Two traditions of happiness research, not two distinct types of happiness

Abstract

In an earlier paper (Kashdan, Biswas-Diener, & King, 2008), we outlined a critique of the distinction being made between eudaimonic and hedonic forms of happiness. That paper seems to have had the desired effect in stimulating discourse on this important subject as evidenced by a number of responses from our colleagues. In this paper, we address these responses collectively. In particular, we outline common intellectual ground with the responding authors as well as points of difference.

Keywords:

• happiness
• meaning in life
• subjective well-being, eudaimonia
• self-determination theory

Acknowledgements

The contributions of the first two authors to this manuscript were equal. This work was supported by National Institute of Mental Health grant MH-73937 to Todd B. Kashdan.