Logically, two things follow from this observation.
1) If you beautify your world, and you are not depressed, you will be happier. This applies on all social levels and in all ways, but obviously it is the personal level over which we have most control.
2) If you teach yourself to see more beauty, to find it in more contexts–more people, places, things, and ideas–you will be happier.
As I have said often, in my own view happiness is the source of space ntaneoya, non-compulsive goodness. As such, it and beauty are important intrinsically.
I will add that the sources of intellectualism–thought aestheticism–can be better understood through this rubric. If we trace the idea that ideas can be beautiful, can be works of art, can be faithful if diminished emanations of the ineffable, back to the Greeks, as seems proper to me, it becomes obvious what value this approach might have had. They were convulsed in frequent wars. Socrates fought in one if the Persian wars, and could likely fell the Peloponesdian War o its way. I think that history is correct.
If you place the most important source of beauty in your life beyond human hands, beyond the power of a torch to consume, beyond the power of enemies to carry off, then your achieve something like security. Ideas become something like cherished possessions.
But the source of this need, itself, asks more of them than they should be asked to provide. Ideas–reason–is a means to an end, and it is arguably the case that the Western obsession with ideas on themselves which has led to the dead ends, futility, and overt and aggressive stupidity one sees in our universities, which in concept owe so much to Greek models.