Thursday, January 8, 2009

90% & 1% (No Right to Happiness)

90% of our happiness depends on the outside circumstances which are out of our control. Even though I believe that I can make myself happy as long as I want, in fact, my personal ability can only make up 1% of my own happiness.
Lewis believed that human has no right to happiness. To be always happy is not a human nature. He also agreed with Clare that “behind the laws of the state, there is a Nature Law.” The laws of states have to be based on Natural Laws. “The pursuit of happiness” was written into the Declaration of Independence of the United States. However, it doesn’t mean that human can do “anything” to make them happy. It must have a moral role behind it. And the moral role here is more likely referred to Natural Laws. When a country is making laws, the governors have to make sure that the legal laws are not contradicted to Natural Laws. Otherwise, there will be no right laws exist.
In the article, Lewis gave some examples of right such as he had right to drive on public roads. However, since a civilized country has to be guided by both Natural Laws and legal laws, apparently, there is no absolute freedom. I drew a picture in my mind.

Look at the picture. Suppose the entire paper represents the universe. The circle inside represent legal laws of the country; the circle outside represents Natural Laws created by God. The legal laws are subordinated to Natural Laws. In fact, the actual freedom human have is at the center of the two circles. Since God is in charge of the universe, there is no absolute freedom exist. I also believe that if there is an absolute freedom, life in the world will become a disaster since there is no guideline: people can do whatever they want. If we erase the two circles, robbery, treason, rape and other bad things will happen everyday. To someone who is doing them, they may feel happy; however, for the victims, they will be in miseries for sure.
Plus, as Christians, if there is an absolute freedom or happiness, how can we continue to abbey the Ten Commandments which were written in the Bible?
In this article, Lewis argued the freedom or happiness to have sex. He indicated that Clare’s happiness means “sexual happiness” in particular. “Having sex” is God’s gift to marriage. However, there are some people, who thought that they should have absolute happiness, prefer to have sex before marriage. In other words, they thought they have the right to pursue whatever can make them happy. I like the example Lewis had in his article. Obviously, Mr. A chased his happiness by not considering other people. He simply wanted to live happily. But dose he really have the right to be happy according to the moral roles (Natural Laws)? No. I don’t think he would be happy when he heard the suicide of Mrs. A. Just like what I said in the beginning, there are 90% of human’s happiness depend on outside circumstances. Unfortunely, Mr. A could only make 1% of his happiness.
All in all, I believe that if people want to be happy, they have to follow certain laws and roles first. As Christians, we can not only follow the legal laws but also obey the moral and natural laws which are taught in the Bible. We certainly have a right to happiness, but we just need to find a correct way to get this right. No laws, no freedom nor happiness.

No comments:

Post a Comment