Biological basis for happiness?

This is speculation, but it seems likely that happiness may be something naturally selected for.
For example we feel happy after we eat, after sex, around newborn babies and cute kids, etc.
That would support eating enough, procreating, and raising children.

BIOLOGY HYPOTHESIS http://wp.me/p5S9X-eO
BIOLOGICAL SPECULATIONS Through The Years
http://wp.me/P5S9X-Pp
UV PAPER http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/U/UV_origin_of_life.html
Catabolic and Anabolic evolved, but they did not blend.

On Tuesday, July 8, 2014 1:27:24 PM UTC-4, Tom Hendricks wrote:
> Biological basis for happiness?
>
>
>
> This is speculation, but it seems likely that happiness may be something naturally selected for.
>
> For example we feel happy after we eat, after sex, around newborn babies and cute kids, etc.
This is more like having a good time than happiness. Happiness is more of an emotion complex than an emotion. Happiness is more philosophical. Having a good time is more of an emotion.
>
> That would support eating enough, procreating, and raising children.
>
Read "King Solomons Ring' by Konrad Lorenz. Although basically a memoir, he talks about the difference between 'positive' reinforcement and 'negative' reinforcement. This is basically a memoir about his work with animals. However, he talks about his theories on instinct and drive.

What he claims is that the two differ in terms of specificity and intensity. 'Good times' relates to drives where the fitness payoff (the goal) is not specific. 'Bad times' relates to drives where fitness payoff is very specific.

So the happiness that comes of satisfying curiosity is positive. It eventually helps survival to learn all you can about the place you live. However, there is no specific thing to learn. So the curiosity is very general.

How, consider pain. You burn your finger. Your goal is very specific. Get away from the hot thing that is burning your finger!

The intensity of the response also distinguishes positive from negative. The pain is more compelling than curiosity.

Darwin123 wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 8, 2014 1:27:24 PM UTC-4, Tom Hendricks wrote:
>> Biological basis for happiness?
>>
>>
>>
>> This is speculation, but it seems likely that happiness may be something naturally selected for.
>>
>> For example we feel happy after we eat, after sex, around newborn babies and cute kids, etc.
> This is more like having a good time than happiness. Happiness is more of an emotion complex
than an emotion. Happiness is more philosophical. Having a good time is more of
an emotion

As the philosopher in the crowd, I'm only too happy to add my two cents worth
on this:

Happiness (in the peace of mind sense of the term) is a state of mind which obtains
when all one's needs have been fulfilled. Loosely speaking, these are in three
categories:

Physical needs (e.g., the need the need to avoid physical pain)
Mental needs (e.g., the need to avoid the pain of boredom)
Emotional needs (e.g., the need to avoid feelings of worthlessness)

It's the last category which is the stickler. That's because, according to me it
least,
feelings of worthlessness are not so much an adaptation as a maladaptive
byproduct of the evolution of rationality -- part of the price we humans have had to
pay for having become a little too rational/ objective for our own good
or, in terms of the theory of natural selection, part of the cost of doing
business that Mother Nature "tolerates" as a necessary premium for
having a rational species to do her bidding.

PR
www.rationology.net

Don't forget in this discussion the more bio side of it.
We have hormones that reinforce happiness when we eat, have sex, sleep, women give birth, etc.
We also have pheremones to influence other members of our species.

Just as we have feel good rewards for biological healthy behavior, we have feel bad fight/flight for negative biological healthy behavior. That seems logical, but it may be startling in that it connects our fight/flight and sadness with a biological basis.