Some people believe that happiness is essential for human beings to achieve their visions, others believe that it is an overrated trap. Where do you stand on the idea that happiness is essential and how important is it for you in your life? (Minimum 80 words).

Explanation:

philosophical concern with the existence, nature, and attainment of happiness. Some philosophers The philosophy of happiness is the believe happiness can be understood as the moral goal of life or as an aspect of chance;indeed, in most European languages the term happiness is synonymous with luck.Thus, philosophers usually explicate on happiness as either a state of mind, or a life that goes well for the person leading it. Given the pragmatic concern for the attainment of happiness, research in psychology has guided many modern day philosophers in developing their theories.

There are roughly two philosophical literatures on “happiness,” each corresponding to a different sense of the term. One uses ‘happiness’ as a value term, roughly synonymous with well-being or flourishing. The other body of work uses the word as a purely descriptive psychological term, akin to ‘depression’ or ‘tranquility’. An important project in the philosophy of happiness is simply getting clear on what various writers are talking about: what are the important meanings of the term and how do they connect? While the “well-being” sense of happiness receives significant attention in the contemporary literature on well-being, the psychological notion is undergoing a revival as a major focus of philosophical inquiry, following on recent developments in the science of happiness. This entry focuses on the psychological sense of happiness (for the well-being notion, see the entry on well-being). The main accounts of happiness in this sense are hedonism, the life satisfaction theory, and the emotional state theory. Leaving verbal questions behind, we find that happiness in the psychological sense has always been an important concern of philosophers. Yet the significance of happiness for a good life has been hotly disputed in recent decades. Further questions of contemporary interest concern the relation between the philosophy and science of happiness, as well as the role of happiness in social and political decision-making

the support that the author, uses in the article facing our fears is a): a definition of the part of the brain called the amygdala.

he takes neuroscientist joseph ledoux's words by telling that by falling to distinguish between evolutionary old systems located in the amygdala and newer systems, centered in the prefrontal cortex, doctors have conflated non conscious threat circuits in the brain with circuits that underlie the conscious experience of fear. that, the author says, "leads ledoux to the jarring conclusion that the amygdala, a decades-old centerpiece of the brain's fear circuit, does not underlie the conscious feeling of fear".

despite this, the author points out in the article that that is a controversial notion and that evidence, in animal and humans, supports the idea that core emotions can exist outside of conscious awareness.

can i get the statements? if so ill be more then happy to !