The Greek philosopher Aristotle wrote that:
“The happy life is thought to be one of excellence; now an excellent life requires exertion, and does not consist in amusement” (Nicomachean Ethics, Book X).
Aristotle thought that the ultimate goal of human life is happiness. By happiness, he meant living well. To live well requires taking action. Living is an activity. Therefore, living well is acting well. Happiness, then, is the life of excellent action.
But, which actions are excellent, and what does it mean to act well?
Aristotle thought that the best actions are those that we choose for their own sake. These fall into two general categories. First, we choose and perform morally good actions for their own sake. Second, we choose and perform intellectually rewarding activities for their own sake.
This is why he thought that the goal of human life cannot be amusement or rest. We do not choose amusement for its own sake. Amusement is a form of rest. We choose amusement in order to rest and relax. We choose rest because it is necessary in order to return to worthwhile activities.
If we choose amusement for its own sake, then that would mean that the reason we exert ourselves in performing difficult activities is ultimately in order to be amused. Aristotle thought this is not only “foolish”, but “childish”. If we choose rest for its own sake, then that would mean the point of life would be to do nothing. The life of doing nothing is not a happy life.
These ways of thinking get things precisely backwards. We seek amusement in order to rest, and we seek rest in order to return to worthwhile and difficult activities. We choose worthwhile and difficult activities for their own sake, and that is what it means to live well.
Could a live focused on amusement be a happy one though? I think maybe it could depending how broad you want to go with amusement. Just spending your life doing the things you enjoy?