Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Aristotle's view of happiness
Aristotle’s theory of virtue
Aristotle's view of happiness
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Aristotle's view of happiness
Aristotle's View
Is life really about the 'money', the 'cash', the 'hoes', who has the biggest gold chain or who drives the shiniest or fastest car, who sells the most albums or who has the most respect? Aristotle challenges views, which are similar to the ones held and shown by rap artists such as Jay-Z and the Notorious B.I.G., by observing that everything in the universe, including humans, has a telos, or goal in life. He states that the goal of a human life is to achieve happiness or eudaimonia. I believe that Aristotle is completely correct in his reasoning of the purpose of human nature. He even explains how happiness is different for every person, and each different type of person has a different idea of eudaimonia. He then goes on to talk about how a person must do all things in moderation, not doing the excess but at the same time doing just enough. This idea, called the "golden mean of moderation" was the backbone support to Aristotle's idea of human telos because it concluded that living a virtuous life must be the same for all people because of the way human beings are built.
Aristotle argued that the goal of human beings is happiness, and that we achieve happiness when we fulfill our function. Therefore, it is necessary to determine what our function is. The function of a thing, or its telos, is what it alone can do, or what it can do best. Like the function of the eye is to see, Aristotle declared the human being as the "rational animal" whose function...
Melissa is more likely to be attracted to Aristotle’s basic orientation and his view on the soul. Melissa’s mind set leans more towards the scientific thought process when it comes to life and death. Like Aristotle her beliefs are more of the here and now. Making due with the reality put in front of them. Even though Melissa’s thoughts and beliefs mostly come with facts she still has some belief that there is something beyond the body that makes Matthew who he is, Matthew. But with that belief she also thinks without brain function there is no Matthew to save. It is a body with no ability to think and live. So like Aristotle she does think that there is a soul that is a part of our bodies. But without the ability to think then you are not living.
A question I have been asked more often than not, “What would you rather be if not a doctor?” Well, my journey as a doctor has seen a share of crests and troughs, but I will not have it any other way. I am a book lover, and every good read is time saved; I have trekked mountains, and every step brought forth a sense of achievement; I have been recognized for my English debating skills many a time. Every cup held was precious, but none of it so fulfilling and rewarding as another human being trusting you with his breath. This texture of human relationships is unique to this profession, and is probably what makes it sublime to the eyes of a common man.
In conclusion, Aristotle’s elucidation of happiness is based on a ground of ethics because happiness to him is coveted for happiness alone. The life of fame and fortune is not the life for Aristotle. Happiness is synonymous for living well. To live well is to live with virtue. Virtue presents humans with identification for morals, and for Aristotle, we choose to have “right” morals. Aristotle defines humans by nature to be dishonored when making a wrong decision. Thus, if one choses to act upon pleasure, like John Stuart Mill states, for happiness, one may choose the wrong means of doing so. Happiness is a choice made rationally among many pickings to reach this state of mind. Happiness should not be a way to “win” in the end but a way to develop a well-behaved, principled reputation.
Aristotle argues that the human function is activity of the soul that expresses or requires reason. This argument is found in Nicomachean Ethics approximately between Bekker lines 1097b24 and 1098a9.
Aristotle begins his ethical account by saying that “every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and every choice, is thought to aim for some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim” (line 1094a1). Though some things might produce higher good than others, Aristotle looks for the highest good, which he says we must “desire for its own sake” and our actions are not decided on some other goal beyond this good itself (line 1094a20-25).[1] This highest good is then realized to be happiness (line 1095a16-20).
In Book I of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle states that the ultimate human goal or end is happiness. Aristotle then describes steps required for humans to obtain the ultimate happiness. He also states that activity is an important requirement of happiness. A virtuous person takes pleasure in doing virtuous things. He then goes on to say that living a life of virtue is something pleasurable in itself. The role of virtue to Aristotle is an important one, with out it, it seems humans cannot obtain happiness. Virtue is the connection one has to happiness and how they should obtain it. My goal in this paper is to connect Aristotle’s book of Nicomachean Ethics to my own reasoning of self-ethics. I strongly agree with Aristotle’s goal of happiness and conclude to his idea of virtues, which are virtuous states of character that affect our decision making in life.
From the first email being composed and sent in 1971 to the creation of Facebook in 1994, online communication strategies in higher education has changed tremendously (Bennett, 2013). There are increasing social channels to reach more diverse and widespread populations, and the vast array of internet-based tools continues to grow (Cruz, 2012). Social media has evolved into networks of knowledgeable people, working across time and space to make informed decisions and solve intricate problems (Bingham & Conner, 2010). Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, YouTube, blogs and forums are all examples of social media tools that provide ways to engage with other people online and form long-term or short-term relationships (Fouts, 2009). According to a study done at Hardin-Simmons University, 92 percent of colleges are using social media in concurrence with their official websites (Greenwood, 2012). In order stay abreast of the shifting demographics of students, employees, alumni and other constituencies, leaders in higher education must readjust marketing strategies and traditional communication approaches through the utilization of social media.
As long ago as 350 BC, Aristotle famously wrote that a play must have a beginning, a middle, and an end, which is the beginning of the structure. Over time, dramas evolved, the Roman poet, Horace, advocated for five acts, and many centuries later, a German playwright, Gustav Freytag, developed the five-act structure which is commonly used today to analyze classical and Shakespearean dramas. The first act of these five-act structures consist of an exposition, which allows the reader to be introduced to the time, setting, and characters. The second act introduces the rising action. A rising action normally includes the protagonist of the story to face some sort of conflict or obstacle. The third act produces the climax, which is the turning point in the story. This act creates suspense and keeps the reader on the edge of their seat. The fourth act is the falling action, which wraps up any plot twists or unknown details of the story. The fifth act is the denouement or the resolution, which is the final outcome of the drama. In 1952, Arthur Miller wrote The Crucible, a four-act play, to compare the witch hunts of the Salem Witch Trial to the hunts for communists in the 1900s. Although tragedies are normally constructed into five parts, Miller managed to fit the story into a
Aristotle tries to draw a general understanding of the human good, exploring the causes of human actions, trying to identify the most common ultimate purpose of human actions. Indeed, Aristotelian’s ethics, also investigates through the psychological and the spiritual realms of human beings.
Aristotle’s thoughts on ethics conclude that all humans must have a purpose in life in order to be happy. I believe that some of the basics of his ideas still hold true today. This essay points out some of those ideas.
Michael J. Bugeja, director of the Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication at Iowa State University and author of“Facing the Facebook” in The Chronicle of Higher Education, states that the initial purpose of having access to the Internet in the classroom was to give students the opportunity to conduct research. However, this privilege is rapidly being used as a means for students to not pay attention during class. A poll was taken at Iowa State University where 20,247 out of the 25,741 enrollees were registered on Facebook (Bugeja 1). Social networking sites such as Facebook have had some negative effects in academia such as “institutions seeking to build enrollment learn that ‘technology’ rates higher than ‘rigor’ or ‘reputation’” (2), that there has been improper use of the freedom to use technology in the classroom, that employers and parents check Facebook to see what users have been doing, and that technology is an overall distraction in the classroom.
1.) Aristotle begins by claiming that the highest good is happiness (198, 1095a20). In order to achieve this happiness, one must live by acting well. The highest good also needs to be complete within itself, Aristotle claims that, “happiness more than anything else seems complete without qualification, since we always…choose it because of itself, never because of something else (204, 1097b1). Therefore, Aristotle is claiming that we choose things and other virtues for the end goal of happiness. Aristotle goes on to define happiness as a self-sufficient life that actively tries to pursue reason (205, 1098a5). For a human, happiness is the soul pursuing reason and trying to apply this reason in every single facet of life (206, 1098a10). So, a virtuous life must contain happiness, which Aristotle defines as the soul using reason. Next, Aristotle explains that there are certain types of goods and that “the goods of the soul are said to be goods to the fullest extent…” (207, 1098b15). A person who is truly virtuous will live a life that nourishes their soul. Aristotle is saying “that the happy person lives well and does well…the end
Wang, Qingya, Wei Chen, and Yu Liang. “The Effects of Social Media on College Students.” MBA Student Scholarship 1 Nov. 2011. Print.
Aristotle feels we have a rational capacity and the exercising of this capacity is the perfecting of our natures as human beings. For this reason, pleasure alone cannot establish human happiness, for pleasure is what animals seek and human beings have higher capacities than animals. The goal is to express our desires in ways that are appropriate to our natures as rational animals. Aristotle states that the most important factor in the effort to achieve happiness is to have a good moral character, what he calls complete virtue. In order to achieve the life of complete virtue, we need to make the right choices, and this involves keeping our eye on the future, on the ultimate result we want for our lives as a whole. We will not achieve happiness simply by enjoying the pleasures of the moment. We must live righteous and include behaviors in our life that help us do what is right and avoid what is wrong. It is not enough to think about doing the right thing, or even intend to do the right thing, we have to actually do it. Happiness can occupy the place of the chief good for which humanity should aim. To be an ultimate end, an act must be independent of any outside help in satisfying one’s needs and final, that which is always desirable in itself and never for the sake of something else and it must be
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.”