Is Hemholtz's happiness, mentioned in chapter 2, the same kind of hapiness that his fellow citizens feel? Is the fact that Hemholtz is happy in conflict with Huxley's statement in the foreword that happiness should be secondary to the pursuit of humanity's final end? Is it possible for troubles or unpleasant experiences to make one happy?
Hemholtz's happiness is from buying into the idea os social conditioning. Unfortunately, it might have crossed the mind of an Epsilon that his or her life really sucks. Huxley reveals some of the main sources of social stability. Science creates and conditions people to become happy members of society. The comment by the Director, "What man has joined, nature is powerless to put asunder," reveals the extent that the conditioning can alter behavior. Although behavior may be altered, human nature is not. It is essential for unpleasant experiences to make us happy. Bad experiences help us understand what it means to be happy rather than merely relying on our primal urges to get our dopamine rush.
