Being happy

There's no science to being happy however we measure it

Boyd Tonkin writes in Saturday's Independent newspaper

here

Among the authors he quotes is Daniel M Haybron

Associate Professor of Philosophy at St Louis University

 whose acronym: SOARS is designed to summarise thinking about the philosophy and sociology of happiness:
It stands for 

Security [not necessarily wealth, a strong sense of sufficinecy and protection]

Outlook [hopeful and altruistic, not fearful and selfish]

Autonomy [free to set your own goals, not multiple consumer choice]

Relationships [not exclusively close family and friends, a network of trusted social contacts]

Skilled and meaningful activity [tasks that reinforce self-esteem and make sense of your world, whether paid or not]

Interestingly, Haybron suggests we might add: 'contact with the Natural world' to the list [SNOARS?]

From the article, I conclude that international comparisons of happiness levels and charts of the unhappiest towns in Britain are a waste of time. 

I'm not sure that I can do very much about optimising security, outlook, autonomy and relationships. My numbers of friends, ambition and sense of freedom were probably all laid down very early, based on reacting to my parents, teachers and carers.

But I suppose I could take up more skilled and meaningful activity; does that rule out computer games? What about the allotment? Hardly skilled and not very productive.
Of course I can get out into Nature more, so maybe that's the one I should concentrate on.