In this paper I will look at Thomas Aquinas’ discussion from the Summa Contra Gentiles Book III Chapters 27 to 37 examining the pursuit of happiness and the ultimate source of happiness. I will first discuss the various kinds of happiness which Aquinas describes in the Contra Gentiles and how they may appear at first sight to satisfy the definition of happiness. I will then look at why he refutes these pursuits as the true source of happiness. Secondly, I will look at how the knowledge of God, to Aquinas is the ultimate source of happiness for man even though a full understanding is unattainable in this life. I will then defend this argument which I feel supports that happiness is linked to God and why I believe it is a valid argument.
In the Summa Contra Gentiles, Book III, Chapters 27 to 37, Thomas Aquinas in a very systematic fashion describes various pursuits of mankind that although they may be pleasurable they fail to meet the ultimate definition of happiness of which Aquinas speaks. He describes these various pursuits and then explains why they fail to meet the criteria required to be true happiness. To Aquinas the ultimate and most desirable kind of happiness is that which is found in the knowledge of God. These various pursuits’ progress from our most instinctive nature and progress towards more reason based assertions and pursuits.
Beginning with chapter 27, paragraph 1 of the Summa Contra Gentiles, Aquinas states, “it is impossible for human felicity to consist in bodily pleasures, the chief of which are those of food and sex” (Aquinas, 1264) Although, food and sex may indeed be forms of pleasure, they ultimately have a more important purpose than pleasure alone. Food is required in order for the individual to ...
... middle of paper ...
...rldly desires found within riches, power, physicality and his senses. As man becomes further aware, he looks towards the external world in order seek out happiness through, acts of moral virtue, acts of prudence and the representation and appreciation of art. I think that this represents a valid interpretation of Chapters 27-37 of Book III of the Summa Contra Gentiles and presents a very clear representation of the stages through which man progresses in the pursuit of happiness. Ultimately, if man continues on this journey of self-discovery he will find the ultimate happiness he seeks through the contemplation of those things greater than man himself, and that is the contemplation of God.
Works Cited
Aquinas, T. (1264). Contra Gentiles. Book Three Questions 27 -37 translated by Vernon J. Bourke Retrieved from: http://dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles.htm
Christian faith adamantly states that the belief in one God will set you on the path to inner peace and true happiness. Christians, Ancius Boethius and Susan C. Stark, agree that the acceptance of God and his teachings is the only way to achieve peace and happiness. Boethius writes about his own wavering path to happiness in The Consolations of Philosophy. Lady philosophy, like Jesus, teaches Boethius what the true “goods” of the world are, that God has complete control and knowledge, evil has no real substance and ultimately, that through God, he can attain true happiness. Susan C. stark parallels these teachings in her article, Where peace comes from. The many interrelating ideas of Boethius and Stark’s works shed light on the Christian values, teaching and essentially, the path to happiness.
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.”
... divine law and letting reason govern one’s actions, they can achieve complete happiness. One must not totally disregard temporal goods, but their actions should be based on their goods of the will, not temporal goods.
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).
Human beings have faculties more elevated than the animal appetites, and when once made conscious of them, do not regard anything as happiness which does not include their gratification.(2)
Both Plato and Augustine offer unusual conceptions of what one must acquire to live a truly happy life. While the conventional view of happiness normally pertains to wealth, financial stability, and material possessions, Plato and Augustine suggest that true happiness is rooted in something independent of objects or people. Though dissimilar in their notions of that actual root, each respective philosophy views the attaining of that happiness as a path, a direction. Plato’s philosophy revolves around the attainment of eternal knowledge and achieving a metaphysical balance. Augustine also emphasizes one’s knowing the eternal, though his focus is upon living in humility before God. Both assert that human beings possess a natural desire for true happiness, and it is only through a path to something interminable that they will satisfy this desire.
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
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). Also according to Roman Cicero, the bonds between virtue and happiness are very strong, that a virtuous person could still be happy even if he is tortured (McMahon 2006). In addition, Rosalind Hursthouse contended that owning virtue does not essentially result in happiness, as luck plays an irrefutable part in human’s life; however it is the best bet for a good life (Hursthouse 1999). Exactly the same like taking on a healthy routine is the best way for being healthy, although it does not assurance perfect health. In my opinion, there is a strong connection between virtue and happiness, yet there are some exceptions.
Although Adam Smith never distinctly faces the problem of the supreme end of life, nor asks himself whether virtue and morality are merely means to the attainment of happiness, or whether they are ends in themselves irrespective of happiness, he leaves little doubt that happiness really occupies in his system very much the same place that it does in the systems of professed Utilitarians.
In his book of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle writes “Happiness then, is found to be something perfect and self sufficient, being the end to which our actions are directed”. Based on that statement, as a result, one might perceive that all human actions are directed towards one goal of ‘supreme Good’ and ultimate happiness. While most agree that the ‘supreme Good’ is what one achieves by happiness, the definition and constitution of this happiness remains a debate. At the same time, the study of this ‘supreme Good’ can clearly be seen as a political science, as the role of politics is the creation and protection of the highest possible means of human life. Then, it becomes evident that whatever one
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
What does it mean to be happy? Happiness is a sensation that people want to have, and a lot of it. Above all else in the world, it’s what we seek and long for. Though this feeling can be found in many different places and at many different times, it isn’t easy to acquire. For some people, happiness might be found in exercise and sustaining good health. On the other hand, others can discover it when they go on vacation and relax. The idea here is that we each have our own things that make us happy.
For our Economics subject, we watched The Pursuit of Happyness, a movie based on Chris Gardner, a salesman who was not making that much money and eventually experiences homelessness with his five-year old son. He faces problems when his wife is unwilling to accept his goal to become a stockbroker and leaves him. However, he perseveres even under all this stress.
Seligman, Aquinas, and Aristotle all emphasize the importance of relationships in achieving happiness. Aquinas held that true happiness required, “love, love of God and love of neighbor”. I found it interesting that Aquinas and Seligman, but not Aristotle, cited marital friendship as a source of happiness. I think that perhaps as a Christian, Aquinas recognized this and modern psychology has also come in line with the importance of a healthy marriage. As anticipated, Aquinas considers the most important relationship that between man and God, differing from Aristotle and
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...