UDC

17.036(045)+330.5(045)

Authors

Demenev Aleksey Grigoryevich
Institute of Social, Humanitarian and Political Sciences,
Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov
2 prosp. Lomonosova, Arkhangelsk, 163002, Russian Federation;
e-mail: a.demenev@narfu.ru, alexei.demeneff@yandex.ru

Abstract

The ethical concept of happiness has, in recent decades, become a subject of research in economics, sociology and psychology. It turned out that there is no direct proportional relationship between the GDP growth and the level of satisfaction with life in a country. It is also proven by statistical data (The Easterlin Paradox) and everyday moral experience. As a result, we can now hear more and more politicians say that a state should not aim to raise its GDP at any cost but to increase the level of happiness. At the same time, the correlation between income and the level of subjective well-being does exist. This is one of the main issues in happiness economics. The philosophical basis of these studies is utilitarian ethics. It should be noted that utilitarian thinking is ambivalent: it stimulates social progress but reduces the various motives to benefit-seeking; it can be interpreted as egoistic or altruistic. Classical utilitarianism, which was formed during the Industrial Revolution in England, could not enjoy similar success in Russia. It was criticized by Russian religious philosophers who claimed that in search of pleasure and happiness one could forget about moral values. Many experts in happiness economics believe that the aim of the state should not amount to raising Gross National Happiness at any cost. Happiness should be a reward for the achievement of truly humane, socially and individually significant and morally approved targets. Creating the conditions for setting and achieving these targets should thus be a priority for the state.

Keywords

happiness economics, Gross National Happiness, purpose of life, utilitarianism, social development indicators

References

1. Tatarkevich V. O schast’e i sovershenstve cheloveka [On Personal Happiness and Perfection]. Moscow, 1981.
   
2. Dregalo A.A., Ul’yanovskiy V.I. Sotsiologiya regional’nykh transformatsiy [Sociology of Regional Transformations]. Arkhangelsk, 2010.
   
3. Sachs J.D. The Economics of Happiness. Available at: https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/theeconomics- of-happiness (accessed 15 June 2015).
   
4. Smirnova Zh. “Bezhat’, chtoby ostavat’sya na meste…” [“Running to Keep in the Same Place”]. Available at: http://opec.ru/1444633.html (accessed 15 June 2015).
   
5. Antipina O. Ekonomicheskaya teoriya schast’ya kak napravlenie nauchnykh issledovaniy [The Economic Theory of Happiness as an Area of Academic Research]. Voprosy ekonomiki, 2012, no. 2, pp. 94–107.
   
6. Flerbe M. Za predelami VVP: v poiskakh mery obshchestvennogo blagosostoyaniya. Chast’ II [Beyond GDP: Searching for Social Welfare Measure. Part II]. Voprosy ekonomiki, 2012, no. 3, pp. 32–51.
   
7. Yarkova E.N. Utilitarizm kak tip kul’tury: kontseptual’nye parametry i spetsifika Rossii [Utilitarianism as a Type of Culture: Conceptual Parameters and Specificity of Russia]. Novosibirsk, 2001.
   
8. Hare R.M. Rights and Justice. Moral Thinking. Its Levels, Method, and Point. Oxford, 1981.
   
9. Layard R. Happiness: Lessons from a New Science. London, 2005.