Philosophizing on happiness in the West vs East

A few days ago I wrote about an article in Scientific American, wherein they haphazardly wrote about people having a right to be happy. No, they have a right to pursue happiness. There is no Constitutional guarantee that everyone must be granted happiness. None whatsoever. In any case, the mistake was worth pointing out but it was not central to the rest of the article, which I promised in my commentary that I would circle back to touch on. A few days later than intended, here goes.

Scientific American gets a fundamental notion wrong

In an article about not everyone wanting to be happy, Scientific American gets a fundamental notion incorrect. The big surprise for me was that it wasn't about Global Warming.  Scientific American gets a fundamental American concept wrong.  And it happens in the first sentence.

Everyone wants to be happy. It's a fundamental human right.

It's egregious. No one has an absolute right to be happy. The inalienable right endowed by the Creator, as mentioned in the Constitution, is the right to pursue happiness. Not to be happy.

Their error actually annoyed me and made me unhappy. They have taken away what according to this article, is my right to be happy. I should sue them.

The notion is so ridiculous that it almost negates the rest of the article, but the rest of it is actually worth a comment because it does go on to make some interesting points.

I'll be commenting on those tomorrow.