This is a great definition, and you have strong qualifiers. I would explain how this can be long-term and short-term. Also, expand on what good health is--not being on medication, not having disabilities, learning to deal with disabilities, etc. Just some things to think about, but great job!
I agree with Holland, your definition is good but add one qualifier that would raise the most argument about happiness just so you could balance out your paper with the opposed views and with your persuasion.
I think each of these qualifers is so fundamentally different that they each have their own level of happiness but true happiness requires all of these.
Your simple definition is "happiness is an emotion." I don't think this is very arguable! Maybe if you said "happiness is a state of being," this would be more open for debate.
This is a great definition I am just worried that your simple definition and qualifiers are molded together too much meaning that your simple definition cannot stand on its own. It needs the qualifiers. If that is okay, however, then good job!
You have really specific qualifiers which is good for you definition. I think your definition can be arguable, because its on point. You said its an Emotional effect, which narrowed down, but I feel like that is really close to the original definition, because being happy is an emotional state, but i think with your qualifiers you will be able to back your self. up.
Through your qualifiers you're saying you have to have all 3 of them at the same time? You don't think you could be happy without money? Also what about loved one instead of ones.
This is a good definition and I think you did a good job defining what it is in your own words and I like your qualifiers as well.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with this definition and I would just keep in mind that you want to ensure some form of argument... otherwise awesome job!
ReplyDeleteThis is a great definition, and you have strong qualifiers. I would explain how this can be long-term and short-term. Also, expand on what good health is--not being on medication, not having disabilities, learning to deal with disabilities, etc. Just some things to think about, but great job!
ReplyDeleteYour definition is simple and your qualifiers work well, nice job! I think more people would agree with your definition rather than argue.
ReplyDeleteBe ready to support all of your qualifiers! Some people may argue that you don't need to be financially stable.
ReplyDeleteGreat definition and great qualifiers so far! I think you should try to find more qualifiers to support your definition.
ReplyDeleteI can't comment anything more. Good work!
ReplyDeleteIm not sure that your topic is arguable enough. The only thing that is arguable is the financially stable bit.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Holland, your definition is good but add one qualifier that would raise the most argument about happiness just so you could balance out your paper with the opposed views and with your persuasion.
ReplyDeleteI think each of these qualifers is so fundamentally different that they each have their own level of happiness but true happiness requires all of these.
ReplyDeleteYour simple definition is "happiness is an emotion." I don't think this is very arguable! Maybe if you said "happiness is a state of being," this would be more open for debate.
ReplyDeleteThis is a great definition I am just worried that your simple definition and qualifiers are molded together too much meaning that your simple definition cannot stand on its own. It needs the qualifiers. If that is okay, however, then good job!
ReplyDeleteI love your definition it is straight forward and your qualifiers support it completely. No recommendations or complaints. Well done!
ReplyDeleteYou have really specific qualifiers which is good for you definition. I think your definition can be arguable, because its on point. You said its an Emotional effect, which narrowed down, but I feel like that is really close to the original definition, because being happy is an emotional state, but i think with your qualifiers you will be able to back your self. up.
ReplyDeleteIt seems close to the original definition but at the same time if you can write enough about I think it will be arguable and you should be good to go.
ReplyDeleteThrough your qualifiers you're saying you have to have all 3 of them at the same time? You don't think you could be happy without money? Also what about loved one instead of ones.
ReplyDeletethat is a good definition you are at a good start with your paper you could argue less qualifiers if you wanted to
ReplyDeleteGood, specific qualifiers.
ReplyDelete