Online Assignment For 13 November 2014

Required Viewing: Michael Norton, "How to Buy Happiness"

Direct Link:

Required Work:

In this short video psychologist Michael Norton suggests that we really can buy happiness—just not in the way we tend to think. Watch the video and consider the following question:

Kekes tells us that a life's worth (it's value to others) and it's meaning (it's value to the person who lives it) are entirely separate things. Results like Norton's would seem to suggest otherwise. If happiness is tied up with the meaning of life, and even small-scale, pro-social giving of the sort Norton describes increases happiness, then it seems as though a life's worth and a life's meaning may not be as easy to separate as Kekes thinks. What do you think? Do Norton's results give us reason to question Kekes' distinction between the worth of a life and the meaning of life? Or do you think that Kekes' distinction holds up in the face of this evidence? Support your answer with good reasons.

Your answer should be 250-500 words in length. Try to base your answer on what you take to be the case from an objective point of view rather than on pop-psychology or personal narrative. Stay focused on Kekes' essay and on what you learn from the video.

This assignment is due to the instructor by midnight, tonight, November 13, 2014, via Marygrove email (ude.evorgyram|nosrettaps#ude.evorgyram|nosrettaps). Late assignments will not be accepted for any reason. This is a credit/no credit assignment. See the assignments section of the syllabus if you don't know or have forgotten what this means.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License