EUDEMONISM. – From the Greek ἄνθρωπος (ἀνθρωπος), *bion genio*, and thus “happy”), it is, in a general sense, the moral system that places happiness, whether individual or social, as the end and very essence of morality. If happiness is understood as mere empirical individual pleasure, eudemonism merges with hedonism (v.): if, instead, happiness is identified with interest, private or public, eudemonism coincides with utilitarianism (v.), which in turn varies according to the different conceptions of the useful itself. Proper eudemonism arises when happiness is understood in a rational sense.
This system errs in considering happiness, which is merely a concomitant and consequent element of morality, as its constitutive essence. Psychologically, it is true that man in every action seeks happiness, but the objective ethical end to which human action is bound is first and foremost the realization of moral good, according to the determinations essentially connected with his rational nature, in relation to the attainment of his ultimate end. That this ultimate end coincides with perfect human happiness, to be achieved in a future life—whose negation or at least ignorance constitutes another substantial defect of the ethical systems considered above—is a fact that might justify a correct form of eudemonism; yet it remains true that the objective foundation of moral value is not the formal reason of happiness, but rather the unconditional demand entailed by the ethical-metaphysical categories of order, necessity, law, and obligation. This, moreover, does not reduce the position to the Kantian one: it is indeed possible to act with a view to attaining happiness, whether absolute or relative, and yet preserve the fundamental character of morality in one’s action, provided that it is directed first and foremost toward conformity with the objective order of duty and the good, to which the end of happiness remains subordinate and conditioned.