Caballero 1

Norma Caballero

Professor Corri Ditch

English 115

December 9, 2020

Determining Happiness

There are many perspectives one may have on determining happiness. Sonja

Lyubomirsky in the article, “How Happy Are You and Why?” argues that happiness is based

mainly on three aspects: your happiness set point, intentional activity, and circumstances.

Lyubomirsky presents the most effective argument in the article “How Happy Are You and

Why?” with the use of ethos, pathos, and logos by building credibility and engaging the audience

to enhance her argument about determining happiness. Her argument has a clear understanding

of different sources and perspectives to support her reasonings compared to the articles by

Howard Cutler and The Dalai Lama, “The Sources of Happiness” and by Graham Hill, “Living

with Less. A Lot Less.” that ineffectively use rhetorical strategies to build their argument.

In the article “How Happy Are You and Why?”, Lyubomirsky’s use of ethos, pathos, and

logos strengthens her argument that when it comes to determining happiness there are different

factors to take into consideration. She argues that as an individual pursues happiness there are

three main factors: your set point is fifty percent, intentional activity is forty percent, and

circumstances are ten percent of determining happiness. To build her credibility in her argument

she uses ethos in her argument by including that she is a professor of Psychology at the

University of California, Riverside, who has earned her Ph.D. in social psychology from

Stanford University and has done research specifically on “the development of “sustainable”

happiness and cultural influences on the pursuit of happiness”(Lyubomirsky 141). Throughout

 Caballero 2

the article, Lyubomirsky also uses ethos by finding support from different sources. For example,

she connects her knowledge of the subject, happiness, to different writers and thinkers, like

Greek philosopher Aristotle and founder of psychoanalysis Sigmund Freud who offer:

“wide-ranging definitions of happiness” (Lyubomirsky 146). Because she mentions these famous

influential thinkers and linking it to her own definition of happiness, she demonstrates that

everyone has their own way of defining the term happiness. This builds reliability for the author

because the audience begins to comprehend other perspectives and start identifying their own

definition of happiness.

In the article “The Sources of Happiness” by Howard Cutler and The Dalai Lama use

different rhetorical strategies as well to support their argument that happiness is determined by

one’s state of mind. Although the authors use ethos to enhance their argument, they rely too

much on their authority. At the beginning of the article, they construct a slight sense of

credibility when they mention “Western psychology” but not essentially when they bring in

religious core beliefs like Buddhism. For example, they state that “In Buddhism, for instance,

there is a reference to the four factors of fulfillment, or happiness: wealth, worldly satisfaction,

spirituality, and enlightenment. Together they embrace the totality of an individual’s quest for

happiness” (Cutler and the Dalai Lama 18). Although Buddhism might be a good reference to

connect with pursuing happiness, many people, like the audience, might not believe in such

values and have different beliefs, which may jeopardize their argument because the audience

may think they have bias assertions of such beliefs.

Like Cutler and Dalia Lama, Graham Hill in the article, “Living with Less. A Lot Less.”

uses ethos to imply that materialistic things do not always bring happiness into your life. He

builds credibility as a journalist, entrepreneur, and designer, he builds a reliable appeal to the
 Caballero 3

audience. The use of ethos in his argument provokes a sense of credibility by using a study from

a reliable source. For example, the study from the U.C.L.A. on how people live with many

unnecessary products: “seventy-five percent of the families involved in the study couldn’t park

their cars in their garage because they were too jammed with things”(Hill 256). With this

unintended use of ethos, Hill lacks the connection that materialistic things can affect the way you

create your own happiness, which does not support his logic from this particular source.

Lyumboriksy’s argument is also the most effective argument because she cleverly uses

pathos by taking readers beyond cliche and conventional wisdom by clearing up different myths'

appeal. For example, she uses the common myth that happiness lies in changing our

circumstances, Lyubomirsky asserts “The reality is that elements that determined our happiness

in the past, and can make for future happiness, are with us right now and are here waiting to be

taken advantage of'” (Lyubomirsky 147). This evokes a sense of emotion in the reader because

they might have believed such myth, and they have been revealed a new approach. In addition to

validating her argument, she uses pathos by addressing additional standpoints. For example, she

demonstrates the differences between two opposite views, a person that has been through

negative experiences compared to one with positive experiences. She uses the example of Randy

who has lived through trauma from childhood compared to Shannon, who has had a positive

childhood experience. Ironically, Randy is a very content individual who is always smiling and

prefers to see the “silver lying in the cloud” (Lyubomirsky 143). Whereas Shannon is

dissatisfied, she “feels very alone and believes her life to be unsteady” (Lyubomirsky 144). In

other words, your mindset can affect your own level of happiness, and it supports her argument

that at least forty percent in determining happiness is your intentional activity. This appeals to the

curiosity of the reader by asking “Where Do You Fit In?” to engage the reader into her argument.
 Caballero 4

Whereas in the article by Cutler and the Dalai Lama, clearly base their argument on

pathos more than any other rhetorical strategy to support their reasoning. For example, the

experiences of two of their friends, one that showed that their success in their new high paying

job resulted in a temporary feeling of elation. The other friend received unfortunate news, which

was being HIV positive. Both had very different situations and outcomes, the friend with positive

news stated: “overall I don’t think I’m much happier than before” (Cutler and the Dalai Lama

15). Whereas, the one with unfortunate news stated that he couldn’t be happier. By portraying the

emotional events of others, it invokes a sense of sympathy in the reader while also illustrating

their essential point. The source could also backfire in their argument because one might think, I

would definitely be content if I had enough money to buy a new house, travel, and be financially

stable. One might also disagree with the second example, one might say that testing positive for

any disease would not be satisfying news. This use of pathos can miscarry their argument.

Lastly, Hill also applies intended pathos by using his own personal journey to assist his

argument. He expresses that he has had many materialistic things, as many would desire, yet he

states: “Somehow this stuff ended up ruining my life, or a lot of it; the things I consumed ended

up consuming me”(Hill 255). This intended use of pathos helps his argument by demonstrating

himself as an example that having too many materialistic things can bring numbness instead of

happiness which can lead the reader to feel pity for him. In addition, throughout his argument,

the author also demonstrates unintended pathos. For example, in the beginning, he starts with the

things he is currently living with; his 420-square foot studio with a foldable bed and having only

six dress shirts. Hill states “My space is small. My life is big”(Hill, 258). By using his own life

experience as a millionaire, it is vague wisdom to the regular person because as the audience

looks at the things he is content with, many would not be so happy or have similar attitudes in
 Caballero 5

his position. Because most of Hill’s argument relies on his own experiences, it lacks logos to

support his argument from other reliable sources.

Unlike the other articles, Lyubomirsky also uses logos to support her reasoning. For

instance, she uses a credible study from behavior geneticist David Lykken, Auke Tellegen, and

colleagues at the University of Minnesota on how a factor to consider in when determining

happiness is genetic: “This fact- that identical twins (but not fraternal ones) share similar

happiness levels- suggests that happiness is largely genetically determined”(Lyubomirsky 150).

This use of logos enhances her argument by including scientific studies between twins to prove

the connection between genes and happiness and prove that fifty percent of pursuing happiness

comes from your happiness set point that you are born with.

In conclusion, Lyubomirsky in the article “How Happy are you and Why?” strategically

crafts her argument towards pursuing happiness with the use of ethos, pathos, and logos, she

builds up her logic and credibility to the reader. Whereas in the article “The Sources of

Happiness” by His Holiness the Dalai Lama and Howard Cutler and the article “Living with

Less. A Lot Less.” by Graham Hill do not use logos, which affects their argument because the

audience may need some more studies or facts from different sources to help them understand

their claim. Although the authors use both ethos and pathos, without the use of logos, it

undermines their reasonings.

 Caballero 6

Work Cited

Cutler, Howard, and The Dalai Lama. “The Sources of Happiness.” Pursuing Happiness: a

Bedford Spotlight Reader, by Matthew Parfitt and Dawn Skorczewski, Bedford/St.

Martin's, Macmillan Learning, 2020, pp. 15–26.

Hill, Graham. “Living with Less. A Lot Less.” Pursuing Happiness: a Bedford Spotlight

Reader, by Matthew Parfitt and Dawn Skorczewski, Bedford/St. Martin's, Macmillan

Learning, 2020, pp. 254–258.

Lyubomirsky, Sonja. “How Happy Are You and Why?” Pursuing Happiness: a Bedford

Spotlight Reader, by Matthew Parfitt and Dawn Skorczewski, Bedford/St. Martin's,

Macmillan Learning, 2020, pp. 141–157.