Numerous thinkers contemplated ever-lasting principles of morality and happiness. David Hume suggested his perspective on this phenomenon, stating that if a person is incapable of differentiating between good and evil, then there is some extra-human ability for distinction (“Hume notes for ethics,” n. d.). When claiming that morality is a matter of sentiment, the philosopher presumed that this distinction derives from approval and disapproval. His ideas seem persuasive to me as human ethical decisions are highly dependent on external conditions. Meanwhile, Jean-Jacques Rousseau views morality in terms of positive freedom, meaning that one is capable of integrating themselves into moral standards. Thomas Hobbes also insisted that morality is a matter of taste; yet, his outlook was different since it utterly relies on natural laws, and breaking them is unacceptable (History of ethics, 2019). Rosseau poses the most appealing view of the moral life because it allows understanding that human nature can adjust to the circumstances.
The other philosopher Immanuel Kant suggested that duty and the right intention are the foundation of a morally good deed. It presumes that goodness is an outcome of acting out of obligation – when a person is driven by the need to act benevolently, they receive positive results (History of ethics, 2019). It is a legitimate claim because moral legislation stems from the impact on the will of the universal maxims of reason. Therefore, it is right that many people act for their own sake since Kant distinguished benefiting oneself as a primary duty. In the meantime, Aristotle describes morality in terms of communal good – everyone helps each other first. Hobbes considers the major moral duty to act out of a will to prevent any ethically wrong situation (History of ethics, 2019). In general, Kant and Hume’s views seem most logical to me as they are referred to by many other researchers and are widely applied in modern philosophical theories.
References
History of ethics. (2019). Wiley.
Hume notes for ethics [Lecture notes]. (n. d.).