On Happiness: Its Duration, Its Name, and What Endures

Non sumus Deus tuus; quaere super nos — We are not your God; seek above us. This essay begins from an Augustinian intuition: the finite goods human beings love are real, meaningful, and often genuinely joyful, but they cannot bear the full weight of what the human search for happiness demands. The problem is not that created goods are illusions. The problem is that they are frequently mistaken for ultimate ground. Beginning with the historical semantic inheritance of the English word happiness from happ (luck, chance, fortune), the essay argues that ordinary understandings of happiness remain structurally tied to contingency, favorable circumstance, and what happens to the self rather than what the self fundamentally is. To clarify this problem, the essay proposes a philosophical model in which the present moment functions as the singular locus of actuality, while memory and anticipation operate as representational loops rather than alternative sites of actual existence. Within this framework, happiness as circumstantial satisfaction cannot endure as ultimate fulfillment because it depends on conditions that arise and pass. The essay develops a structural account of suffering, arguing that grief and absence create the experience of duration through recursive residency in memory rather than through ontological extension. It then places this framework in conversation with philosophical readings of the Beatitudes, Qohelet, Buddhist diagnoses of conditioned happiness, and the Catholic theological concept of beatitudo. The argument does not claim deductive metaphysical proof, but offers a philosophical reinterpretation of happiness, suffering, and fulfillment. Its central claim is that what human beings seek under the name happiness is not the indefinite extension of favorable conditions, but a rightly ordered mode of presence whose completeness lies in actuality rather than duration.