Garafalo 1

Jacob Garafalo
Shaelynn Long-Kish
English 111
2/10/16
Morals Do Not Restrict Happiness
Happiness is beautiful, compelling, and elusive; some people spend their entire lives
waiting for happiness to settle in, only to be overwhelmed with appalling disappointment. Life is
a fundamental right to which all humans are entitled, but personal happiness is the sole
determinant of a life well lived. C.S. Lewis, author of We Have No Right to Happiness, came
to the conclusion people must abide by moral obligations when pursuing happiness. Within his
article he explains how infidelity taints the personality of individuals and goes against the morals
society developed. However, Lewiss ideology places happiness dependent upon other people.
When moral standards rule society, the pursuit of happiness is sure to be neglected. According to
Lewis, unwritten rules should be as important as national law. In todays society there are
assortments of different moral arguments: gay marriage, polygamy, religious practices, etc.
Happiness cannot rely on the moral standards of one person, or one even one culture. People
have a right to happiness and are entitled to pursue happiness by all means necessary within the
nationally recognized laws set forth by society. This freedom to pursue happiness is a right
because people are responsible for their own happiness, different cultures have different morals,
and people worldwide have different views on what happiness means to them.
The most important lesson in life is learning people are 100 percent responsible for their
own happiness. From an early age, parents teach children to set goals, go after their goals
wholeheartedly, and remain determined. As people become older, a greater awareness develops

Garafalo 2

which highlights important aspects of life. Once individuals have developed an active, conscious
understanding on what makes them happy, they can begin to take the necessary steps turning
dream into reality. Happiness should be treated the same way people chase their goals, a
passionate pursuit until an ideal state is reached. When referring to moral restrictions within life,
Lewis said, If the laws allow Mr. A to desert his wife and seduce his neighbors wife, then, by
definition, Mr. A has a legal right to do so, and we need bring in no talk about happiness (Lewis
22). This statement is interesting because it shows the view that moral obligations restrict
happiness. However, is it morally wrong for a man to leave his wife, if he is truly unhappy?
There is no point staying in a lifeless relationship, when happiness waits elsewhere. It is only a
matter of time until the relationship breaks down and both spouses become unhappy. Mr. A is
responsible for making himself happy. Although it is unfortunate Mr. As relationship failed, his
wife is not a dictator of his happiness. It is even fair to say that Mr. A is rude and disloyal;
however, the right to pursue happiness within the written law should not be adjusted for the fear
of discourteous people. Happiness remains in the hands of oneself, making it irresponsible to
give someone else control.
Throughout the globe there are assortments of different cultural beliefs on what is
morally acceptable. With a plethora of different belief systems, it is nearly impossible to abide by
a set of universal moral standards. When referring to a man abandoning his wife, Lewis said, It
is an offense against honesty. Mr. A.s action is an offense against good faith (to solemn
promises), against gratitude (toward one to whom he was deeply indebted) and against common
humanity (Lewis 24). It is apparent that Lewis thinks leaving a spouse is morally wrong and
should not be permitted. However, he is only referring to a specific culture of moral guidelines, a
culture which loyalty and a commitment to another human is a value of life. Lewis fails to bring

Garafalo 3

about the idea of other cultures. Polygamy is the practice of having more than one spouse at a
time, and is a popular custom in many parts of the world. A culture which endorses polygamy
would reject Lewiss ideals. Different countries develop written laws, for the purpose of
establishing control and keeping individuals safe. These established laws are the only boundaries
that should be considered when pursuing happiness. Even a single country can have contrasting
views on morals restrictions. In the United States people abide by a variety of different religions
and moral standards, but all beliefs ensure the pursuit of happiness abides by the written law. It
should not be assumed hidden laws exist because different views make society stronger and more
compassionate toward one another.
If you take a look at happiness from a micro perspective, the undisputed conclusion can
be made that everyone has a different perspective on happiness. One persons happiness can be
completely different from anothers. If people have contrasting views on happiness, it would be
foolish to abide by the same moral standards. It is up to people to follow the laws, and abide by
their own personal morals. Morals do not exist in the form of a concrete list. Instead, each person
develops his or her own ideas on what is right and what is wrong. Lewis explained that morals
need to coincide with the law. He said, We thus advance toward a state of society in which not
only each man but every impulse in each man claims carte blanche (Lewis 25). When making
this statement Lewis was referring to a society where morals do not exist and anarchy is the
likely result. However, Lewis does not understand morals exist differently within each person.
The contrasting morals of society are a result of unique definitions of happiness. Therefore, a
single list of universal morals will only confine the pursuit of happiness.
Happiness is the most important abstract emotion an individual can find. In no way,
shape, or form, should the pursuit of happiness be subjected to external morals. When pursuing

Garafalo 4

happiness people are responsible for their own well-being and should not be dependent on
others. Cultures have different views on moral standards and each individual person has his or
her own idea of what happiness is. It is important to realize that morals, though they do exist, are
different within each person. People should pursue happiness abiding by only the law. The
morals they bring to the table are up to them.

Garafalo 5

Work Cited
Lewis, C.S. We Have No Right to Happiness. God in the Docks.C.S. Lewis copyright by C.S.
Lewis Pte. Ltd. 1970.