Personally I prefer the Greek concept of eudaimonia to happiness. Eudaimonia may be viewed as 'human flourishing' in a broad sense which takes into account experiences of joy, moral virtue, health, art/beauty and so forth. Hedonism has its merits, and it is certainly a very seductive philosophy, but I feel that it misses out on some core dimensions of human well-being (for my purposes at least).
(1) Should the government design policy in the pursuit of higher levels of social happiness?
Yes, certainly. Note that if we allow for policy which dictates governmental absence even those with an anarchic streak may endorse such a principle.
(2) If people are making decisions for themselves that, on average, will result in suboptimal levels of happiness, should the government intervene?
Perhaps - it depends very much on the case and the conception of happiness being used.
(3) Is happiness the only intrinsically valuable good?
Not when construed in narrow terms - see above on eudaimonia.
(4) Is happiness an emotional state, a deliberative judgement about the state of one's life, a combination of both, or other.
Happiness is also a way of life (of Being).
(5) If it turned out that religious belief was positively correlated with happiness, would you become religious?
No, and I can think of at least two good reasons. Firstly, even if religious belief has a positive correlation with happiness it won't be the only thing which is so correlated. Much of my pleasure comes from intellectual pursuits (philosophy, etc) which, for me, are incompatible with naive religious belief. Further, I expect that the correlation would be on account of certain features of religious belief / the religious life rather than religious belief per se, e.g. belief in the transcendent or a sense of community. Many such things can be brought into one's life without recourse to religious belief.
(1) Should the government design policy in the pursuit of higher levels of social happiness?
Yes, certainly. Note that if we allow for policy which dictates governmental absence even those with an anarchic streak may endorse such a principle.
(2) If people are making decisions for themselves that, on average, will result in suboptimal levels of happiness, should the government intervene?
Perhaps - it depends very much on the case and the conception of happiness being used.
(3) Is happiness the only intrinsically valuable good?
Not when construed in narrow terms - see above on eudaimonia.
(4) Is happiness an emotional state, a deliberative judgement about the state of one's life, a combination of both, or other.
Happiness is also a way of life (of Being).
(5) If it turned out that religious belief was positively correlated with happiness, would you become religious?
No, and I can think of at least two good reasons. Firstly, even if religious belief has a positive correlation with happiness it won't be the only thing which is so correlated. Much of my pleasure comes from intellectual pursuits (philosophy, etc) which, for me, are incompatible with naive religious belief. Further, I expect that the correlation would be on account of certain features of religious belief / the religious life rather than religious belief per se, e.g. belief in the transcendent or a sense of community. Many such things can be brought into one's life without recourse to religious belief.
