How do you think Locke would respond to Tocqueville?

How do you think Locke would respond to Tocqueville?

The Conflict of Happiness and Morality

Society is always governed by certain moral values which humanity has to contend with. Sometimes, this happens at the expense of the happiness of the very humanity. The actions of man right from the relationship with friends, conduct in public and even business relations are founded on some ethical dilemmas that at times man chooses not to observe (Sanderse, 2015). But what do happiness and morality mean? While happiness can be defined as the satisfaction of one’s rational wishes, morality can be defined as the judgement/perception of what society finds as good or bad. It has happened to me sometimes back that I had to choose my happiness over the tenets of morality.

I have always desired to drive fast cars. When I was young, I could watch racing competitions on TV, and I could admire all models of fast moving cars something I still do to date. My family could however not afford to buy such a car, and so I never felt the goodness of the car I so much admired. One day, while in the cathedral compound, I realized the priest’s car in the parking lot had the engine on. For once I thought someone was in but on a closer look, the door was open as well and no one was close by. “This must be the day I will drive the fast moving car” I convinced myself. I quickly got into the car, spinned around and drove off to the playground. I felt excited as the car was spinning whenever I made a turn. All this while, the cathedral security had been alerted that the car was not in the parking lot. After 25 minutes of enjoying the fast racing car, the security people came and guess what! I was being accused of a lack of respect as well as stealing the car, which is morally wrong. When I tried to explain that I only did that to satisfy my long years of desire, I was confronted by many people around me all who chanted a lack of moral obligation. The priest came after mass and on hearing my story, he insisted that it was morally wrong to take a person’s property without his/her consent. I felt sorry but deep down my heart, I felt a happy man who had finally accomplished a desire he has had for many years. In fact, I made it clear to myself that I will still do the same to satisfy my desires.

Thinking through my experience based on Emmanuel Kant who is a renowned philosopher, this experience speaks volumes on the relationship between happiness and morality. The philosopher in his book Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785), defines happiness as obtaining what one wants though not as pleasure but as a fulfillment of inner desire (Kant, 2018). He, however, goes ahead to note that not every human being is certain to have obtained what really makes them happy. On how happiness related to morality, Kent provides an example of a person who opts to acquire a lot of wealth by stealing thinking that it will eventually make him powerful. However, he ends up living an insecure life and eventually dies. The picture that comes out of the example is of a person who steals because he lacks morals just to satisfy his desires. Kant infers in a conclusion that the more a person gains the reason to live happily, the more the person stays away from true satisfaction because of the guilt of lack of morals. This really takes me back to the incident where I had to take a priest’s car without permission just to satisfy my short term desires of driving a fast-moving car.

According to Kant, the incident drove me away from the real satisfaction because it was not morally right. To me this is absurd. Even though happiness can be short-lived (like what I experienced), the fact that I had had the desire to drive such a car for a long time and took the opportunity presented at the cathedral to satisfy my happens may not amount to lack of moral values.  I agree that I took the car without permission which is morally wrong, but what is it worse than stealing? In my view, there has to be another way that boundaries regarding morality and lack of it is established. 

The topic of morality and happiness cannot end without mentioning the contribution made by Aristotle who argued that the good of man is the utmost end just like happiness is. He also asserts that the only way happiness has to be attained is through a virtuous life. Aristotle places so much emphasis on what makes a man happy and makes it look like it’s only by living a life of virtue that man will claim to be happy. Therefore, it is always morality that sets precedence for happiness and never the other way round. He also asserts that such as ideas and beliefs are fallacies, so is happiness. Happiness can only be an end result of what something has undertaken and never an impetus of what something is about to do. But wait! Does it mean that a person who undertakes anything perceived to be morally wrong is never happy? What if what a person does is ethical and morally right in their own eyes? Who sets the threshold for what is morally right and wrong? For Aristotle to state that happiness can only be an end result of what has been undertaken, to me is like putting the cart before the horse.

From my understanding, happiness is what gives us the idea to undertake the actions whether wrong or right. Furthermore, speaking from the metaphysics point of view, happiness depends on the inertial frame of reference (Hoipkemier, 2018). What may sound to be bad according to society, may be a source of happiness to another party and so the question is, should one forfeit already conceived happiness for what is said to be morally wrong? This question is what guided me to undertake my happiness over what is seen to be wrong. It is the already conceived desire for happiness that resulted in taking the fast racing car for fun. With the consequences coming later (whether morally right or not), the bottom line is happiness if sometimes/ in most times more important than thinking of the moral debate surrounding the very situation. If man were to think of morality for every decision, then the source of happiness is way beyond anyone’s reach. As Aristotle still argues, morality is a virtue for the soul and not just for the body just like happiness is as well implying that both are important. And so why should I deny my soul happiness!