This statement, is one i have heard many people rehearsed over and over again. At first, i was unsure what they meant by it.
It felt so unreal to me as i wonder what logic was behind it. It seem to me like one of these unrealistic motivations by motivational speakers trying to score points.
I even had to discuss it with some of my friends to hear their views concerning it and the answers i got have similarities!
Their beliefs and submissions are that it doesn't matter what the situation is or look like, one should always choose to be happy.
Logically, they link happiness to choice. This means one can 'choose' to be happy or not. So in their defense, one should always choose to be happy because happiness frees one's mind from worries and disappointments.
While it looks like a position i should go with or a logical argument, i still feel happiness is a feeling and not something that depend on choice.
In fact, it has nothing to do with freewill. It is something that comes from within and comes out as a result of what one feels.
If truly happiness is a choice, i ask, why does someone who loved his/her mother didn't decide not to cry or mourn her when she dies? Why can't the person choose to be happy instead?
Or why does one cry uncontrollably when such person loses dear one?
Or could we link it to strength? That is, how one can control his/her emotions?
We can ask further, are all emotions controllable? If no, then it suffice to say we are not totally powerful to control our emotions.
While I want to follow the bandwagon that happiness is free, my reason and fact that certain situations wont give you the chance to 'choose' happiness over what your emotion brings, says otherwise.
I therefore choose to differ on the statement that happiness is free. One can try to choose to be sad or happy but we shouldn't forget situations that defer this 'choice'.
Also, keep in touch with Blurtconnect-ng family on Telegram and Whatsapp