Philosophy started with the search of a wisdom i.e. of an attitude to have in the life.
All the philosophers of which however be of the Masters
of wisdom. Aspired by the temptation of the knowledge, they sometimes forgot wisdom with the profit of science.

Also, Kant (1724-1804) it took the care to recall that the metaphysics questions which the man puts only have of solution practises. Because if it is contradictory to want to prove God or the immortality of the heart by the reason, I is on the other hand necessary to postulate them to guide 1. practical life. And this, because it is essential for us to suppose a perfection in order to perfect us ourselves. Who more is, it is while existing that one includes/understands the existence. From where importance of morals, term which nevertheless often causes many reserves: y-a it not a social conformism which calls "morals" it makes respect a certain number of rules of joint life, while conforming to a standard image delivered by the group to which one belongs?
There is not also a moralism, caricatures morals, which practises conduits of persecution in
"making morals" with those which made faults?

To have moral strength

For the question of social conformism, A is necessary to recall, as well as the Kantfact, that on the contrary morals included/understood well is all except a conformism. Because to live morally consisting in showing "moral fibre", i.e. of will, such an attitude implies a requirement, a fidelity with oneself and a courage absent in the conformism, which by weakness and passivity is always ready to compose with the greatest number and the circumstances.

As for the question of the moralism, it is important of
to underline, like it makes Spinoza(1632-1677), that
morals is not simply moral, but ethical.
Indeed, it is important on the one hand to live with virtue and
to acquire by there a dignity while posing like value
that one cannot do anything with the life
and with the men but it is also important to underline
that our first duty is
to be happy like making happy the others. As well it is true as it is not virtuous to be hated and even less to be unable to make the happiness of its entourage. It is easy to be sad and morose Alain( 1868-1951) recalls. He is to it less smile and to be merry. This is why it specifies that our first duty is to be happy. Morals, ethics, virtue, happiness, all these terms are inseparable. Because if a sad virtue is a sad virtue, very little virtuous at the bottom, a happiness without virtue, that is this if not an unable happiness of itself fault of having itself with itself?
A happiness must have requirements with respect to itself to be able to be a happiness. It is necessary to go worthy to be happy, will say Kant, to recall that morals needs a philosophy, to save moralism as much that to save the happiness of the hedonism *.