The debate will be in English.

Citibank’s 2005 advertising campaign in Greece - Η ευτυχία γράφεται με ε όχι με € (‘Happiness is written with an ‘E’, not a ‘€’) - seems now might appear unthinkably cynical. ‘Happiness’ did not seem to equate to this summer’s images of bloody violence as protestors clashed with police in Syntagma Square, in scenes becoming so familiar that some European commentators dubbed such stand-offs ‘the new Greek ritual.’ Yet the Citibank campaign was based, apparently, on “new research” that is routinely used to underpin arguments that the ‘relentless pursuit’ of economic growth and productivity not only fails to make us happy but is ‘socially divisive’ and ‘environmentally destructive’ to boot.

Outside Greece, indeed, happiness has increasingly become a serious focus of policy for Western governments, seemingly heightened since the financial crisis took hold. In the UK, economist Richard Layard has advocated a new ‘science of happiness’ which seeks to revolve the apparent paradox of individuals seemingly becoming unhappier even as society grows wealthier and materially more developed: ideas which have been notably taken up by governments from Tony Blair’s New Labour to David Cameron’s Conservatives. International organisations like the World Bank have increasingly sought to decouple wealth from wellbeing, taking instead a ‘basic needs’ approach to development. The OECD has recently announced a ‘Your Better Life Index’ which would ‘go beyond GDP’ to ‘deliver better policies for better lives.’ France launched a similar initiative in 2009 and even Brazilian officials considered a bill in February that would add happiness to the constitution.

With some happiness experts heralding ancient Athens as the spiritual and intellectual home of debates over ‘the good life’, there are growing calls for Greece to take up these concerns in the modern age. Is the ‘the happiness movement’ simply an attempt to re-establish moral and ethical concerns in a secular, consumerist age or should it be treated sceptically as an attempt to excuse and pacify anger over economic and political failures? Is the rise of interest in well-being and psychological skills a sincere attempt to make sense of developments in psychology and neuroscience or a poor substitute for more old-fashioned debates over morality, character and meaning? Should we even be discussing ‘the good life’ when there are more pressing issues at stake?

This event will be attended by Alan Miller, as a guest representative of the Battle of Ideas Organising Committee