In Aristotle’s words, he “is one who considers himself worthy of great things, and is worthy of them” (66:1123b3-4). While this description may strike some as arrogant or self-important, in reality the great-souled man finds the appropriate mean and acts in accordance with virtue, “for he assesses himself in accord with his worth, while the others exceed or fall short of theirs” (67:1123b16-17). It is for this reason that Aristotle holds the great-souled
With true friendship, friends love each other for their own sake (not for pleasure or usefulness), and they wish good things for each other. True friendship is lasting friendship. A complete friendship, according to Aristotle depends on similarity in virtue. "Perfect friendship is the friendship of men who are good, and alike in virtue; for these wish well alike to each other qua good, and they are good themselves." (NE; bk.8; ch.3) True friends must be virtuous, therefore bad and un-virtuous men cannot be true friends.
This concept can be related to the term eudaimonia, which translates to the flourishing of a human being; a happy and well-lived life. Aristotle argued that the good life would focus to a great extent on contemplation and learning, or acquiring the intellectual virtues. According to Aristotelian theories, to achieve eudaimonia, one must possess arête and telos. Arête can be directly translated as
In his more specific discourse on the nature of happiness, Aristotle comes to the conclusion that happiness lies in the contemplative life because “contemplation is the highest form of activity” (Aristotle 268). Aristotle views the activities of the mind to be the most sophisticated element of human life, and thus he believes the greatest good must come from the greatest aspect of life. In this view of happiness, Aristotle assumes that “happiness is an activity in accordance with virtue,” and that in order to live the contemplative life, one must also live a morally virtuous life (Aristotle 270). This connection between morality and contemplation coincides with Aristotle’s view of the superiority of contemplation over all other human activities. Aristotle asserts that contemplation in and of itself is separate from virtue, but that “in so far as he is a human being and a member of society [the contemplative man] chooses to act in accordance with virtue” (Aristotle 274).
Doing good actions makes human beings feel good about themselves. Notwithstanding, it is not fully selfish reason because not only man who does good action gets benefits from it, but others also. When someone commits a good deed for you it makes you happy. For example,
Eudemian ethics,came from the word eudaimonia which means happiness,is a fruitful work of Aristotle from Nichomachean Ethics.The greek word eudaimon is composed of two parts:”eu” means “well” and “daimon” means “divinity” or spirit”.To be eudaimon is therefore to be living in a way that is favor with God.But Aristotle regards a mere substitute for eudaimon as “living well”. Eudemian ethics focuses on man’s way of living well is by appreciation main points of friendship,temperance and virtue. “Without
His choice to “take one’s route analytically from common cognition to the determination of its supreme principle” suggests a causality (Kant 4:392): “common cognition” guides the rational agent to the categorical imperative (the “supreme principle”), which allows the agent the ability to create moral legislation. Yet, Kant’s language here, describing his method of inquiry, is far from supportive of an entirely constructivist view of morality. His movement from “common cognition” to the “determination of its supreme principle” is rhetorical, not philosophical. The possessive pronoun “its” in the phrase “the determination of its supreme principle” suggests that, rather than common cognition being the guiding force of the supreme principle of morality, it is the principle which guides cognition. Hence, the supremacy of this principle over cognition and rationality contradicts the constructivist position that reason is the cause of
Since a virtuous person would regard a friend as “another-self”, he would love his friends the way he loves himself (IX 4, 1166a1-3). Aristotle then moved on to distinguish the two types of self-love. On one hand, it is immoral if self-love means assigning yourself “the larger share of money, public honours and bodily pleasures” (IX 8, 1168b16). On the other hand, however, self-love is an entirely proper emotion if he is to “gratifies the most authoritative part of himself” (IX 8, 1168b31). In the latter case, Aristotle argued it is good to be self-loving because “he will both be benefited himself by performing fine actions and also help others” (IX 8,
In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle lays the groundwork for his perspective on virtue ethics, articulating the relationship between happiness, or eudaimonia, and virtue, or aréte. Aristotle’s particularly unique concept of happiness follows from his belief that happiness is the only end that humans wish to achieve that is purely an end in itself, and not a means as well, rather than an emotional disposition of happiness in the modern understanding of the word. Similarly, the Greek idea of virtue doesn’t have the same connection to duty that it does in English, rather it is most synonymously related to excellence. That is, to be virtuous is to be excellent at what you are. For example, a sharp knife is virtuous because it is good for cutting things;
Do you love and celebrate life itself? This too is philos’ (Marinoff , 2003). One of the most powerful expressions of philos is friendship and can be stressed thus: In friendship the ego is not dissolved in the other; on the contrary it blossoms. Unlike love, friendship does not declare that one plus one makes one; rather, that one plus one makes two. Each of the two is enriched by and for the other.