In defense of vagaries, or possibly a defense through vagary.

I tend to feel that the more specific something gets, the less defensible it becomes. That being said, I believe a very general take on the promotion of positive mental states is the most easily defensible of many of the theories that we’ve been speaking on in class up until now. The benefits of promoting positive mental states are obvious: people are happy, to be in a scenario where positive mental states are possible, making the world a better place must be a priority, and people, in seeking happiness, will tend to agree with the concept, making it a practical concept.

 

If you take the theory in a sufficiently nonspecific fashion, it also becomes possible to defend against the objection of the Happiness Machine thought experiment. In promoting positive mental states in humanity, it cannot be said to be a correct or defensible action to put oneself on a theoretical happiness-inducing machine. In doing so, one is no longer available to contribute positively to humanity, making the choice to go on the machine an inherently bad one, considering that being able to promote positivity is inherently good.