Two Philosophical Problems in the Study of Happiness

154 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Authentic leadership and eudaemonic well-being: Understanding leader-follower outcomes (2005, methodology): “…life, what we call eudaemonic well-being, reflects the Aristotelian concept of eudaemonia: Aristotle’s view of human happiness that assesses the goodness of life based on bliving in a manner that actively expresses excellence of character or virtueQ (Haybron, 2000, p. 210; see also Waterman, 1990).”
Was Hercules Happy? Some Answers from a Functional Model of Human Well-being (2009, background): “2008; Ryff and Singer 2008; Seligman 2002; Sumner 1996; Waterman 1993) and those arguing that eudaimonia is not about feeling states or judgments of life satisfaction, but deals with elements that are not properly captured by subjective experiences (e.g., Giovanola 2005; Haybron 2000; Kenny and Kenn”
Rethinking how built environments influence subjective well-being: a new conceptual framework (2018, background): “Haybron (2000) makes the distinction between psychological happiness (hedonic well-being), prudential happiness (life satisfaction), and perfectionist happiness (eudaimonia).”