To me, happiness isn’t really something that’s under your control, so it doesn’t make sense to focus on it.

The Economist’s review of Darrin McMahon’s Happiness: A History:

His central argument is that the modern idea of happiness was an invention of the Enlightenment. …

Historically speaking, this was a radical change. For the ancient Greeks, happiness was largely bound up with notions of luck and fortune. Any man, however high and mighty, could be brought down by a twist of fate. The important thing, therefore, was not to seek happiness for its own sake but to live virtuously. Being good, as Mr McMahon nicely puts it, was more important than feeling good. For Herodotus and his contemporaries, happiness was not a “subjective state” but a “characterisation of an entire life that can be reckoned only at death.”

However, if someone dies and people say, “well, he/she lived a good life,” then it probably means that the person was (at least relatively) happy, successful, and beloved, while if someone says, “I want to live a good life,” it probably means that they want to minimize any potential negative impact of their existence while maximizing their overall contribution… so I’m not sure about the context here.

So, while I definitely don’t have the secret formula for the good life tucked away in the silverware drawer where I can get to it quickly if I need to, I’m pretty sure there are certain aspects that must (usually) be present, chief among them: living in the “now” instead of looking forward to that time when everything’s gonna be great, or looking back on how cool it was back when you were ________ (a kid, in college, married, unmarried, living in another place, had less/more responsibility, etc.) It shouldn’t be imagined that living in your own present means that one has no goals or must always be satisfied with the status quo, but when you pin your happiness on some concrete condition that must change before you can enjoy life – well, it’s probably not going to be the golden ticket you think it is.

In addition to this, these things all seem more or less integral: the ability to be grateful for what you have when you have it; the ability to see the world, recognize the beauty and complexity around you; service to others; a clear conscience (as much as this is possible); honest acts of kindness; physical exertion, especially in aid of something constructive; exercise of the imagination; learning new things; taking care of yourself and your surroundings.

I’ve seen too many miserable people with all the money and freedom that they would ever need, living in beautiful, luxurious palaces, able to travel at will and buy anything they they want to believe that the good life is inherent in any of these lovely things. I certainly don’t think they will keep you from living the good life, but judging by a preponderance of empirical evidence, and assuming my theory of “contentment” is correct – they certainly won’t get you there.

Don’t feel bad. I thought it was Fear and Loathing too, until I got to the end (“and we’re wearing sunglasses”) without the mention of any drugs.

Me, I’d be perfectly content to follow the Blues Brothers’ example and head out on an adventure with someone just as odd and funky as I am. That would be a good life.

Nothing. Nothing at all.

That should be your website for next week cortex. BigBigAnswer: a spin-off of BigBigQuestion where the answers to the BigBigQuestions are provided. Either that or do like the crosswords and post the answer to the last one when you post the new one.

And no copping out, Mike: finish that formula.

1. Do not fuck shit up for other people.
2. Do things that make you happy.
3. Do things that will make other people happy.

If I am happy in my life, my needs satisfied and my mind kept busy, that’s a good life, for me, and damn the consequences: whether I’m a saint or a drunk or Adolf Hilter redux.

But accounting for the idea that a good life is a life judged in the context of how it affects the world, is it good done or harm prevented that makes a life good? And how do overt acts of good balance against acts of harm? Is the suburbanite who has never done a lick for charity but never been cross or hurtful to anyone in his life living well?

- Robert Louis Stevenson

In the abstract of “what should we all strive toward,” Meatbomb’s answer strikes the (ahem) happy medium, for me. One should try to be happy and to improve the lives of others.