Simply stating something is ego driven or divisive is not a logical objection. It i your prejudiced view. If you can really be logical , I am ready for a debate.
To debate one must read what is already written with a commitment to listen. Only then it will be possible to respond intelligently to the objections raised.
It seems I have to connect the dots for you
OK, then.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In Post 1 you write
" One's health
ii. One's intelligence
iii. One's wealth
So if one is lacking in one of these, one's happiness comes down"
This is sophomoric because mental peace has nothing to do with any of these.
It has to be do with being content with what one has in life though they can strive to get more but happy people accept cheerfully what comes as result. You can find examples of wealthy people being very unhappy because they keep wanting more.
Intelligence has nothing to do with mental peace. Some of the most intelligent have committed suicides in history. Another flawed understanding of human emotions.
Human emotions is another independent factor and not connected to the three above.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Then you write
"Your happiness also depends on how much happy you can make others. Trust me this is such a powerful way of creating happiness for self. "
Tell me -if you have prejudice in your thinking for any segment of a population can you be happy? Can you really make others happy. We have discussed a lot about your prejudices (though you maintain it 'calling a spade a spade" and calling LGBTQ an anomaly and therefore not normal people)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
When Mr Vaagmi asked you to define happiness you write
"I define happiness as a positive feeling that happens when one is not in misery or discomfort physically or mentally and when one's righteous desires are satisfied. By righteous desires I mean desires that are not harmful to others. So it is beyond being just the absence of misery and discomfort" in Post 4
Mental discomfort has to do with emotions, not intelligence that is missing in your post 1.
You say righteous is what is not harmful to others. But your divisive rhetoric against LGBTQ (that they are born as) is harmful to them. So you have to agree then that you are not righteous.
If so, you have no right to preach about happiness and peace
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
All your messages are about "us"vs "them". This divisiveness is not righteous and make the person who views the world that way an unhappy person.
You do name calling in this thread itself to challenges to your ideas. Well, name calling is an ego response of someone who is affected emotionally. That kind of reaction shows the state of your mind.
Tell me - if you are unhappy can you really make others happy.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Stopping here. The thread is full of holes in logic and basic understanding of happiness and peace.
Address all the issues raised, ask clarifications with humility (to use your advice to me) and debate
I will show you also when you make a logically right statement here