A lot of questions has been asked trough history. There was a topic that had brought so many questions with it: Happiness. What was it? How did you achieve it? Was it all the good in life like Aristotle said? Or was it not an external thing like Socrates said? Was it something totally different? Plato has the most debatable idea of all: Happiness depends on virtue and wisdom which both lead to knowledge.
To debate this idea we have to understand what knowledge is. How broadly should we think. Perhaps we should take the defendants,Plato’s idea of happiness. Knowledge is a factual cognitive state. A factual cognitive state, something we know for sure. What do we know for sure? If I know something for sure its that I know nothing. So am I never happy?
Today’s philosophers think that knowledge is any well justified belief. So I if we apply Plato’s definition of happiness to modern day knowledge it will be the most logical one. For example lets say you do well in all mock exams and quizzes people will believe that you will do well in the real exam. It’a a well justified belief so it is knowledge, not a fact yet but still knowledge. So you will be happy right? It works out. All tough lets say there was a new development in science that slimmed the chances of there being an afterlife. This would be the corruption of justice and peace as we know it because if there is nothing to be good for or judged on why would you? But philosophically you should be happy because you have knowledge which is justified belief of there not being an afterlife. Are you happy then?
In my opinion happiness is 40 percent knowledge and knowledge is something- a theory, a thought, art…- that can be thought to somebody or be disagreed on. The other 60 percent is another debate for another time.