Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The value of philosophy bertrand russell essay
Emerson's philosophy
Emerson's philosophy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The value of philosophy bertrand russell essay
What does it mean to live a good life? How does one go about it? What manner of persons should we be? Many philosophers, theologians, and laymen have ruminated on the subject and drawn their own conclusions. Is there only one right answer? Is there a right answer at all? Perhaps there is a fitting solution for all of us, or perhaps we must each devise our own path to the good life. Of the many individuals who have written on this subject, let us delve into the philosophies of three individuals: Aristotle, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Bertrand Russell. Perchance, within the theories of these three philosophers, a common ground may be discovered.
More than twenty-three hundred years ago lived a man named Aristotle (384-322B.C.E.). He lived in a largely polytheistic Greece as a teacher, writer, and orator who eventually founded the Lyceum. (Veatch, 1974) Christianity would not get a foothold for many, many more years. A pupil of Plato’s, and also one of the most well-known and long-respected philosophers, Aristotle didn’t have too many options if he had wanted to stand on the shoulders of giants. (Hunt, 1993) How much relevance can be found in someone’s beliefs from over twenty-three hundred years ago? The answer is surprisingly much. So many great intellectuals and philosophers have stood on Aristotle’s shoulders, that his belief system may spawn a feeling of déjà-vu. How did he feel about living a good life, or pursuing happiness? The Greeks had another word for happiness—to be fair, they had another word for everything. The word is eudaimonia, which actually doesn’t translate directly to happiness, but more toward the concept of “flourishing” or “thriving.” The way to achieve this eudaimonia, he believed, was to embody excellence ...
... middle of paper ...
...ch, and discover that which makes us and others happy outside our selves, thereby connecting ourselves to the universal stream of life? Or should we practice the “Virtual mean” to achieve eudaimonia? That is for you to decide. For every person must decide their own path on this Earth. Fortunately for us all, it is not necessary that we must do it alone.
Works Cited
Emerson, R. W., & Ed. Porte, J. (1983). Emerson, Ralph Waldo: Essays and Lectures. New York: Library of America.
Guignon, C. (1999). The Good Life. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.
Haidt, J. (2006). The Happiness Hypothesis. New York: Basic Books.
Hunt, M. (1993). The Story of Psychology. New York: Anchor Books.
Slater, J. (1994). Bertrand Russell. Bristol: Thoemmes Press.
Veatch, H. B. (1974). Aristotle: A Contemporary Appreciation. Bloomington: Indiana U. Press.
Aristotle accepts that there is an agreement that this chief good is happiness, but that there is a disagreement with the definition of happiness. Due to this argument, men divide the good into the three prominent types of life: pleasure, political and contemplative. Most men are transfixed by pleasure; a life suitable for “beasts”. The elitist life (politics) distinguishes happiness as honour, yet this is absurd given that honour is awarded from the outside, and one’s happiness comes from one’s self. The attractive life of money-making is quickly ruled out by Aristotle since wealth is not the good man seeks, since it is only useful for the happiness of something else.
The meaning of eudaimonia, etymologically, is ‘good spirit’ and it is generally translated as ‘happiness’; in Aristotelian terms, ‘happiness’ represents the highest human good and it is also the representation of the soul’s virtues. The identification of the soul parts as the contributors and main elements for the function of the most important human activity (reasoning), marks the inevitable psychological asset of Aristotle’s thinking; specifically, the classification of human virtues derives from the analysis of the soul’s types, attributing to human beings the ability of reasoning which distinguishes human beings from the rest of ‘natural bodies.’ Indeed, reason exists in two parts of the soul, namely the rational and the appetitive (desires or passions), and so it expresses within two different virtues, the moral and intellectual ones.
Emerson, Ralph Waldo. The American Scholar ; Self-reliance ; Compensation. N.p.: American Book, 1893. Print.
From examining ends and goods, Aristotle formulates eudaimonia. He questions “what is the highest of all the goods achievable in action?” (Shafer-Landau 2013, 616). Aristotle argues that the majority of people agree that the highest good is achieving happiness, however, they disagree over what happiness actually is, for example, some claim t...
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.”
Happiness is often viewed as a subjective state of mind in which one may say they are happy when they are on vacation with friends, spending time with their family, or having a cold beer on the weekend while basking in the sun. However, Aristotle and the Stoics define happiness much differently. In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle describes happiness as “something final and self-sufficient, and is the end of action” (NE 1097b20). In this paper, I will compare and contrast Aristotle and the Stoics’ view on human happiness. Aristotle argues that bodily and external goods are necessary to happiness, while Epictetus argues they are not.
Ralph Waldo Emerson, nineteenth century poet and writer, expresses a philosophy of life, based on our inner self and the presence of the soul. Emerson regarded and learned from the great minds of the past, he says repeatedly that each person should live according to his own thinking. I will try to explain Emerson’s philosophy, according to what I think is the central theme in all his works. “Do not seek answers outside yourself”. This is the main idea of Waldo’s philosophy.
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.
Happiness is a challenging emotion or state of mind that is hard to define. It is remarkably difficult because every person on earth has a dissimilar view on happiness. Happiness should be understood as something that fulfills the person’s abilities. If he or she achieves happiness, then that equates to a balance of pleasure, honor, and self-sufficiency. Aristotle believes the greatest good is happiness. He describes happiness as, “an activity that is guided by and exercises the human virtues” (60). Is the highest good happiness? What are the characteristics of good? Do we all require habituation to become good? Such questions as these stirs up emotional reactions among debates of the topic.
What establishes a noble, valuable, enjoyable life? Many philosophers tried their own beliefs to these ancient and most persistent of philosophical question. Most of Philosophers have agreed that the best possible life is a life where the ideas of “virtue” and “happiness” are fulfilled. Nevertheless expected differences in terms, many great minds theorized that the road to a joyful, flourishing, happy life is paved with virtues. For example, Aristotle believed that anyone keen to live a virtuous life will reach happiness (Aristotle 1992).
The Selected Writings of Ralph Waldo Emerson. Ed. Brooks Atkinson. New York: Modern Library, 1950.
It was Aristotle’s belief that everything, including humans, had a telos or goal in life. The end result or goal was said to be happiness or “eudaimonia”. He explained that eudaimonia was different for each person, and that each had a different idea of what it meant. Further, he said that people must do things in moderation, but at the same time do enough. The theory, of “the golden mean of moderation” was the basis to Aristotle's idea of the human telos and concluded that living a virtuous life must be the same for all people. Aristotle maintained that the natural human goal to be happy could only be achieved once each individual determined his/her goal. A person’s telos is would usually be what that individual alone can do best. Aristotle described the humans as "rational animals" whose telos was to reason. Accordingly, Aristotle thought that in order for humans to be happy, they would have to be able to reason, and to be governed by reason. If a person had difficulty behaving morally or with ethics, he was thought to be “imperfect”. Moral virtue, a principle of happiness, was the ability to evade extremes in behavior and further to find the mean between it and adequacy. Aristotle’s idea of an ideal state was one where the populous was able to practice eth...
McManaman, D. (n.d.). Aristotle and the Good Life. lifeissues.net. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/mcm/ph/ph_01philosophyyouth14.html
We might not have the same opinions, paths, and ways of living; but we all, millions of people around the world, share the same purpose of life: Being able to say “I am having a good life!” What we mean by “good life” is living in pure happiness and having a wonderful peace of mind. The difference between us is that each one of us chooses a different way in his pursuit of happiness. Some find it in stability with a big house, a family, and a good paying job. Some find it in adventure and wildness, travel, and taking risks. While others don’t really have specific criteria or an organized plan, they just believe that happiness comes with living each day as if it was the last, with no worries about the rest. Personally, I find it in trying to be the best version of myself, in staying true to my principles, and in the same time in being able to make my own decisions; which reminds me of what George Loewenstein said “Just because we figure out that X makes people happy and they're choosing Y, we don't want to impose X on them.”
...that happiness is not found in amusement for it is too incongruous to end in amusement, and that our efforts and sufferings would be aimed at amusing ourselves. A flourishing life—a happy life, is one that consists of numerous requirements having been fulfilled to some degree. These include those things that preserve and maintain physical welfare such as, a certain level of material wellbeing, health, satisfaction, good familial and friendship bonds, and a comely appearance. Additionally, certain intellectual and moral needs ought to be met as well. It is a well-ordered and just state and community that preserves the freedom to have such a life. Thus, eudaimonia—happiness—for Aristotle is an inclusive notion consisting of life in accordance with intellectual and moral virtues, rational contemplation, and securing certain physical needs, such that one is flourishing.