As other have pointed out, this article attacks “happiness” in the title, then proceeds to argue against what should have been called from the beginning “mere pleasure”. “Happiness” is usually understood as a satisfied or serene pleasure, not necessarily a passionate or appetital one. “Happiness” is not the opposite of “pain”; it is the opposite of misery. I don’t think the authors are arguing that we must be miserable simply to pursue some ideal, so their argument ends up being simply “We should orient our lives around a higher ideal rather than mere pleasure”. And the obvious answer is that doing so will make us more “happy” according to its usual definition.

[deleted]