"Happiness ranking."
Haru was reading an article on her phone. "What rank do you think Japan is?"
"Low," Ren answered immediately.
"How do you know?"
"Economically wealthy, but subjective happiness tends to be low."
Haru asked puzzledly. "But can happiness be measured?"
"Good question," Ren looked up. "Utilitarians thought it could."
"Utilitarianism?"
"Bentham and Mill. They treated happiness quantitatively and tried to maximize society's overall happiness."
Noa joined. "'The greatest happiness for the greatest number.'"
"But how do you measure it?" Haru asked.
Ren wrote in a notebook. "Intensity, duration, certainty, proximity... evaluate across various dimensions."
"Complex."
"Yes. So simple quantification is difficult."
Noa supplemented. "Nowadays, surveys are used. Ask 'Are you happy?' and have them answer from 1 to 10."
"Is that accurate?" Haru had doubts.
"Questionable," Ren admitted. "Subjective evaluation is influenced by culture and language."
"What do you mean?"
"Japanese tend to be modest, so they report lower happiness. Americans are the opposite."
"So you can't compare?"
"Not completely," Noa said. "But you can see trends."
Haru pondered. "In the first place, is happiness one thing?"
"Sharp," Ren nodded. "Aristotle distinguished two types of happiness."
"What kind?"
"Hedonic happiness and eudaimonic happiness."
Noa explained. "Hedonic happiness is pleasant, joyful emotions. Eudaimonic happiness is the sense of living a meaningful life."
"They're different."
"Very different," Ren continued. "Pleasure is temporary. Eudaimonia is lasting."
"Which is true happiness?" Haru asked.
"Both are necessary," Noa answered. "Pleasure alone is empty. Meaning alone is painful."
Ren asked philosophically. "But can meaning be measured?"
"Can't," Haru answered intuitively.
"Why?"
"Because it's different for everyone."
"Correct," Ren said. "Meaning is subjective and individual."
Noa showed another perspective. "Economists use the concept of revealed preference."
"What's that?"
"Infer a person's happiness from their choices. What they choose shows what makes them happy."
Haru tilted her head. "But people make wrong choices too."
"Yes," Ren admitted. "People don't necessarily maximize their own happiness."
"Why?"
"They prioritize short-term pleasure, or lack information."
"So it still can't be measured?"
Noa smiled. "Can't be measured, but can be approximated."
"Approximated?"
"There's no perfect scale. But combining several indicators can grasp general trends."
Ren gave examples. "Income, health, relationships, freedom, social trust... these correlate with happiness."
"Correlate, but not perfectly," Haru understood.
"Right. There are wealthy but unhappy people."
"So what's the point of scales?" Noa asked.
Haru thought. "...To make policies?"
"Exactly," Ren nodded. "Even if individual happiness can't be measured, you can know society-wide trends."
"To improve society."
"Yes. But at the individual level, feeling matters more than numbers."
Noa said quietly. "Trying to measure happiness itself might damage happiness."
"Why?"
"Constant evaluation prevents enjoying the now."
Haru laughed. "True. If I constantly think 'Am I happy now?' I'd be tired."
"A paradox," Ren said. "Pursuing happiness too much distances you from happiness."
"So what should we do?"
"Don't measure," Noa smiled. "Just live."
"But for society as a whole?"
"Measure. Change approach for individuals versus groups."
Ren looked outside the window. "Happiness can be measured but not fully measured."
"Contradictory," Haru said.
"That's human," Noa answered.
The three laughed. While seeking scales for happiness, they felt the small happiness of this moment now.