RE: What Does Happiness Mean To You?
Happiness doesn't need to be subjective. It just needs a better definition than the one you've given.
Ayn Rand defined it as follows:
"Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of one’s values. If a man values productive work, his happiness is the measure of his success in the service of his life. But if a man values destruction, like a sadist—or self-torture, like a masochist—or life beyond the grave, like a mystic—or mindless “kicks,” like the driver of a hotrod car—his alleged happiness is the measure of his success in the service of his own destruction. It must be added that the emotional state of all those irrationalists cannot be properly designated as happiness or even as pleasure: it is merely a moment’s relief from their chronic state of terror.
Neither life nor happiness can be achieved by the pursuit of irrational whims. Just as man is free to attempt to survive by any random means, as a parasite, a moocher or a looter, but not free to succeed at it beyond the range of the moment—so he is free to seek his happiness in any irrational fraud, any whim, any delusion, any mindless escape from reality, but not free to succeed at it beyond the range of the moment nor to escape the consequences." The Objectivist Ethics, from The Virtue of Selfishness, p. 28.
You'll notice that happiness is the achievement of values - and while people's values may (in general) differ, happiness can only be achieved by pursuing and achieving them. Essentially, to be happy, one needs to identify their values and pursue them.
The very fact that you base happiness over another person's opinion is subjective. This is my definition of happiness. Many people are not in a position to achieve the values you so define, yet irrespective they can attain a state of happiness.
Differing opinions doesn't mean a particular thing is subjective. You may feel hot while I feel cold, but the temperature itself is not subjective. People may feel happiness in varying degrees, but its source is the same: the pursuit and achievement of values.
Can you explain to me how someone can be happy without having achieved or pursued their values?
subjective
Happiness is
A simple example - Many people in India value education, yet they are not able to achieve it due to various reasons. Yet you'll see them happy. There are many personal examples, this is just an overview and I'm not going into detail. As mentioned in my article,
It's clear you aren't open to a real discussion about this, so this will be my last comment.
Happiness isn't about the immediate and instant achievement of every value one holds. Does the person in your example hold only one value? What has made that person happy if their value of education isn't being completely fulfilled? Any number of other values, or the partial achievement of them.
No doubt they can learn things on their own through experimentation. They might have watched someone else dancing and imitated the motions, now learning the dance. Or any of their numerous other values could be fulfilled, making them happy: things like a healthy family, a roof over their heads, food to eat, money to be earned, and so on.
I offered you an objective definition of happiness; you refused it. I'm not arguing that peoples values are subjective (most of them are). But I am arguing that happiness, as a state of being, has a very simple, objective definition.