Is being interesting more important than being happy?

Vimspot asks:

2 things I'd love you to elaborate on (though perhaps you left them as cliff hangers for a reason):
1. You once said being interesting and responsible are more important values than happiness. Could you elaborate on why you think that?

It's more interesting if you get only one of the two queries, even if it makes you less happy. 

There's also the value of being interested.

"Happiness" to me sounds boring, as if the person has a limited imagination when it comes to wants and an inability to be frustrated by the difficulty of creating new peak experiences. 

"Responsible" is the right thing to do and it usually carries with it some sense of fulfillment. 

"Interesting" helps other people expand the horizon of their wants, since you show them some new goodies on the table.

Viewed as a signaling problem, "happiness" fails when it comes to credibly demonstrating the possession of some extreme quality or another.  The busier people are, and the higher wages are, the more important it should be to signal extreme qualities to command the attention of interesting others.

What does the word "important" mean anyway?  It presupposes the value judgment in question.

Penelope Trunk has interesting posts on this topic:

People with interesting lives do not get offended that they cannot be happy. Happy people are offended that they cannot have interesting lives.


Comments for this post are closed