Aristotle proposes that eudaimonia is the most intrinsically valuable. Eudaimonia is defined as happiness, or well-being. Happiness is probably the best English word to translate eudaimonia, the term also has relations with fulfillment, success, and flourishing. A person who is eudaimon is not just merely enjoying life but is relishing life by living magnificently. One’s reputation and success, different than one’s emotional welfare, can be affected after death, which makes Aristotle’s discussion of eudaimonia after death significantly more relevant.
The doctrines of happiness: There are different perspectives on happiness, two of which are the hedonic and the eudaimonic views. Both views have roots in philosophy, such as Aristotle and Aristippus. Despite their ancient origins, these views on human well-being are relevant even today. The hedonic view encompasses the idea those people are happiest when their life is filled with positive experiences and emotions, without negative ones. According to Fredrickson et al.
In all of Plato 's dialogues, Socrates ' main goal is to achieve happiness, although friends and foes alike present him pathways that could lead to pleasure, but not true happiness. Moreover, in Crito, Socrates pursues happiness by obediently following the Athenian law, whereas, Crito tries to lure him into committing an unjust action so that he can obtain the pleasure of having a friend and keeping a good reputation and so that Socrates can still have the pleasure of life on earth1. One can know that happiness and pleasure are different due to the fact that happiness is a state of being eternally fulfilled, but pleasure provides a person only an immediate and short-lived image of fulfillment. If happiness is being eternally fulfilled, then it would not be of this world because this world has many flaws and is mortal. Therefore, happiness must be achieved through divine powers that allow us to become eternally fulfilled in life after death.
A good life is one that provide all the necessary conditions and opportunities for a person to become fully himself or herself, and one in which the person has the character to do so. For Aristotle happiness is quality of life here and now, not something for the hereafter. It is neither material nor entirely spiritual. Happiness is often translated to eudaimonia. Eudaimonia implies being really alive rather than just existing.
By experiencing the same emotion of audience is sort of ‘cleansing of the soul’ can through communication of emotion in the work of art. Just the soul is superior to the body, so is the rational part of the soul superior to the irrational part. Philosophy is good in itself because it good for what they can bring us, but others are good in themselves. The fact that it is worthwhile without bringing us anything extra means that it is one of the very highest good in soul not that it is useless. Clearly, the exhortation to philosophy was a passionate argument for dedicating one’s life to philosophy
Aristotle filled Nicomachean Ethics cover to cover with claims pertaining to happiness, virtue, friendship, and similar concepts. One claim states that happiness is choice worthy in its own right and self-sufficient, as “it is the end of the things achievable in action” (I.7, 1097b). Another claims finds that happiness requires external goods (I.8, 1099b). The purpose of this paper is to create a complete comprehension of these claims before responding to them. Comprehending Aristotle’s Happiness Aristotle’s claim begins with the introduction of the complete—or possibly final or perfect—good.
Aristotle and plato also share some similarities, when aristotle mentions how we should be happy and not aim to what will get us happy. Plato also mentions our idea is ours and won 't amount to any physical item or goal. What they share there is when it comes to happiness and ideas we should already be happy and how our ideas wont be perfect as long as we can better ourselves thats what should matter and make us
Comparative analysis of Aristotelian Equality In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle asserts one cannot live a virtuous and fulfilling life without the presence of a friend, despite the presence of the essential goods. In addition to his point, he states the best friendships are built upon a true equality which in turn builds on the mutual contributions and goodness of the character of the individuals within a friendship. Without equality, Aristotle argues, friendships tend to fall apart either due to eventual conflicts of interest or the friendship outliving it usefulness. However, some might argue the best friendships do not need any equality among individuals and can still produce the benefits of a Aristotle definition of the best friendship. Although this argument suggests the absence of equality produces a better friendship and life, I will defend Aristotle’s view by presenting textual evidence from of Nicomachean Ethics proving otherwise.
He believes that happiness is achieved through a life full of virtue as well as the expansion of reason and the ability of greater wisdom. This is why we take various actions, to ensure enough outer goods to obtain health, leisure time and the ability to have virtue in our lifespan. Furthermore, another point Aristotle emphasizes, is that moral virtue is located somewhere between extremes and deficiency. That’s where the Greek saying “παν μετρον αριστον” comes from, meaning everything is good but don’t over or under do it. Keep everything in moderation, except virtue.
If we follow this line of thinking there must be a superordinate good that all actions ultimately seek. Aristotle sums this up writing, “Suppose, then, that the things achievable by action have some end that we wish for because of itself… Clearly, this end will be good, that is to say, the best good” (1094a 18-22). Moreover, the existence of a superordinate good does beg the question, of what exactly this good is; the next premise of Aristotle’s argument addresses this very question. As put by Aristotle, “Now happiness, more than anything else, seems complete without qualification. For we always choose it because of itself’ (1097a 37-1097b
Post 1 Like Wiener, author of “The Geography of Bliss,” I am a "happiness seeker." I believe that happiness is out there, somewhere and I am determined to find it. Also, like Wiener I don 't believe that all happiness comes from within. Rather, geographic and culture play a role in happiness. Most Americans share the same belief that money, fame, and material items will bring them happiness.
The definition of Utilitarianism is “the ethical principle that virtue is based on utility, and that conduct should be directed toward promoting the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people.” A Utilitarian would say that taking Henrietta Lacks’ cells without her permission or knowledge would be acceptable because it has helped with so many things. Libertarianism is defined as “an extreme laissez-faire political philosophy advocating only minimal state intervention in the lives of citizens.” A Libertarian focuses on the protection of the individual and their rights. A Libertarian would say that taking Henrietta Lacks’ cells without her permission or knowledge would be unacceptable because that was an infringement on her rights as a human being. Henrietta Lacks was born to Eliza Lacks Pleasant and Johnny Pleasant on August 1,
A good person will necessarily be happy because every positive means results in a positive end. The main goal for every action is happiness. Every man desires happiness and therefore they will do good to attain it. According to Aristotle, happiness comes from the inside and is an activity that is based on choices. If a person is not happy, that means he failed to choose the right path or decision.