Happiness and Needs Satisfaction

Like Corona, your post reminds me of Maslow's Theory of Motivation. In summary, his theory states that we humans have 'needs' that we have to satisfy in order of priority. Before higher ideals can be achieved the lower ideals must be met. As one moves upward in the hierarchy, each level of needs becomes less biological and more social in origin.

Here's a diagram of his theory:



Interesting that you mention Buddhists, because I just read a quote from the Dalai Lama saying that the key to happiness is contenment (which is the experience of satisfaction). It ties in a way to the theory of Maslow because it deals with content theory and what we need to satisfy in order to experience self actualisation - a state full of peak experiences, including happiness.

Here is a pretty interesting site: Wirehead Hedonism versus Paradise Engineering. Amongst other things, it points out that getting rid of negative emotions (what Buddhists strive for) increases our tendency to explore, and thus progress. It also increases the range of activities we find rewarding.
------
Oh, and as for Maslow, I disagree with his hierarchy of needs. A person can be moral and creative without the benefit of being safe or feeling belonging, for example. To justify his hierarchy, you really gotta accept a lot of "no true Scotsman" arguments: sure, he seems to have esteem while his life is under constant threat, but that is not really esteem.

I do have reservations about the idea of satisfying one need (level) at a time. I think several needs come and you can satisfy them all at the same time unless for some reason they're conflicting. Then there are also cases when people seem to sacrifice the basic needs (physiological) and are still able to achieve higher needs (artists and scientists come to mind).

Side note (bit related): I just read an article about Obama and what he thinks the Iraqis aspire for...what do they desire/would make them happy? He said that Bush's obsession about elections and political rights makes him overlook the Iraqi people's basic needs: food, shelter, jobs. Once these are met, then that's the only time these people would really bother about having democratic regimes that the US want to see. That reminded me of Maslow too.

Really, I would say that Maslow was certainly onto something, but his hierarchy of needs was an oversimplification of things. As for Iraq, it does seem that democracies only flourish in materially successful countries. Not sure which leads to which, but I suspect there is something of a feedback loop involved.