From Homo Economicus to Homo Eudaimonicus: Anthropological and Axiological Transformations of the Concept of Happiness in A Secular Age

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i19.235992

Keywords:

person, values, happiness, secularity, secularization, secular values, Modernity, Age of Authenticity, eudaimonia, homo economicus, homo eudaimonicus, social business

Abstract

Purpose. The paper is aimed to explicate a recently emerging anthropological model of homo eudaimonicus from its secular framework perspective. Theoretical basis. Secularity is considered in three aspects with reference to Taylor’s and Habermas’ ideas: as a common public sphere, as a phenomenological experience of living in a Secular Age, and as a background for happiness to become a major common value among other secular values in the Age of Authenticity. The modifications of happiness interpretation are traced from Early Modernity till nowadays. The preconditions of the contemporary appeal to Aristotle’s eudaimonic theory of happiness are elucidated. The main characteristics of homo economicus anthropological model and reasons for its collapse in the contemporary world are analyzed. Specificities of the contemporary interpretations of eudaimonia are described with reference to the works of MacIntyre, Haybron, Hamilton, Kekes, Melnick, and others. A moral foundation and a behavioral strategy of homo eudaimonicus model are expounded and the role of this model in the life of a contemporary individual person and society is revealed. Originality. For the first time in the Ukrainian philosophical discourse, it is shown how secular ethics enables the rise of a new homo eudaimonicus model within a sphere of secularity; and it is argued that homo eudaimonicus is the result of overcoming the values crisis. It is revealed how homo eudaimonicus along with being descriptive becomes also a normative model of a new effective behavior strategy of a contemporary person facing the current social, economic, political, and environmental challenges. Conclusions. According to the contemporary interpretation, happiness as eudaimonia is a combination of the good life and the meaningful life; it is a human flourishing in this world (saeculum) through the accomplishment of a person’s life plan in the sphere of secularity. Homo eudaimonicus manifests the overcoming of values crisis and the rediscovery of purpose and meaning, this time on the secular basis. Homo eudaimonicus implies the realization of a person’s project of a happy and fulfilling life through moral behavior and socially useful activities.

References

Annas, J. (1995). The Morality of Happiness. New York: Oxford University Press. (in English)

Binder, M. (2019). Homo Economicus and Happiness: Towards More Sustainable Development. In M. Rojas (Ed.), The Economics of Happiness: How the Easterlin Paradox Transformed Our Understanding of Well-Being and Progress (pp.171-191). Cham: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15835-4_8 (in English)

Cirrone, S. (2015). Secular Morality: Rhetoric and Reader. SFC Publishing. (in English)

Finance, J. de. (1962). Liberté et Fidélité. Gregorianum, 43(1), 12-38. (in French)

Green, R. M. (2013). Religion and Medical Ethics. Handbook of Clinical Neurology (Vol. 118, pp. 79-89). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-444-53501-6.00006-8 (in English)

Habermas, J. (2005). Religion in Public Sphere. Retrieved from https://holbergprisen.no/sites/default/files/Habermas_religion_in_the_public_sphere.pdf (in English)

Hamilton, C. (2011). The Freedom Paradox: Towards a Post-Secular Ethics. Crows Nest: Allen&Unwin. (in English)

Haybron, D. (2013). Happiness: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (in English)

Haybron, D. M. (2016). The Philosophical Basis of Eudaimonic Psychology. In J. Vittersø (Ed.), Handbook of Eudaimonic Well-Being (pp. 27-53). Cham: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42445-3_2 (in English)

Helliwell, J., Layard, R., & Sachs, J. (Eds.). (2013). World Happiness Report 2013. New York: UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network. Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/happiness-report/2013/WorldHappinessReport2013_online.pdf (in English)

Hobbes, T. (1991). Leviathan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (in English)

Hysa, X., & Suparaku, S. (2020). From Happiness to Super Happiness: Not a Tradeoff Anymore. Happiness and Contemporary Society: Conference Proceedings Volume, March 20-21, 2020, Lviv, 114-116. Lviv, Ukraine. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31108/7.2020.26 (in English)

Kekes, J. (2007). Attitudinal and Episodic Happiness. In S. M. Cahn & C. Vitrano (Eds.), Happiness: Classic and Contemporary Readings in Philosophy (pp. 179-193). Oxford University Press. (in English)

Khmil, V. V., & Popovych, I. S. (2019). Philosophical and psychological dimensions of social expectations of personality. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, 16, 55-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i16.187540 (in English)

Kováč, L. (2012). The biology of happiness: Chasing pleasure and human destiny. EMBO reports, 13(4), 297-302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/embor.2012.26 (in English)

Leirvik, O. (2014). Interreligious Studies: A Relational Approach to Religious Activism and the Study of Religion. A&C Black. (in English)

Lushch, U. I. (2018). The Self in the World: Overcoming Classical Dualism and Shaping New Landmarks. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, 13, 17-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i13.122840 (in English)

Lushch-Purii, U. (2021). Eudaimonic Happiness as a Convergence Point for Religion and Medicine: The Ukrainian Context. Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe, 41(1), 106-117. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/ree/vol41/iss1/9 (in English)

MacIntyre, A. (2007). After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory (3rd ed.). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. (in English)

Mckay, F. (2016). Homo Eudaimonicus: Affects, Biopower, And Practical Reason (PhD dissertation). The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. Retrieved from https://knowledge.uchicago.edu/record/1638/files/Mckay_uchicago_0330D_13178.pdf (in English)

Melnick, A. (2014). Happiness, Morality, and Freedom. Leiden: Brill. (in English)

Nussbaum, M. (1986). The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (in English)

Nussbaum, M. (1994). The Therapy of Desire: Theory and Practice in Hellenistic Ethics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (in English)

Nussbaum, M. (1999). Virtue Ethics: A Misleading Category? The Journal of Ethics, 3(3), 163-201. (in English)

Ott, J. (2020). Beyond Economics: Happiness as a Standard in our Personal Life and in Politics. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56600-5 (in English)

Phillips, J., De Freitas, J., Mott, C., Gruber, J., & Knobe, J. (2017). True happiness: The role of morality in the folk concept of happiness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146(2), 165-181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000252 (in English)

Purii, R., & Lushch, U. (2019). Happy Life Planning. Lviv: Litopys. (in Ukrainian)

Rawls, J. (1999). A Theory of Justice (Revised edition). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. (in English)

Russell, D. (2012). Happiness for Humans. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (in English)

Seligman, M. (2011). Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being. New York, NY: Free Press. (in English)

Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. (in English)

Taylor, C. (2007). A Secular Age. Harvard University Press. (in English)

Tiberius, V. (2018). Well-being as Value Fulfillment: How We Can Help Each Other to Live Well. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (in English)

UN Secretary-General. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Retrieved from: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/139811#record-files-collapse-header (in English)

Downloads

Published

2021-06-30

How to Cite

Lushch-Purii, U. I. (2021). From Homo Economicus to Homo Eudaimonicus: Anthropological and Axiological Transformations of the Concept of Happiness in A Secular Age. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (19), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i19.235992

Issue

Section

THE MAN IN TECHNOSPHERE