AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to over 30 million articles from top publications available through your library.
Create a link to this page
Copy and paste this link tag into your Web page or blog:
The Pursuit of Happiness in Times of War
by Carl M. Cannon
(Rowman & Littlefield, 318 pp., $24.95)
In this exceptionally friendly book, journalist Carl Cannon explores what the word "Happiness" means in the famous phrase, "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness," found in the Declaration of Independence. Much of the conceptual power of this phrase derives from its linkage of the three: Life is necessary to liberty, and liberty to the pursuit of happiness. Cannon examines the sources of these words, deep in the traditions of Enlightenment political reflection, and the ways they have reverberated in American history since 1776, used by warriors and presidents, including Washington at Valley Forge.
The Confederates, Cannon notes, could make slavery compatible with it only by deeming slaves partially "men," and of course Lincoln answered this in his Gettysburg Address. George H. W. Bush, World War II flying hero, says here, in a heartwarming response to Cannon's inquiry, that he attained happiness through satisfaction in his family--thus reminding us that the word "happiness," for the Declaration, is a box to be filled in by the individual, its content not prescribed (as by Plato and much classical thought) as philosophical contemplation or (as by Christianity) as prayer and holiness.
While giving Jefferson credit for the "magical phrase," Cannon shows its long prehistory in Enlightenment political theory and the parallel documents of colonies, counties, and towns. In a felicitous passage, Cannon says it more resembles the Mormon Tabernacle Choir than a string quartet: It reflects the mind of the new nation as a whole.
Locke had spoken of life, liberty, and property--explaining that by property he meant the "natural rights of man" not given him by king or ruler--and of the State itself as the basis of a "social contract" between the governed and those who governed them. Prior to this social contract, man was in a mythical State of Nature. Many have asked, as need not be surprising, how a "natural right" as Locke posits it comports with the strict empiricism--sight, hearing, smell, touch, taste, however supplemented by instruments--of his Essay on Understanding. Where, amid his empirical facts, does Locke find a natural law? All or most men may say murder is wrong. But where is the law, as far as empiricism is concerned?