make others feel good.  The inverse is also true.  I dislike making people feel bad.  

I hate it when I hurt someone, intentionally or otherwise.  It is, quite simply, unpleasant.  

I don't feel this way in order to be "closer to god" or so that I can reap the rewards of a 

"kind person" in the next life.  I'd rather be closer to people, here, now.  People, I can relate to.  

Also, in this approach, the gratification is instant.  I don't have to wait to die to be rewarded.  

Given the choice (which we are) of whether to be nice or nasty, I choose the more 

enjoyable of the two. Simple.  I don't need any promises or threats to encourage this behavior.  

It is its own reward.  

The same principle holds true for happiness as well.  I mentioned optimism earlier.  

At 38 years old, I am as wide eyed as ever.  I could worry about what will happen tomorrow, 

next month, December 21st, 2012 or I could feel great about it.  Since I can never know what 

is going to unfold with certainty, why would I choose pessimism over optimism?  Negativity over 

positivity?  Sadness over happiness?  Some do, and that's fine, but that's not for me.  

I find that my present is a lot more enjoyable when my future still has the potential to be 

amazing.  If I decide to believe that tomorrow is going to be awful, it most likely will be.  

Furthermore, all of the time between now and then will have been made worse (wasted) 

purely as a result of my outlook. Even if tomorrow turned out to be 'not so bad', today would 

have been worse than it had to be due to my negative energy and thoughts.  In a construct (Life) 

in which a major goal is to be happy (my premise, maybe not yours) it is logical to choose a 

more enjoyable way of existing whenever possible, free of irrational worry, regret and fear.  

In other words: if you choose to be happy you will create a reality in which 

happiness is possible.  Who knows?  Maybe you actually will be.  If, on the other hand,
you choose to be unhappy, you are all but guaranteed to be so.

Here's the best part: If I lived my entire life believing this and it turned out to be complete crap, 

I will have beaten the system.  I would have been misguided but happy, enjoying as many of my 

available moments as possible.  In this case, had I known "better" I would have come to the
same destination but the journey would have been much worse.  If it turns out I'm pulling the
wool over my own eyes by choosing to be happy, I'm perfectly comfortable with that. 

If, on the other hand, there is some gate where my life is reviewed and my 

passage is based on having been a good person, they're going to have to let me in.

If admission is based on something other than having been mindful & kind to others 

I probably don't want anything to do with it anyway.