Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Aristotle's Theory Of The Good Life
Aristotle's Theory Of The Good Life
Aristotle's Theory Of The Good Life
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Aristotle's Theory Of The Good Life
From the time we are born till our death we are always seeking the good life, and for the billions of people on earth, good life can mean many different things.. There are also circumstances in our lives that makes us decide if we are living a good life. For many, having money gives them the greatest joy. While for others becoming educated and giving back to the society is the best life, and there are many more reasons. For me living a good life is about being moral, not pertain to evil and educate myself in order to gain respect from the people around me. However one thing that can be distinguished is that materialistic things like money, jewelry or being evil and hurting others is not a form of true happiness. It is temporary happiness that …show more content…
In my paper I will discuss the question of “are we living a good life” by comparing opinions of philosophers like Socrates, Aristotle and Epictetus from the book “Ethics” by Gordon Marion and what they consider living a good life means. We begin with Socrates, he was a wise philosopher in Athens .He influenced many and at the same time displeased many too. His teaching was viewed to be profound and new, which instilled fear in many Athenians which resulted in him being imprisoned. However Socrates was reluctant to leave Athens and save his life. Why? Wouldn’t he live a happy longer life if he escaped? No, Socrates made his arguments as he quoted “could we live having an evil and corrupted body.” His argument started with him claiming that an evil and corrupted mind and body never finds thrives and lives a good life. Further quoted “Then we ought not to retaliate or render evil for evil for any one….from him” he wants to stay loyal to the people of Athens and most specifically the government. These statements are crucial for the understanding of how one can lead a good …show more content…
Our life experience shape us, some of those experience may be good, some maybe distressing and others may not mean anything. But all of these experience play a huge role at the end of our lives when we ask ourselves if we “lived a good life?” Comparing to Socrates who, despite his imprisonment still considered that he lived a good life and if he broke the law he would become evil and loose his goods. Aristotle argued similarly about living a good life, he quotes “small pieces of good fortune or of its opposite clearly do not weigh down the scales of life one way or the other”. He also quoted “man who is truly good and wise,….all other craftsman” his meaning to his statement is that a man who lived long and experienced life to the fullest, good or bad experiences, is able to ask himself if he lived a good life? Whether the experience is good or bad does not matter it is the end result that counts, at the end if a man lived honestly and found good in everything than yes, he did live good life. One the second quote he further argues that a man that is able to make any circumstances play to his favor is a good man .A man that makes use of his resources and never let evil get to him will continue to enjoy life to the fullest as quoted by Aristotle “happy man can never be miserable” .This supports my theory about, to not letting evil concern us is key to achieve happiness
...dditionally, Socrates believed that escaping would show that the people who tried him and found him guilty that they had in fact done the right thing. This would further their assumptions that he was corrupting the minds of people by running away and disobeying the law. If he had escaped, he may have been invalidated and may not be as important historically as he is today. Whether or not it made an impact on Athens or the rest of the world, Socrates did what he believed was right for himself and for the people. I believe that Socrates did what was honorable at the time. His honor and incite in to the way that people should live has been carried on through history is proof that people still value his ideas and reasoning.
Humans, throughout recorded history, have searched for a proper way of living which would lead them to ultimate happiness; the Nicomachean Ethics, a compilation of lecture notes on the subject written by Greek philosopher Aristotle, is one of the most celebrated philosophical works dedicated to this study of the way. As he describes it, happiness can only be achieved by acting in conformity with virtues, virtues being established by a particular culture’s ideal person operating at their top capacity. In our current society the duplicity of standards in relation to virtue makes it difficult for anyone to attain. To discover true happiness, man must first discover himself.
The people in Athens are still respect him, that is why they will treat him seriously and put him in jail. Drifting away the idea of justice, Socrates’s idea challenges the society. Each society has its limit to tolerate, the behavior of Socrates provoke the authority of Athens openly. In this case, Socrates die for the insistence of his own
Socrates reaches a conclusion that defies a common-sense understanding of justice. Nothing about his death sentence “seems” just, but after further consideration, we find that his escape would be as fruitless as his death, and that in some sense, Socrates owes his obedience to whatever orders Athens gives him since he has benefited from his citizenship.
First, he believed that escape is a manifestation of fear of death, which according to him, no philosopher to do so. Second, If he escaped from Athens, then his teachings cannot be satisfactory in any other place where he had queried people he met and not responsible for the unsatisfactory them. Third, by accepting to live under a state law, he was completely subjugated himself to be accused by other citizens and it court are said to be guilty – this is entirely consistent with the Socrates was living honest, respect the law and the truthfulness till the last minute of his
(37) The problem is that many of the citizens of Athens who wanted Socrates dead, lacked that emotional intelligence and thought highly of themselves. So of course they become defensive when Socrates sheds light on the idea that they may be wrong. As someone who cared most about the improvement of the soul, Socrates would have made a constructive role model to the criminals of Athens, as he would go on saying, “virtue is not given by money, but that from virtue comes money and every other good of man…”(35) Socrates was able to benefit everyone alike as he had human wisdom- something that all the Athenians could relate
Simply defined, happiness is the state of being happy. But, what exactly does it mean to “be happy?” Repeatedly, many philosophers and ideologists have proposed ideas about what happiness means and how one attains happiness. In this paper, I will argue that Aristotle’s conception of happiness is driven more in the eye of ethics than John Stuart Mill. First, looking at Mill’s unprincipled version of happiness, I will criticize the imperfections of his definition in relation to ethics. Next, I plan to identify Aristotle’s core values for happiness. According to Aristotle, happiness comes from virtue, whereas Mill believes happiness comes from pleasure and the absence of pain. Ethics are the moral principles that govern a person’s behavior which are driven by virtues - good traits of character. Thus, Aristotle focuses on three things, which I will outline in order to answer the question, “what does it mean to live a good life?” The first of which is the number one good in life is happiness. Secondly, there is a difference between moral virtues and intellectual virtues and lastly, leading a good life is a state of character. Personally and widely accepted, happiness is believed to be a true defining factor on leading a well intentioned, rational, and satisfactory life. However, it is important to note the ways in which one achieves their happiness, through the people and experiences to reach that state of being. In consequence, Aristotle’s focus on happiness presents a more arguable notion of “good character” and “rational.”
Another reason Socrates did not escape prison was his obligation to his city. Again, this ties to Socrates need for consistency, when manhood is reached in the city of Athens the citizens comply with the laws of Athens, and if they do not they are to leave the city. So, given this, Socrates must assent to the laws of Athens because he agreed they were just, whether he was wrongly accused or not. Socrates also towards the end of his life becomes certain of the afterlife, that it either must end in eternal sleep or you pass into a spiritual Transcension. Given the dilemma of a planned death, Socrates is given the opportunity to die a good person knowing he has committed no wrong, which is likely why he is content at the end of his life.
Socrates, according to Plato challenged the norms of society by questioning life and having others question it as well. He was labeled of “corrupting the youth” and for not believing in the Athenians gods. “Socrates is guilty of corrupting the young, and of not acknowledging the gods the city acknowledges, but new daimonic activities instead.” (The Apology, pp 654) Although, he was cast by being “corrupt”, Socrates had many followers that saw him as a wise man. Socrates trial was made up of thirty jurors, who were later known as “The Thirty.” The “Thirty” really wanted was to silence Socrates, rather than taking his life. However, Socrates did not want to disobey the laws, he did not want to be violated of his right to freedom of speech, nor did he did he want to be undermine his moral position. (The Apology, pp. 647) He stood against injustice acts several times while he was in counsel. “I was the sort...
In Plato’s dialogue Crito, you can find Crito offering escape from demise to Socrates. This would be enough to make most men succumb to their survival instinct and flea but Socrates takes a different path. Socrates reasons through the escape with Crito. He logically comes to the fact that one shouldn’t do wrong when wronged or do harm when harmed (49b-c). He then draws the conclusion that escaping prison would harm the citizens, laws, and whole city of Athens (50b). As Athens is his home, Socrates feels he owes everything to his city, he feels compelled to follow the laws and decisions of its courts. He likens a home city to a parent, saying that to bring violence against one’s city would be sacrilegious as it would be with a parent (51c). In Socrates’ mind he would not wrong Athens because it made him the man he stands to be. All the knowledge, wisdom, and high regard he holds is because of Athens, and so he refuses to
One of Aristotle’s conclusions in the first book of Nicomachean Ethics is that “human good turns out to be the soul’s activity that expresses virtue”(EN 1.7.1098a17). This conclusion can be explicated with Aristotle’s definitions and reasonings concerning good, activity of soul, and excellence through virtue; all with respect to happiness.
Aristotle once stated that, “But if happiness be the exercise of virtue, it is reasonable to suppose that it will be the exercise of the highest virtue; and that will be the virtue or excellence of the best part of us.” (481) It is through Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics that we are able to gain insight into ancient Greece’s moral and ethical thoughts. Aristotle argues his theory on what happiness and virtue are and how man should achieve them.
...ns. Why would he do this if he did not see the laws of Athens as just? In order to fulfill the agreement he has made with Athenian law, Socrates must accept the punishment he is given, though he feels that his being punished is Athens wronging him. It would be wrong, by his view, to escape from prison, though he would not be pursued, because he would be breaking his agreement to obey Athenian law. Since he and Crito previously agreed that one must never do wrong, he simply must stay in jail until his death. This is merely one example of the way in which Socrates uses a method of logical dialogue in order to make his point. He appears to be unmatched in his skills of deduction and consistently demonstrates his love of knowledge and truth. Socrates exemplifies all that is philosophy, both as a student and a teacher, because of his constant, active pursuit of wisdom.
Question: What is Aristotle’s idea of a good life and why does he view a good life in this way? Is Aristotle’s understanding of a good life accurate? Why or why not? (Make sure to talk about the concept of the mean).
According to Aristotle, the good life is the happy life, as he believes happiness is an end in itself. In the Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle develops a theory of the good life, also known as eudaimonia, for humans. Eudaimonia is perhaps best translated as flourishing or living well and doing well. Therefore, when Aristotle addresses the good life as the happy life, he does not mean that the good life is simply one of feeling happy or amused. Rather, the good life for a person is the active life of functioning well in those ways that are essential and unique to humans. Aristotle invites the fact that if we have happiness, we do not need any other things making it an intrinsic value. In contrast, things such as money or power are extrinsic valuables as they are all means to an end. Usually, opinions vary as to the nature and conditions of happiness. Aristotle argues that although ‘pleasurable amusements’ satisfy his formal criteria for the good, since they are chosen for their own sake and are complete in themselves, nonetheless, they do not make up the good life since, “it would be absurd if our end were amusement, and we laboured and suffered all our lives for the sake of amusing ourselves.”