« Back to Philosophy in Practice
THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS
Contents:
First, some definitions…
Happiness:
If values are defined with one’s life as the standard, and if happiness is the psychological affirmation of life as an end in itself, then happiness is the state of the non-contradictory achievement of one’s values. Since life in this context means life as a volitional being, life and thus happiness involve the integration of the actual and the potential, i.e. the short-range and the long-range. However, since life in this context refers to life as a whole rather than any given moment of life, happiness is the state of the non-contradictory achievement of one’s values in the long-range, i.e. in one’s life as a whole, with non-essential short-term losses being ultimately irrelevant to happiness.
NOTE: By the nature of a volitional life, volitional life cannot be sustained without such integration, even if one chooses to live off of available resources and/or the effort of others (see: “Life as a volitional being” from The Nature of Life from Ethics).
Suffering:
With the same definition of values, if suffering is the psychological response to the undermining of one’s life, suffering is the state of the frustration of one’s values. Again, since life in this context means life as a volitional being, life and thus suffering involve the integration of the actual and the potential, i.e. the short-range and the long-range. However, since life in this context refers to life as a whole rather than any given moment of life, suffering is the state of the frustration of one’s values in the long-range, i.e. in one’s life as a whole, with non-essential short-term gains being ultimately irrelevant to suffering.
Back to the discussion…
If one’s morality is the practical framework to pursue one’s value for one’s life in the broadest context available, then one’s pursuit of life is defined by one’s pursuit of happiness and not one’s avoidance of suffering. However, the question is: what does the pursuit of happiness involve in practice? In essence, everything discussed in Philosophy in Practice is part of what the pursuit of happiness involves. However, in this document, I shall look into the forms of direct, i.e. concrete experience of happiness to understand how to recognise, affirm and further pursue one’s happiness in the moment.
Happiness is a state of consciousness arising from the non-contradictory achievement of values, but the state of the achievement of values is not static and does not imply any particular emotions, positive or negative. Hence, happiness is not a positive emotional state, nor does it consist only of positive emotional states. However, since happiness is a form of sustained, i.e. long-range life-affirmation, positive emotional states are a key characteristic of happiness in the long-term, but not necessarily at any given point or short-term period.
Therefore, a happy person is not the same as a joyous person, although a happy person can also be a joyous person. Joy is a powerful fuel for one’s life and happiness but not the only feature of it. The same applies for enjoyment, pleasure, comfort, etc. Then, what characterises a happy person? Since happiness is a state of the non-contradictory achievement of values, the key characteristic of happiness is self-value, i.e. self-esteem. Furthermore, since purpose is a fundamental value in life and since happiness is a non-static state, happiness involves a purposeful state of existence, i.e. an active-minded and engaged state of existence. Thirdly, since rationality is the fundamental virtue in one’s pursuit of life, happiness involves the wholehearted affirmation of one’s grasp of reality; an evasive state of mind can never result in happiness. Lastly, since happiness is essentially a long-range state of consciousness, a key characteristic of happiness is the tendency toward experiencing values concretely, i.e. the tendency toward positive emotions, especially when compared to experiencing negative emotions.
Based on the above conclusions, the essentials of happiness are self-value, engagement with reality, the affirmation of one’s grasp of reality and the tendency toward the concrete experience of value; in short, pride, purpose, rationality and the tendency toward enjoyment. Hence, we can see that in the short-term, happiness is consistent with a neutral or even negative emotional state. In fact, since emotional states are the concrete responses of one’s mind to one’s internalised value-judgement (i.e. one’s judgement of the gain or loss of values), feeling a positive emotion when a neutral or negative emotion is appropriate is a sign of dysfunction and therefore does not imply happiness; in fact, it implies a lack of the capacity for happiness, at least for the time being, since happiness needs an objective orientation toward values and value-judgement. Hence, happiness can be consistent with the loss of short-range values that do not harm one’s core efficacy in life and one’s long-range achievement of values.
However, since happiness cannot be consistent with the loss of essential or long-range values, the experience of heavy loss does impact happiness. In such a state, most of the essentials (namely pride, purpose and rationality) can still be present. However, due to the significance of the loss, one’s tendency inevitably shifts (at least for a while) toward the experience of negative emotions. It is key to note, however, that even in heavy loss, as long as one values one’s life, one’s orientation in the long-range should be toward happiness ultimately. But reaching happiness ultimately requires the affirmation of one’s loss, which requires the acceptance of some form of suffering, such as grief, and the acceptance of reality, i.e. serenity. For very heavy losses, the achievement of serenity can require mourning.
The following provides a basis for the further pursuit of happiness.
The pursuit and achievement of value can only be done in an individual’s real-life context, i.e. a value can only be a value to someone if it exists, is known by him and achievable by him. The potential of a person’s life is not an imagined potential but an objective one. If it turns out that he was mistaken in what his potential consists of (be it lesser or greater than he had thought), though he may suffer an emotional blow of some kind, it is not potential that he has lost but knowledge that he has gained, because you cannot lose something that never existed (namely, the imagined potential). In fact, by gaining knowledge about reality (despite the emotional blow), he has strengthened his real ability to pursue happiness.
Furthermore, if, for some reason, his potential in one or more respects is diminished or degraded (e.g. by illness, disability, failure, etc.), his essential ability to pursue happiness is not diminished or degraded as long as he keeps his mind active and engages with what is actually possible and valuable to him. In other words, losing potential in one or more respects changes the form of happiness available to him, but it does not change the fact that he can, in some way, still pursue his happiness.
That being said, I am not denying that loss of potential can (though does not always) lead to a diminished or degraded experience of life in one or more respects. However, here, but more generally as well, the only way to come to pursue happiness to the fullest is to accept the facts, which is why I regard serenity as the basis of happiness. Of course, if potential is destroyed entirely, the only form of life-affirmation possible may be serenity, but if you have serenity, you have the basis for the best life possible to you, whatever that may be. Additionally, I hold that lamenting one’s fate is anti-life and irrational; why concern yourself with what you cannot change, especially when there is potential to be pursued?
KEY POINT (credit to ChatGPT): Recognising and accepting limitations (e.g. due to illness or disability) does not diminish one’s capacity for happiness. Instead, it helps in redirecting efforts towards achievable and meaningful goals.
Here, we also reinforce some of the previous points.
Happiness is an objective state of being that integrates a variety of external and internal factors. Thus, it cannot be achieved by mere willpower. Let us expand on this fact. Happiness, properly defined, is the proper goal of volitional life (see: “Volitional life is tied to the pursuit of happiness” from The Nature of Value from Ethics). However, happiness is a complex goal, i.e. a goal that integrates every aspect of one’s life. Hence, it cannot be achieved by mere whim, wish or force of will; it needs rationality, the acceptance of reality and the objective experience of reality, i.e. the experience of both gain and loss, as appropriate.
Hence, a state of joy is not what happiness is about. Rather, happiness is the state of full and non-contradictory life-affirmation. Now, note that life-affirmation must be pursued in steps and cannot reach its full potential directly. Hence, since happiness needs objectivity in thought, action and experience, the pursuit of happiness needs the acceptance of the fact that happiness is not automatic and need not be experienced at every given moment for life to be worth sustaining. The pursuit of happiness is essential to one’s life, but the experience of happiness is essential ultimately, i.e. in the long-run, not necessarily at every given point in life.
To further reinforce the above discussion, see: “The capacity for value implies and needs the capacity for loss” from The Nature of Value from Ethics.
Happiness is the fullest expression of life-affirmation, which means understanding the nature of life-affirmation is relevant to understanding how to pursue happiness. Life-affirmation in the moment is the concrete pursuit and experience of values, which means it is the metaphysical basis for all purpose and all value. Note that the core value to be experienced is volitional life itself, i.e. life wherein one is alive, aware and desirous to be both. Hence, life-affirmation is essentially the concrete pursuit and experience of volitional life itself.
Hence, as long as such a value exists in some concrete form, the nature of life-affirmation does not imply a need for positive emotion or enjoyment in the moment. Why? Because the concrete pursuit and experience of life requires objectivity, which also requires the acceptance of neutrality or negativity where appropriate. In fact, not accepting neutrality or negativity where appropriate is anti-life, since such a denial contradicts the facts and their relation to one’s life.
Now, note that since life-affirmation in the long-term leads to the pursuit and experience of values in the long-term, the tendency and long-term effect is the experience of positivity. However, such an experience, while essential in the long-term, is non-essential for any given concrete form of life-affirmation. What this means in practice is that enjoyment and pleasure in the moment are vital values but by no means the only values. Much of what is valuable may have less or even no enjoyment or pleasure in the moment, but they are still objectively and concretely valuable.
Note also that the nature of concrete motivation aligns with this view; we can feel greatly motivated for uncomfortable, difficult or sometimes even excruciating endeavours, especially endeavours that are objectively valuable to us in the long-term. Observing these facts, it is clear that life-affirmation in the moment does not always necessitate a state of enjoyment or pleasure in the moment, and expecting enjoyment or pleasure in the moment for every moment is irrational, since not every moment of every valuable pursuit leads to them or calls for them in the short-term.
REITERIATING A KEY POINT: In some or even many instances, the demands of life-affirmation are such that (1) it is invalid to experience positivity in the moment beyond the basic affirmation of life (e.g. invalid to experience joy, enjoyment and pleasure), or such that (2) it is valid and necessary to experience neutrality or even negativity. To put the point briefly: the demands of life-affirmation are varied and do not always require the experience of positivity beyond the basic affirmation of life.
Observation 1:
Initially, I only considered enjoyment as a means and result of concretising one’s pursuit of values. However, I realised that many of my proudest pursuits that brought me great value in the moment and far beyond (e.g. music composition, philosophical or fiction writing, personal programming projects, etc.) could not always be accurately labelled as “enjoyable”, although they were engaging and were a source of self-motivation in life. Hence, to expand my consideration, I use “life-affirmation” as the broader concept of which “enjoyment” is a sub-concept.
Observation 2:
Lifted from “The basis of motivation and willpower” Integrating the Actual and the Potential.
In the face of a deadline that was not too close but important to address (i.e. my semester 2 final assignments in 2024), I found that consciously and completely engaging with concretely enjoyable activities — such as watching a show I enjoyed — had two advantages compared to pushing against my desires and forcing myself to work. (1) I did not drain my willpower, and thus, did not drain my motivation and capacity to engage with valuable but uncomfortable work in general. (2) I was able to properly satisfy myself (since I did not keep undermining my pleasure with shame or despair) and move past my need for concrete enjoyment, and thus, was able to focus on more challenging work more effectively, leading to far more efficient work and substantial results. I would compare this case to that of starvation; when you are starved, it is hard to think of anything but food, not least because food is an essential need that must be satisfied to fuel yourself for other pursuits. In this light, note that I do not regard concrete enjoyment — or any form of life-affirmation — as something “to get over with” or a nuisance or an itch that must be addressed, but rather, as a vital, genuine need of my mind and for my life, just as food is a genuine need of the body and not a mere indulgence.
KEY POINT: The above applies only if there is no evasion on your part about what you are doing and what may be its consequences to you. Only a full and true acceptance of reality as it is can ensure that such indulgence can be of any value and pleasure (in the true sense) to you; evasion is a cause of shame and despair, and thus, destroys enjoyment and life-affirmation.
I hold, however, that life-affirmation in the long-term does lead to and call for a genuine enjoyment of life in the moment as a tendency and a common practice. Furthermore, I hold that genuine enjoyment is impossible without rationality and objectivity in one’s pursuits, which include pursuits that do not lead to or call for enjoyment in the moment. Lastly and perhaps most importantly, I hold that life-affirmation never involves the sacrifice or renunciation of values, be they short-term or long-term. You can and must never give up any values in the moment for the sake of “long-term values”, but rather, you must understand what actually are your values in the moment, i.e. the things that you must act to gain and/or keep so as to integrate your pursuit of the potential with your experience of the actual; after all, a value is never a value in isolation and only in integration with every other value, all ultimately aspects of the value for life itself (see: “Integrity in values” from The Nature of Value from Ethics). In fact, for a volitional being, the experience of value in the present neither exists nor can exist apart from the recognition and pursuit of valuable potential in some form; the former gives rise to the latter and the latter sustains and enriches the former. To reiterate a previous point in other words, the metaphysical source of value is life lived in the moment, in concrete and active engagement.
NOTE: Life-affirmation and efficacy:
To reinforce the view that life-affirmation cannot exist in isolation, consider the fact that life-affirmation — like any objective state of success or fulfilment in life — cannot be contradictory. Hence, a necessity for life-affirmation is achieving and maintaining one’s efficacy in life and the pursuit of values. Furthermore, the pursuit of life-affirmation (e.g. in the form of enjoyment) is a powerful, concrete way to orient your actions toward your values and thereby achieve moral and practical efficacy; hence, the pursuit of life-affirmation in the truest sense leads to efficacy, which is a precondition for experiencing further life-affirmation, especially in the form of enjoyment.
It is vital to understand what is practically meant by the “non-contradictory achievement of values”. Right away, it is clear that since life is an ongoing process of self-advancing purpose, so is the pursuit of values. In other words, life, being the end in itself, has no final state after which its purpose is reached; life is the source of purpose, which means purpose is sustained as long as life can be sustained. Hence, the non-contradictory achievement of values cannot be a final state that we keep striving toward but never reach. Rather, such achievement is state of being wherein (1) we are able to do something to sustain our life in the moment, (2) we are able to strive toward a life-oriented potential, and (3) we act with reason and thus never evade what is possible to us in our knowledge and within our capacity. Evidently, the experience of happiness can vary greatly across contexts, but as long as the essence of happiness can be retained, we can achieve and pursue happiness in both relative privation and relative affluence.
Point (3) in the above paragraph is key, since it is the basis of long-range flourishing. A volitional life requires the pursuit of potential to the fullest of one’s capacity; any less is an evasion of reality and the degradation of our value for life. Why? Consider: on what grounds would you strive for what is (in your knowledge) less than your fullest capacity to flourish in life? Here, we must consider three key facts: (a) life is necessarily conditional, (b) life is the only end in itself, i.e. to have life (as it is for a volitional being) is to have everything one needs or wants. (a) means that life is not guaranteed at any given level, which means evading the greatest form of life-affirmation that you can achieve amounts to being indifferent to the robustness of your existence long-range, which amounts to evading reality in a broader context, thereby devaluing your life in a broader context and degrading your life in the moment (since life in the moment as a volitional being involves the integration of the actual and the potential). Hence, the non-contradictory achievement of values, i.e. happiness, requires ambition shaped by your context and proportionate to your capacity.
To put the point briefly, the essence of happiness is to be alive, aware and self-driven to be both to one’s fullest capacity.
A word on “fullest capacity”:
I hasten to add that exercising one’s fullest capacity for life is not and cannot be a burden that takes away from one’s experience of values in the moment; after all, the metaphysical source of value is life in the moment, and thus, to exercise one’s fullest capacity for life means to take life in the moment as the essential. Furthermore, rationality demands relevance and efficiency; one’s current context and purpose is the basis of further considerations, and the proliferation of arbitrary doubts and hypotheses detached from one’s current context and purpose is profoundly irrational. Hence, exercising one’s fullest capacity for life is a means to enable, enrich and enhance one’s experience of life in the moment. Long-range pursuits are not ends in themselves but a means to make one’s life in the moment blossom to the fullest.
Now, we shall expand on the ideas presented in the previous section, so as to clarify how exactly to approach life-affirmation in the moment and integrate it with long-term values in order to pursue happiness to the fullest.
The non-contradictory achievement of values is key to happiness, which is why it is key to understand how integrity must be achieved in life-affirmation. Since (1) life is the ultimate value and thus the ultimate purpose, and since (2) life lived in the moment is the metaphysical source of value and purpose (because concretes are the basis of further abstractions, both epistemologically and ethically), and since (3) contexts cannot be contradictory (i.e. narrower contexts cannot contradict nor be contradicted by broader contexts), it stands to reason that any value or pursuit of value is an aspect of the value for life lived in the moment. In other words, concrete life-affirmation is the ultimate purpose of all value-seeking pursuits, short-range or long-range, and any value-seeking pursuit can exist neither apart from nor in contradiction to concrete life-affirmation.
Concrete life-affirmation:
The experience of concrete values.
Life lived in the moment:
The concrete fact and experience of life.
Nutritive aspect of life:
Pertaining to physical life-orientation.
Sensitive aspect of life:
Pertaining to conscious (but not necessarily volitional) life-orientation.
Rational aspect of life:
Pertaining to volitional life-orientation.
NOTE: A volitional consciousness is based on self-driven awareness.
Since concretes are the basis of any further abstraction, we shall start the integration of life-affirmation at the most narrow, i.e. concrete context, namely the nutritive aspect of life, i.e. the physical sustenance of life. Then, we move onto the sensitive aspect of life, i.e. the sustenance of a conscious existence. By the non-contradictory nature of values, the nutritive aspect of life serves to fuel conscious existence, while the sensitive aspect of life can expand the scope of one’s physical sustenance.
NOTE: “Sensitive” refers to the capacity for sense-perception rather than sensitivity.
As an example, consider the difference in the capacity of a plant and an animal to sustain their lives long-range; a plant is rooted to a spot and has little-to-no means to avoid threats or seek other sources of sustenance, whereas an animal, with its perceptiveness and locomotion, is able to expand its means of physical sustenance. Of course, we see empirically that at least some plants can be more capable of surviving in various cases and conditions than animals, but the existence of consciousness adds a new range of possibilities for seeking means of survival.
Now, note that to survive, a sensitive being needs to not only tend to its physical needs but also the needs of its consciousness. In particular, it needs to maintain and (if possible) improve its perceptiveness as well as its capacity to act on its perception. Key examples of such needs are: sufficient nutrition, rest and exercise, activity to avoid the atrophy of key physical and mental faculties, etc.
From here, we move into the rational aspect of life, i.e. the sustenance of a volitional existence. By the non-contradictory nature of values, the nutritive and sensitive aspects of life serve to fuel volitional existence, while the rational aspect of life can expand the scope of one’s perceptiveness (through abstraction and mental integration) and thereby the scope of one’s physical sustenance.
NOTE: “Rational” here refers to the capacity for reason rather than the use of reason.
As an example, consider the difference in the capacity of an animal and a human to secure a stable supply of food. By recognising the potential of various entities and events in nature (e.g. the tool-related potential of rocks, the potential of a seed to grow into edible crop, etc.), a human can harness nature to achieve a surplus of food, whereas an animal can only act on instincts and range-of-the-moment awareness. Of course, we see empirically that at least some animals can be more capable of surviving in various cases and conditions than humans, but the existence of volition adds a new range of possibilities for seeking means of survival.
Now, note that to survive, a rational being needs to not only tend to the needs of its consciousness but also the needs of its rational, i.e. volitional faculty (the rational faculty is the volitional faculty, in essence). In particular, it needs to maintain and (if possible) improve its perceptiveness not only of the present but also of some long-range potential, for the reason that volitional consciousness is self-driven and thus needs to recognise and strive toward some long-range potential to sustain itself.
Note that “long-range” is the key term, and here, long-range refers anything something beyond the present moment. The present offers stimuli that by themselves can only drive immediate and instinctual reactions. However, a self-aware consciousness (which is the basis of volition) can only sustain itself (i.e. as a self-aware consciousness) if there exists at least something within the mind that causes it to sustain its self-awareness over time. However, such an internal factor cannot be the environment’s stimuli alone, since consciousness of such stimuli alone cannot result in self-awareness.
Evidently, then, such an internal factor has to be something apart from the present moment. However, if so, then the only thing that would lead to self-awareness being sustained by itself over time would be something that fuels the self-sustaining ability of the self-aware being as a whole. In other words, the internal factor must be a goal that would drive the self-aware being to sustain itself as it is (i.e. as a self-aware being) in order to reach the goal. In other words, self-awareness can only be sustained if it is efficacious and recognised as such. Hence, a self-aware being, which is ultimately a volitional being, i.e. a rational being, needs to recognise and strive toward some long-range potential.
Thus, a rational being needs to not only be able to sense its environment but also be able to grasp the nature of its world, so that it can grasp the potential within it beyond the range-of-the-moment. In other words, a rational being needs to grasp concepts and generalisations about its world that are valid or at least sufficiently well-founded. Furthermore, since a volitional consciousness is self-driven, its values, which are rooted in its particular form of life, i.e. in its self-driven existence, are not guaranteed to exist without internal factors that it can consciously affirm and accept. In other words, a rational being needs to act to maintain a sense of self-value.
Since a being’s values are rooted in the being’s form of life, and since a sense of self-value is an internal factor for a self-driven being’s self-driven existence, a sense of self-value is essentially the being’s recognition of the potential of its own self with respect to its existence. In other words, a sense of self-value is one’s sense of efficacy in sustaining one’s volitional, conscious and physical existence. Hence, we see that a rational being must achieve and maintain virtues (i.e. qualities of long-range efficacy in living) to be able to sustain itself.
NOTE 1: If a being is reduced permanently to a lower form of life, then the being ceases to exist, since the essence of its identity is lost. Hence, as a rational being, you cannot survive as a purely sensitive or nutritive being; “you” would cease to exist and in your place would be either a beast or a vegetable.
NOTE 2: What “life” means to a being depends on the kind of being it is, i.e. on the essential nature of the being. Hence, for a volitional, i.e. rational being, life means life as a volitional being, i.e. as a being capable of a conscious and physical existence that is, in some essential respect, self-driven.
Here, we see a clear relationship in the case of a rational being: the greater the integration of potential, the greater the capacity for self-sustenance. We also see that the needs of a rational being build upon on the needs of sensitive and nutritive beings, i.e. the needs unique to a rational being cannot contradict nor be contradicted by its sensitive and nutritive needs.
What does it mean in practice? It means that every need is necessary, and no kind of need can exist apart from the other. If a rational being focuses solely on its nutritive or sensitive needs, it neglects and thereby degrades or even destroys its potential, thereby degrading or destroying its capacity to exist volitionally. On the other hand, if a rational being neglects its nutritive or sensitive needs, it clearly cannot sustain itself for long (at least not by its own effort), since it is neglecting the preconditions of its own existence. Hence, we see two key points: (1) Survival for a rational being cannot be at “any cost”, i.e. at the cost of the destruction of one’s potential for life. (2) Survival in the long-range has no meaning apart from the affirmation of life in the present.
Hence, as rational beings, we see a method arise. Start by considering what it takes to sustain yourself concretely. Hence, start from the most basic needs of life, both nutritive and sensitive. Then, begin integrating increasingly longer-range potentials that support and/or advance one’s capacity for sustaining oneself concretely. Integrate rationally, i.e. according to your knowledge, and do not try to integrate potentials that are only hypothetically connected to your concrete experience of life. A key point to remember is that the purpose of every long-range pursuit is the affirmation of life in the moment; hence, choose your long-range pursuits rationally, building up from your basic needs to the pursuits that, in your knowledge, objectively support and/or advance your capacity to satisfy your basic needs more effectively, especially in a broader context.
NOTE: The value of the process:
By its nature, a truly self-sustaining, i.e. valuable potential adds to your concrete experience of life by means of the very process of striving toward it; any other kind of potential may be considered (if you have reason to believe it has potential value) but it must not be pursued without sufficiently concretising its value.
NOTE: The value of philosophy:
Philosophy is the ultimate integrator of knowledge and value-judgement, which is why it is so crucial to validate our worldview and values philosophically. For a greater clarity about how and why philosophy is so essential, see: “Why to pursue philosophy?” from Introduction to Philosophy from Philosophy.
An analogy for happiness (though only an analogy, and not a perfect one) is that of the goal of reaching the peak through a trek. During the trek, while you are aware of the goal and while your plans, routes and actions fall in line with that goal, your focus moment-by-moment is largely on the next step, the next checkpoint, etc. In other words, the current focus as you trek is usually not the peak itself but the process of trekking.
In a similar sense, I hold that in the pursuit of happiness, while it is important to grasp the long-range and plan and act accordingly, one’s current focus must usually not be on happiness itself but rather on concrete life-affirmation, i.e. the experience of life as you live it, without an expectation or goal of happiness in every moment. Rather, to achieve happiness, one must focus on the basis and causes of happiness, namely serenity, awareness, integrity, objectivity and ultimately the love of existence (i.e. the love of the fact that one exists and that one can exist; self-value).
In any pursuit in life – be it a result-oriented goal or the desire to achieve some potential or whatever – must be framed as: the pursuit of happiness, ultimately. Happiness is the concomitant of life, and since the standard of value is one’s life, the standard of value in psychological terms is happiness. Whatever you choose to do, choose and pursue it as a part – in some form – of your pursuit of happiness.
Motivation by fear can often be valid for particular instances, but for your life as a whole and your life’s central purposes, it is simply not valid (see: "”Gaining” an absence or a negative” The Standard of Value from Ethics). Rather, motivation by love, i.e. a motivation driven by a value for oneself and one’s life, is what is moral.
The above are not merely window-dressing, since how you frame a goal is important in: (1) how you respond to it psychologically, (2) what values you consider as important by association, hence, (2.1) what sub-goals you pursue and tend to achieve and (2.2) how you evaluate and experience their achievement.