[kaskakokos]

In my opinion, this research is very biased: Looking at the first 5 questions [1] I see a materialistic context that channels the answer towards a materialistic view of happiness, where of course money is key.

Now, let's take the Aristotelian definition of happiness: It is about doing good and matching one's nature with one's actions. Then I would design questions like:

- Do you feel that your life is interconnected with the lives of others?

- When you reflect, do you feel that your life is what it should be?

- Are you satisfied with your life?

- In your daily life you do things out of obligation that do not correspond to your true nature?

- etc.

It all depends on what definition of happiness you take, and the one selected by the sponsors of the work I guess is not mine.

[1]Source: https://go.trackyourhappiness.org/

- In most respects, my life is close to my ideal.

- The conditions of my life are excellent.

- I am satisfied with my life.

- So far I have achieved the important things I want in life.

- If I could live my life over again, I would change almost nothing.

[bux93]

The questions used are only biased towards money, in so far as you believe that the ideal life requires materialistic goods, that excellent conditions require money, etc.

Aristotle by the way, did not believe that people with insufficient means could ever be as happy/good as (read; experience levels of eudoimonia commensurate with) freeborn males with plentiful means; and he was big on "natural slavery", which the Stoics disagreed with.

[thrance]

Didn't Aristotle use his definition of happiness (or virtue) to justify slavery ?

Rich people do good by being rich, slaves do good by being slaves.