Expanding on Plato’s theory of the good through the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle wished to share what he believed to be the way in which mankind is meant to live and achieve Eudaimonia. In other words the ethics represent his theory of the good and the virtues, which we must follow in order to live a truly happy, prosperous and successful life. Aristotle also spends a great deal of time (roughly 3 books) discussing the importance and value of friendship, a subject not commonly associated with ethics. However, Aristotle includes a discussion on friendship in his ethics as he views true friendship as the ultimate culmination of his stated virtues and believes that they are the backbone/glue holding society together for the greatest common/shared …show more content…
He states the problem that no person willingly does anything bad. Every decision and choice we make, we deem as good, as no one ever makes a conscious bad/wrong choice; we make choices rationally thinking they are good(1141b). These choices each serve a purpose or telos, in other words they are all means to an end. Thus, rationally speaking the best activity or highest end would be something that is an end in itself. This means that the best activities are those that are done for their own sake with no further goal/telos. For Aristotle this higher goal is happiness(1097b1-6) . To understand how something can be an end in itself one can ask why one is doing something (what is the goal?). If the reason is anything other than “just because” or happiness, then there is a further reason and the activity is not an end in itself. Happiness is thus the ultimate good, making the goal of the ethics to help us best achieve our telos of happiness and achieving the wealth, success, and fulfilment of eudaimonia. Happiness for Aristotle is more than just a feeling or emotion; it is a way of life. Our happiness is dependant on the choices we make. Aristotle then explains how our choices are determined by our character or ethos. However, this does not mean that the ethics help determine right from wrong, but more shows us how to live a virtuous and happy life. This happiness for Aristotle expands far beyond just the personal sphere, but extends into the group or
In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle argues that the human good is the soul’s activity that expresses virtue. Aristotle concludes this from an invalid argument. On the one hand I do agree that the activity expressing virtue is a requirement for the human good. But on the other hand, I insist that the human good is a state and not an action. By modifying this argument, I believe we can reach a new conclusion that will help us better understand what Aristotle meant by these concepts.
Happiness, or eudaimonia, according to Aristotle, is defined simply as human flourishing. The act of flourishing
In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Book ll, he explains that virtue is a habit of right action, formed by acting rightly (Nicomachean Ethics, p. 71). What he means by this is that everyone has the chance to act virtuously, but we must for work at doing what is right. Aristotle thought we should be virtuous because if we live virtuously than we will have a better life over
According to Aristotle, an individual can achieve happiness only by realizing all the works and activities in accordance with reason throughout his lifetime. He claimed that happiness consists in cultivating and exercising virtue and it is the ultimate purpose of human existence, as stated in his work Nicomachean Ethics “He is happy who lives in accordance with complete virtue and is sufficiently equipped with external goods, not for some chance period but throughout a complete life”. However, such Aristotelian concept of happiness inevitably contradicts the understanding of history as development which maintains that fulfilling the work of human exceeds the limits of an individual and thus can only be achieved in the course of history. Three
“Every skill and every inquiry, and similarly every action and rational choice, is thought to aim at some good; and so the good has been aptly described as that which everything aims. But it is clear that there is some difference between ends: some ends are activities, while others are products which are additional to the activities. In cases where there are ends additional to the actions, the products are by their nature better than activities.” (Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics, as translated by Crisp, 2000, p. #3) Aristotle was the first philosopher who wrote a book on ethics titled, Nichomachean Ethics.
The main topic of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is eudaimonia, i.e. happiness in the “living well” or “flourishing” sense (terms I will be using interchangeably). In this paper, I will present Aristotle’s view on the role of external goods and fortune for the achievement of happiness. I will argue that he considers them a prerequisite for virtue. Their contribution to happiness is indirect, via the way they affect how we can engage in rational activity according to the relevant virtues. I will then object that this view threatens to make his overall account of happiness incoherent.
This principle lies at the heart of the great-souled man, the first of Aristotle’s peaks of humanly excellence. The great-souled man is chiefly concerned with—and strikes the mean with—external goods. The greatest of these goods is “the one that we assign to the gods, and at which people of high standing aim most of all, and which is the prize given for the most beautiful deeds; and of this kind is honor” (67:1123b19-21). A man who has achieved greatness of soul is deserving of great honors, but more importantly, he understands his own desert and acts appropriately.
He describes the objection as, “all men desire the apparent good, but have no control over the appearance, but the end appears to each man in a form answering to his character” (1114b). This view argues that all people pursue that which seems good, but some people cannot see the true good, which is out of their control. The immediate implication of this objection, if it is indeed true, suggests that “no one is responsible for his own evildoing” (1114b).
It is critical to recognize Mill’s argument that a degree of contentment can exist in periods of less happiness. However, Aristotle’s view of perceiving wellbeing or goodness as ultimate is more pronounced. Worth emphasizing, Aristotle deeply explores his arguments basing them on functions of a rational man and virtues out of habits. Today, a virtuous citizen is one whose actions are inward, in response to conscience and moral obligations as a member of society. Such a person, not waivered with intensities of pleasures, honor, and wealth but seeks to have a satisfactory level of happiness with friends, co-workers, and family among other
Since “any action is well performed when it is performed in accordance with the appropriate virtue”(1098a15), a good performance of function (which is a display of goodness) is virtuous. For example, a good lyre player is a virtuous player. In the previous part, he concludes that function of humans is rational activity, or the soul acting in accordance to reason. In humans’ case, a good performance of rational activity is thus a display of virtue. For example, as morality is a part of rationale, the good performance of morality can lead an individual towards a virtuous and good life.
Therefore, if one wishes to be healthy, he can choose to eat healthy and practice sports, but his choice of being healthy just by its own will not predict the outcome of actually being healthy. Conclusively, “choice relates to the means and wish relates rather to the end”. Additionally, Aristotle also expatiates on anger and appetite. These characteristics, for Aristotle are related to pleasure and feelings which are themselves relate to all animals. However, choice is not for that choice is only related to rational beings.
In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, the concept of happiness is introduced as the ultimate good one can achieve in life as well as the ultimate goal of human existence. As Aristotle goes on to further define happiness, one can see that his concept is much different from the 21st-century view. Aristotelian happiness can be achieved through choosing to live the contemplative life, which would naturally encompass moralistic virtue. This differs significantly from the modern view of happiness, which is heavily reliant on material goods. To a person in the 21st-century, happiness is simply an emotional byproduct one experiences as a result of acquiring material goods.
He believes that people do bad things due to the fact that they cannot control their evil sometimes. The two theories he defines state that either we do things "in ignorance" where we don 't know that we are missing out on information, or "by ignorance", where we chose to not know or not want to know the information. In order to fulfill the human function, each philosopher has created their own ideas of what humans should do in order to live a successful life.
At the end of everyone’s lives, the goal appears to be about attaining happiness. Describing how to obtain happiness has been an issue that was debated in the past but is still talked about now . In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle expands on his view of happiness and he focuses particularly on how reason helps recognize and pursue what will lead to happiness and the good life. I feel that Aristotle’s philosophies on happiness are important works within the field of philosophy and he considered one of the………of it . In this paper, I will explore Aristotle’s beliefs regarding happiness then compare and contrast them to those of Martin Seligman.
For Aristotle, happiness is the end and purpose of human existence. To pursue happiness is to go for telos. Happiness is neither pleasure nor virtue, but an exercise of virtue. Happiness cannot be achieved until the end of one’s life. Hence, it is a goal not a temporary state.