Analysis Of We Have No Right To Happiness

C.S. Lewis’s “We Have No “Right to Happiness” presents an idea behind the thoughts of moral law and the law of the state. Lewis begins with the story of Mr. and Mrs. A, and develops his argument through this confrontation with Claire and there view points on the subject. Claire’s perspective is that you are given the lawful right to pursue happiness in any shape or form given that it is not wrong in the eyes of the law. Lewis argument goes beyond the eyes of the law, given that we have a moral duty to do the right thing in the eyes of God, which is seen as natural law. The argument is presented by Lewis to the men of his time due to the fact that Lewis believes that man will die at heart if we continue to develop into a civilization that only

and Mrs. A, who has lost their marriage due to Mr. A leaving his wife to pursue someone else that will cause him to be happier than he was before with his wife. Claire, the woman speaking to Lewis on the subject, provides a perspective that Lewis is presenting to his audience that people may have the right to be happy in any way that is right in the eyes of the law but doesn’t make it morally right. This opens up the comparison Lewis makes that a right to happiness makes as much sense as the right to be six feet tall. This proceeds Lewis’s thought and argument against Claire. Lewis presents this allegory in order to show a real life situation to present to his audience how the world has become based on the law of the state rather than moral law. Claire believes in the idea that Mr. A had the right to pursue this new life with Mrs. B; although, Lewis exposes this belief with adding the thought that Mr. A could very well leave Mrs. B to pursue happiness with someone else. Mr. A and all others spoke of previously, including Claire, in this story never have an impact as Lewis only speaks of them; This leads me to believe that all of these characters Lewis has spoken about our fictional, in the efforts to present a common moral law that people tend to break. This allegory excellently opens up the persuasiveness argument that Lewis then begins to speak about that is the base of this entire argument that humanity must change their ways in order for us not to become morally