Mark Kingwall wrote the article In Pursuit of Happiness in his 1998 book In Pursuit of Happiness: Better Living from Plato to Prozac. In writing this article, he explains that even though it seems like the pursuit of happiness may be futile, it is something that people need that is essential and how happiness varies from person to person. His thesis states that happiness is always different and therefore cannot be defined in a few sentences, but people continue to base their lives on the search for happiness and trying to define it. The intended audience for this thesis is more than likely university students majoring in philosophy, as the author is a university professor in Toronto. The author effectively argues his thesis in three ways: good organization, an impartial tone, and research and textual support that give credibility to his ideas, effectively arguing his thesis. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Kingwell begins the article by talking about the human needs to understand happiness and why it affects us so much in everyday life. He also goes into great detail about how people try to define happiness; even if in past centuries philosophers have almost always been useless in this undertaking. He goes so far as to say that looking up a one-sentence dictionary definition of happiness is “a game of cups” (Kingwell, 248). In the article, the first thing I noticed was that the author was well organized in his thoughts and their execution of the document. He states very clearly all his ideas up front, then the ideas of others before him and then the scientific evidence he uses behind all his statements. Not only does he keep all his facts in one place, but he doesn't turn around and walk away from what he's talking about like some authors do. While reading the essay, I could see very clearly where each of his thoughts ended and new ones began and, furthermore, every place his thoughts or research he provided was located. There was a clear reason why it was there, like when he moves from the first few paragraphs to the next idea: “No sentence that begins with 'Happiness is...' is likely to do us much good.” This moves directly into the next paragraph with “This is also a related and larger problem…” (248) This creates a very smooth and well-organized transition to his next idea, and although it hasn't put the current thought on hold; it gives room for transition to the next. This is a clear sign of a clear and organized writer, which is important in a piece like this. Another way he does this is the example of how he switches between talking about philosophical and scientific studies and how he perfectly organized his thoughts without completely interrupting the previous one. This is important because it shows a sign of a really good writer. In the second part of the excerpt, Kingwell talks about great thinkers and philosophers who had studied happiness and tried to find its root. Uses many quotes provided by authors and philosophers well known for their ideas on happiness and general research into it. He uses a quote by John Stuart Mill from his autobiography to show that there were many complications that come with the pursuit of happiness. “Ask yourself if you are happy and you will cease to be happy.” (Mill, 249) Kingwell goes on to use many different quotes from other famous authors, some that are very similar to the first quote, and others that are quite different from what was said previously. Throughout the lyrics, Kingwell maintains a very even-handed tone in the song. He never goes further in saying whether othersphilosophers were right or wrong, or what he believes about the things they wrote. He never really states his opinion in any way throughout the entire text, meaning he never really says what his ideologies are when it comes to achieving happiness, and whether or not it is actually doable. There are very few times the author expresses his opinion in this passage, which leads to his writing having an impartial tone. This allows him to prove his point in a much less intrusive way with opinions and sets a much more relaxed tone to the audience. Another time you can see that Kingwell is impartial is when he talks about what the author before him said, and reiterates it in a way that we as an audience can understand, but there is still an air of impartiality around to what he is writing, even though there may be plenty of room to place it. One of the final points the author makes in the essay is how genetics and rank in society can play a crucial role in determining how happy you are. He supports his theory with data obtained from studies conducted by scientists and geneticists, such as behavioral studies and surveys of different individuals. He uses a quote from David Lykken, a behavioral geneticist at the University of Minnesota "People who have to go to work in suits on a bus can feel as happy as people who wear suits and ties and drive a Mercedes" (Lykken, 249) All It depends on your disposition as a person, and as some studies presented by the author, your entire genetic makeup and personality can influence how happy you are as a person. Furthermore, Kingwell presents another study that states that you are born one way or another, and no amount of research or changes you make will ever change that. This shows evidence within the text to further support the author's thesis. When an author not only has strong arguments, but also good organization, an even-handed tone, and strong evidence to support the facts, it makes what he or she is saying much more persuasive. Besides that, the author does not bring evidence only about one branch of science or medicine, which makes his essay even more credible. While the data is not conclusive and does not answer all the questions we have, it certainly fills some gaps in the authors' writing and creates a more persuasive platform than it would be without it. While I believe the author is effective in making their point in the majority of the essay, I do not believe they are effective in making their point in one portion of the passage. Halfway through the first paragraph he says, “Everyone thinks they know something about what happiness is; very few people can convince anyone else that they are right” (248). I don't think this is entirely true, as there are millions of people who listen to others and their ways of being happy, and a lot of this is through social media or written words, for example someone saying that following a television diet it will make you happy. A large number of people will agree with this statement, or even try to. Now, I agree with the author in the sense that not everyone will agree with that idea of ​​happiness or even follow it down to the last detail. However, people will agree with many of the same details expressed by others when it comes to their or anyone else's personal opinions on happiness. I hated the article the first time I read it, I wanted so badly to one hundred percent disagree with the negative notions about happiness contained in the article. However, within a few times of reading it, I came to understand that the author made many valid points within the article, as did the many who contributed to it. The article was not only valid and contained excellent data a.