Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on aristotle nicomachean ethics
Aristotle vs plato view on happiness
Aristotle vs plato view on happiness
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on aristotle nicomachean ethics
In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle asserts that happiness signifies man’s ultimate purpose in life. He believed happiness was a natural purpose obtained in this life by living with moral and intellectual virtue. In The City of God, St. Augustine contrasts Aristotle by asserting humans have a supernatural purpose and therefore people can’t obtain happiness in this life. True happiness, as an unchanging state of eudaimonia, is everlasting and obtained by establishing peace of the soul and body. Humans are created with a supernatural purpose because they are inclined to suffering on earth, can’t be eternally happy on earth, and therefore can only achieve eternal happiness through supernatural means in heaven.
Humans are inclined to suffering on earth. Suffering has been unavoidable for humans since Adam and Eve’s original sin. Evil, as an unwavering opponent to the supreme good, constantly creates misfortune for mankind. Augustine wisely notes that, “There is no pain of body, driving out pleasure, that may not befall the wise man, no anxiety that may not banish calm,” (139). Every human on earth is exposed to the cruelties of this world
…show more content…
and therefore must endure the suffering that results. Furthermore, as mankind continues to grow and develop, so does the amount of chaos that occurs. Augustine notes, “The bigger the community, the fuller it is of misfortunes,” (142). As earth’s population increases exponentially, it is vulnerable to an increasing number of wrongdoings, and therefore will continue to provide a platform for human suffering. It is impossible for an individual to be eternally happy if he is constantly surrounded by evil. The inevitable suffering that occurs on earth clearly has a negative effect on mankind. Man is created with the natural instinct to love himself, and cherish life. However, a plethora of humans tragically commit suicide each year. When regarding the effects of suffering, it is clear that, “These ills must be very real indeed if they can subdue the very instinct of nature that struggles in every possible way to put death off; overwhelm it so utterly that death, once shunned, is now desired, sought, and, when all else fails, is self inflicted,” (142). Because man is born with the natural tendency to cherish life, something must occur that changes his state of mind to hating life to the point where he desires death. Although the suffering that humans experience does not always result in suicide, suffering clearly has the capacity to negatively affect humans. Because humans are constantly vulnerable to suffering, and therefore its harmful effects, everlasting happiness in this life remains impossible for them to obtain. Heaven, unlike earth, can provide eternal happiness for humans. As Aristotle asserted, humans have an end purpose of happiness. Therefore, if the happiness is not attainable on earth, then it must be obtained in the afterlife. In order to obtain permanent happiness, an atmosphere of peace is essential, as evil and its harmful effects are absent. Fortunately, the heavenly city has this atmosphere of peace that comes as a result of “a perfectly ordered and harmonious communion of those who find their joy in God and in one another in God,” (152). The heavenly city has constant peace, rather than pain and suffering, which allows humans to achieve their ultimate purpose of permanent happiness. One might argue that humans have a purely natural purpose and happiness is obtainable in this life. Aristotle, in particular, asserted that humans obtained happiness by living virtuously and that after obtaining virtue and therefore happiness, an individual maintains both of those entities for eternity. Thomas Aquinas, as a median between Aristotle and Augustine, asserted in his Summa Theologiae that there was imperfect happiness that is achievable on earth and perfect happiness that is obtainable by supernatural means. Although Aristotle correctly states that humans can obtain happiness in this life, the happiness he discusses is temporary. Humans are susceptible to the atrocities of the world and therefore can’t constantly maintain happiness. An individual loses his physical integrity when he needs an amputation and his beauty can be ruined by sickness. As humans undergo change, so do their emotional states. Inevitably, humans will suffer on earth, and therefore they will not maintain a sustainable, permanent state of happiness. Aquinas is incorrect because if happiness represents the ultimate purpose for humans, it must be eternal. Humans often experience brief moments of joy and exhilaration, but that does not mean they are fulfilling their ultimate purpose of existence. The “temporary happiness” that Aquinas describes does not embody a fulfillment of human’s ultimate purpose and therefore signifies an inadequate objection to Augustine’s assertions that humans have a supernatural purpose. Humans are created with a supernatural purpose because they are naturally inclined to suffering on earth, can’t be eternally happy on earth, and therefore can only achieve eternal happiness through supernatural means in heaven.
Evil endures as a never-ending force in opposition of humans, and causes humans immense suffering. This suffering makes it impossible to truly be happy in this life. Although humans can experience brief moments of happiness on earth, they are not truly happy because their happiness will always be temporary. Rather, people attain true happiness in heaven, where the presence of evil is nonexistent and the atmosphere of peace reigns supreme. Happiness, as the ultimate purpose of man’s existence, is attainable only for individuals in heaven who have earned it from an entire life of living under the word of the
Lord.
suffering hurts man spirit is does more good then constant happiness and power. We have to beat
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.
After reviewing the work of David Hume, the idea of a God existing in a world filled with so much pain and suffering is not so hard to understand. Humes’ work highlights some interesting points which allowed me to reach the conclusion that suffering is perhaps a part of God’s divine plan for humans. Our morals and values allow us to operate and live our daily lives in conjunction with a set of standards that help us to better understand our world around us and essentially allows us to better prepare for the potential life after life. For each and every day we get closer to our impending deaths and possibly closer to meeting the grand orchestrator of our universe.
Despite its prevalence, suffering is always seen an intrusion, a personal attack on its victims. However, without its presence, there would never be anyway to differentiate between happiness and sadness, nor good and evil. It is encoded into the daily lives people lead, and cannot be avoided, much like the prophecies described in Antigone. Upon finding out that he’d murdered his father and married his mother,
From chasing joy to evading misery, it seems as if the ultimate purpose in life is to achieve happiness. However, the question regarding how to define and acquire happiness has continued to be a disputed topic. Beginning back in 350 BC, Aristotle developed and supported his view on human happiness as the fundamental end goal of human life in Nichomachean Ethics. However, others did not universally agree upon Aristotle’s accounts and ideas about happiness. In around 550 BC, Solon preached his own theory on happiness in The Histories, stating that a person’s happiness cannot be determined until death, testing Aristotle’s beliefs. Solon attempts, but fails, to refute Aristotle’s belief that happiness is an eternal, virtuous state, by arguing instead that happiness is subject to change.
Aristotle and Jean-Baptiste Clamence have two distinct views on human nature and reason for happiness. Human nature for Aristotle is that we are the rational and political animals that have a soul. As for Jean-Baptiste, human nature is absurd and that we will fail. Happiness for Aristotle is the rejection of nihilism which is that nothing in this world has real meaning. The greatest form of happiness for Aristotle is what he calls Eudaimonia, which is highest form of life or the life of rationally governed life of contemplation. On the contrary, Jean-Baptiste sulks in the fact that we all have flaws so we fail to be truly happy and the things that we do aren’t really making us happy. Clamence is misinformed with the telos
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.”
From pursuing pleasure to avoiding pain, life seems to ultimately be about achieving happiness. However, how to define and obtain happiness has and continues to be a widely debated issue. In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle gives his view on happiness. Aristotle focuses particularly on how reason, our rational capacity, should help us recognize and pursue what will lead to happiness and the good life.';(Cooley and Powell, 459) He refers to the soul as a part of the human body and what its role is in pursuing true happiness and reaching a desirable end. Aristotle defines good'; as that which everything aims.(Aristotle, 459) Humans have an insatiable need to achieve goodness and eventual happiness. Sometimes the end that people aim for is the activity they perform, and other times the end is something we attempt to achieve by means of that activity. Aristotle claims that there must be some end since everything cannot be means to something else.(Aristotle, 460) In this case, there would be nothing we would try to ultimately achieve and everything would be pointless. An ultimate end exists so that what we aim to achieve is attainable. Some people believe that the highest end is material and obvious (when a person is sick they seek health, and a poor person searches for wealth).
...ath is led by humility, directing one toward a better understanding of God. Perhaps it is not important, however, which source, if either, is the correct root of happiness, but merely that one’s source stretches beyond the margins of what is temporal.
Suffering can be defined as an experience of discomfort suffered by a person during his life. The New York Times published an article entitled what suffering does, by David Brooks (2014). In this article, Brooks explains how suffering plays an important role in our pursuit of happiness. He explains firstly that happiness is found through experiences and then, suffering can also be a motivation in our pursuit of happiness. In other words, suffering is a fearful but necessary gift to acquire happiness. This paper is related to motivation and emotion, two keys words to the pursuit of happiness (King, 2010).
Happiness, to Aristotle, is a term for which much exactitude must be made. He understands that, "Happiness both the refined and the few call it, but about the nature of this Happiness, men dispute." As such, he goes to great lengths to attain a fairly accurate accounting of what he sees as Happiness. He begins by illustrating that Happiness is an End, establishes what he finds the work of Man to be, sets conditions on being happy, and then explains where in Man the cultivation of Happiness is to be sought. The result of all these ideas is his fully developed sense of Happiness, an understanding vital to his conception of Ethics.
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
The pursuit for happiness has been a quest for man throughout the ages. In his ethics, Aristotle argues that happiness is the only thing that the rational man desires for its own sake, thus, making it good and natural. Although he lists three types of life for man, enjoyment, statesman, and contemplative, it is the philosopher whom is happiest of all due to his understanding and appreciation of reason. Aristotle’s version of happiness is not perceived to include wealth, honor, or trivial
Augustine shares with that of Plato and Aristotle that virtue is necessary, but he disagrees that is all of what is needed. He denies that the perfection of one?s character suffices for virtue or happiness. His revelation is that the chief good is happiness. Being the highest good, it cannot be attained in one?s physical life. Brought forth is the balance of the natural realm and the supernatural realm. This consists of the Cardinal Virtues and the Faith Virtues. This means to follow and to love God. To Augustine, achieving salvation is the highest good, therefore happiness.
Happiness can be viewed as wealth, honour, pleasure, or virtue. Aristotle believes that wealth is not happiness, because wealth is just an economic value, but can be used to gain some happiness; wealth is a means to further ends. The good life, according to Aristotle, is an end in itself. Similar to wealth, honour is not happiness because honour emphases on the individuals who honour in comparison to the honouree. Honour is external, but happiness is not. It has to do with how people perceive one another; the good life is intrinsic to the...