Ethical Conduct: Philosophers’ Perspectives on Happiness
Ortega y Gasset believed that a moral person is constitutive of the rational nature of man; it is the very being of man. A man’s moral motivation in life is the natural inclination to be happy, to fill his life with actions that fulfill his sense of existence. Humans, as moral subjects, through ethical and moral choices can either find happiness and fulfillment in life or become bitter and frustrated. Everyone wants to achieve the best for their life, as Aristotle and Aquinas also believed. A wise and good person tries to always do what is morally good, and not succumb to good or bad luck; to achieve inner balance and psychological well-being.
We, like others, have different life choices and existential perspectives, such as different races, trades and professions, and sports. When faced with these choices, we find that some are better suited to our capabilities. We choose our path in life. People have ideals, a set of values, beliefs, and aspirations that serve as models for our behavior. The most positive ideals for human and social relations are recognizing the dignity and equality of persons, achieving peace, achieving ecologically sustainable development, accountability, honesty, and professional integrity, eliminating violent behavior, and respecting human rights. According to Javier Sádaba, behind altruistic behavior is a selfish desire for personal satisfaction. Morality must be universal and universalized; what is valid for one person is valid for all (e.g., do not kill because no one should violate the inalienable dignity of persons). Man is a moral agent embedded within a given society with a code of moral behavior. David Hume believed that the goodness or badness of an act is a feeling of approval or disapproval of subjects to a moral act.
From the beginning of moral reflection on the ethical conduct of human beings, there has been a rational effort to answer the great questions of human existence: Who am I? Where do I come from? How must I live to be fulfilled and happy? Ethics has attempted to answer these transcendent questions. Epicurus believed that philosophical reflection on the moral life of man is an activity that seeks a happy life, and man must know himself as Socrates suggested. For the Stoics, those who do good and act virtuously, following a straight and honest moral conduct, are happy. Aristotle considered that one would be happy to practice the ethical virtues, developing good habits of behavior to achieve moral good. In the Middle Ages, Thomas Aquinas considered love as the appetite or the tendency of man toward the moral good, which everyone pursues to feel happy. This love will, in the first instance, as also for Aristotle, be self-love, love for others, and love for things. But self-love is not synonymous with selfishness; it is love for the best in us. Thomas Hobbes believed that happiness is wanting and desiring objects evenly: pleasure as an end in itself. In the European Enlightenment thought of the eighteenth century, apart from self-love or rational egoism with the calculated and prudent pursuit of one’s own happiness, there is the principle of benevolence, which is philanthropy. Nietzsche, in the nineteenth century, believed that we do all that we do ethically to strengthen our will to existential power. Today, in our post-industrial, technologically advanced, and globally connected society, being happy, on a private level, means making sense of life by having a home, children, work, and prospering economically. Scientific and technological progress has brought a high level of collective welfare. Philosophers such as Heidegger or Sartre think that man is a “being towards death”, which is why we should take advantage of the small moments of happiness, pleasure, or satisfaction. According to Spinoza, this would be a relative and evanescent happiness that evaporates.