If a group of individuals were asked if they would be happier if they won the lottery, the vast majority would most likely respond with a resounding "yes", images emerging in their minds of various luxuries, freedom and security. Perhaps they share the consensus that “money makes the world go round” and they would not be wrong to note its obvious omnipresence. This article presents a discussion of some elements of Seligman's (2011) theory, including positive relationships, positive emotion, accomplishment, and partial meaning. He claimed that implementing these feel-good factors along with commitment equates to a prosperous life. I will attempt to prove that lottery winners are happier because they have more freedom to implement the discussed factors thanks to their new financial independence and, thus, their well-being will be improved. To conclude, as Seligman (2011) stated, “What is wealth for?” I believe that this must be in the service of well-being” (p.194). Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Seligman (2011) pointed out that whenever something positive happens, people are featured somewhere in those moments. After all, Homo sapiens are inherently social and rely on each other to survive, as Cacioppo and Hawkley (2009) explain. Given that civilization depends on money not only for survival but also for gratification, one might ask whether the greater amount of money a person possesses, the less likely they are to engage in positive relationships, which leads to the resulting unhappiness. Bianchil and Vohs (2016) suggested that even if disadvantaged individuals were more social than wealthy ones, their relationships might not be as emotionally rewarding or valuable and instead serve a practical purpose. For this reason, they may not actually be positive relationships, but rather instrumental ones, based on desperate or at least more dependent circumstances. Conversely, perhaps this wealth has made the lottery winner meaner, so those close to him can distance themselves, resulting in fewer positive relationships. relationships. As Stellar, Manzo, Kraus, and Keltner (2012) observed, compassion tends to be lower in higher grades. However, I emphasize that this evidence is not entirely valid for the case of lottery winners but is quite comparable. For example, Hedenus (2011) noted that the lottery winners studied expressed a humble appreciation of their fortune. It could be argued that this is because they are not used to this lifestyle compared to the upper class. This negative effect on relationships can also exist due to the financial imbalance between friends and relatives. In support of this, Gullestad (1992) states that difficulties arise when a person lives with more freedom than his friends (cited in Hedenus, 2011). Hedenus (2011) also observed participants' concerns that others enter into relationships solely for their money and that this influences their identity. This could escalate into suspicion, leading to negative relationships or complete social avoidance. Conversely, this level of awareness could help the individual ensure that relationships preserve their identity, are healthy and, therefore, more positive. Seligman (2011) defines positive emotion as “what we feel: pleasure, delight, ecstasy, warmth, comfort…” (p.23). It is the centerpiece of its model, because itappears in almost all of its well-being factors. To begin with, Piff and Moskowitz (2018) revealed that the upper class expressed emotions of pride, contentment, and amusement while love and compassion were higher. in the lower class. They suggested that because upper-class individuals are financially viable, they can focus more on positive experiences. Therefore, the lottery winner may be more likely to acquire positive emotions following these events. Conversely, they claimed that the lower classes used love and compassion to form bonds and avoid conflict. The threat posed by more limited resources. However, their studies measured both extremes: upper class and lower class, with no middle group for comparison. Continuing their positive experiments, Carter and Gilovich (2011) found that material purchases did not induce as much pleasure as experiences. By approaching this concept, the lottery winner would have more disposable income to create new memories, experience positive emotions and, therefore, possibly improve their well-being. However, they risk quickly getting used to positive emotions because of their ease of achieving them and their potential regularity. Lottery winners seem aware of this prospect, as Hedenus (2011) observed a reduction in their concerns about enjoying money used to support others. Luthar, Small, and Ciciolla (2018) found a correlation between high socioeconomic status in early adulthood and heavy drug use. and addiction. Although this implies that the continued increase in positive emotions through drug use is due to acclimatization, it may be that lottery winners are particularly prone to addiction. Xian, Gidden, Scherrer, Eisen, and Potenza (2013) found associations between gambling and frequent drug use. Even if the lottery winner constantly experiences positive emotions, their health may be at risk and acclimatization may be present, leading to a decline in well-being. Finally, there is achievement, which, according to Seligman (2011), is very independent, because people are driven to succeed even in the absence of its other well-being factors. But he also suggested that fulfillment could lie in the pursuit of a higher cause. So when we talk about accomplishment, it will naturally move away from the meaning. For example, Jolliffe (2016) reported that world happiness is linked to the giving of money and is determined by nations having a better quality of life. The question also arises whether lottery winners have more opportunities to achieve, thereby increasing their well-being. Piff and Moskowitz (2018) stated that upperclassmen have more freedom than lowerclassmen to focus on their goals. However, the situation of the upper class differs significantly from that of lottery winners, as it is commonly believed that the upper class is defined by much more than just their wealth. On the other hand, they may feel incomplete and guilty, because the riches were acquired by pure luck. Furthermore, Winkelmann, Oswald, and Powdthavee (2010) demonstrated that this unworthy feeling was experienced by lottery winners during the early stages. However, they further note that once they mentally overcome this feeling, well-being improves following the gratification that money begins to evoke. Von Kriegstein (2017) argued that the feeling of accomplishment against all odds can only be achieved through.