'But David,' we could say, 'look at these historical, psychological and biological studies. Suppose, for the sake of argument, that we could somehow scientifically prove that higher standards of living did not translate into greater happiness. 'Well,' he might answer, 'growth is essential to provide people with higher standards of living, better medical care, bigger houses, faster cars, tastier ice-cream.' And, we could press further, what is so good about higher standards of living? 'Isn't it obvious?' Cameron might reply, 'It makes people happier.'Ī reason to be happy … tastier ice-cream? Photograph: Envision/Corbis Suppose we caught David Cameron in a corner, and demanded to know why he cared so much about economic growth. Most governments still focus on achieving economic growth, but when asked what is so good about growth, even diehard capitalists almost invariably turn to happiness. Similar initiatives have recently been developed in numerous other countries – from Thailand to Canada, from Israel to Brazil. In 2007 the European commission launched 'Beyond GDP' to consider the feasibility of using a wellbeing index to replace or complement GDP. The traditional right to 'the pursuit of happiness' is imperceptibly morphing into a right to happiness, which means that it is becoming the duty of government to ensure the happiness of its citizens.

Consumerist economies are increasingly geared to supply happiness rather than subsistence or even affluence, and a chorus of voices is now calling for a replacement of GDP measurements with happiness statistics as the basic economic yardstick. With the stupendous growth in human production, happiness is also acquiring unprecedented economic importance. With the rise of individualism and the decline of collectivist ideologies, happiness is arguably becoming our supreme value. And if the spread of monotheism had no noticeable impact on global happiness, what difference did it make? W e are far more powerful than our ancestors, but are we much happier? Historians seldom stop to ponder this question, yet ultimately, isn't it what history is all about? Our understanding and our judgment of, say, the worldwide spread of monotheistic religion surely depends on whether we conclude that it raised or lowered global happiness levels.

Pre civilization stone age