Have you ever dreamed to live well? Or Did you know someone who has lived a good life? If so, how can you define a good life? According to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, the good life can be defined as “a life marked by a high standard of living. In my opinion, the good life can be defined as a way that someone plans to live virtuously by having a great education, enough money, and helping others.
This is particularly so since it seems that, according to Aristotle’s philosophy, the good life is reserved for a select few who were fortunate enough to grow up in an environment conducive to their success. This disillusionment probably arises through the differing concepts of ‘good’ between Aristotle’s time and ours. We usually use the term ‘good’ in order to express a moral judgement; for example, ‘respecting your colleagues is good.’ But understood in a more comparative sense Aristotle’s use of the word ‘good’ merely outlines usually accepted facts. Most would agree that it is better to have friends than to be lonely, or to be financially secured than to be
In the article “Nicomachean Ethics” Aristotle talks about how virtue is needed for a person to have happiness in their life. A virtuous person is a person that is living with high morally standards and that is living by the great of goodness. Aristotle talks about two different types of virtue. One being Virtue of thoughts and the other being virtue of characters. Virtue of thought is believed to be a good characteristic.
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.
A fool can be satisfied but he will not see all the aspects that Socrates will see. Thus making him ignorant to the reasons for Socrates dissatisfaction. Although Socrates claims to be ignorant himself, he is one of most respected and studied philosophers in history. This shows that he was clearly onto something with his ideals. Socrates might say that the fool’s satisfaction is not the kind that he would want, he would want a much more fulfilling satisfaction than one who seeks common wants such as wealth, fame etc… Would Socrates be satisfied if he knew the answer to every question he or someone else asked?
Saying this, Loeb states that what motivates people to be kind is the desire to respect themselves, which all ties back to living a rich life. So, is it possible to be kind to others and still not be qualified as a good citizen, or does a person simply have to be active in social standings? What exactly is a good citizen? When it comes to the topic of what it means to be a good person or a good citizen, most of us will agree that it means to be kind, thoughtful, or helpful to others. Where this argument usually ends, however, is with the question of the person, if they are truly being kind or just having a face.
One of the thing that makes Brutus fits the definition of a tragic hero more than Caesar is that he has a noble personality. Brutus is always afraids that Caesar will become a tyrant, and at that time, everyone will become slaves, who live in misery. So that he kills Caesar for the good of Rome, not to deceive Caesar, and everything he does is for the benefit of someone else, not for personal gain. “Not because I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more”(3.2.23-24). About Caesar, he always acts like he is nice, but he is not.
According to Aristotle, everything we do in life, we do for the sake of some good, or at least something we perceive to be good. We call an act good if it satisfies a certain need. The satisfaction of this need is then considered good if it is a means for satisfying some further need, and this in turn is good if it will satisfy still another need. Sooner or later this process reaches a point where it is no longer a means for some further end but is an end in itself. This final end is what Aristotle means by the chief good.
Some people have it severely, and then there are some who doesn't even realize this themselves. People who has this particular habit of comparing themselves to others, never feel good enough. They never see their good side, because they always look at others. All they see is their flaws. People in general are not perfect, there will always be a glitch in life.
Introduction People don’t understand that they can control their own destiny and life well-being just by positive thinking. This positive psychology subject is important because it can improve one 's life in almost every field, physical and psychological. The definition of Positive psychology: "the branch of psychology that uses scientific understanding and effective intervention to aid in the achievement of a satisfactory life, rather than merely treating mental illness.” (Wikipedia). There 's various research about positive psychology, the few we will mention focus on positive thinking and positive emotions, what causes it and what effects it create. First, positive emotion improves the broaden people 's thought-action repertoires, undo
She argues in her article, that with a higher grade of education you will in turn make more money. She also states that even with the high cost of a degree, that college still pays off. College does not just allow one to become economically effective, but it permits them to partake in a healthy life beyond them. Even though education is valuable to students, the society also desires it to make it safer and healthier. In my opinion, education will be beneficial to those who do their very best in their high school and college years.
According to history, some have claimed that Thucydides makes empirical claims and that Plato makes normative claims. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to identify the different philosophy between Thucydides versus Plato on the Nature of the Good Life. Consequently, reaching a better understanding specifically on empirical and normative claims. As a result, the outcome should illustrate a detailed explanation on such claims with supported evince. Plato indeed advocated normative thinking; In other words, his claims are about human well-being, moral thought, and virtue.
From a global perspective, positive psychology centers on the positive aspects of human development. It is a fact that as a human grows and matures, the person faces the same challenges that every developing human encounters. However, although there are many who are at the point in their lives where their efforts and labors are recognized, the recognition often does not support the person (Seligman, 2009). The author suggests that every human should place him or her on the path to the “good life.” This does not necessarily mean wealth or intangible assets but rather inner happiness and peace (p. 45). Seligman’s notion of the good life speaks shifting one’s focus on what is truly important such as health, security, and most of all happiness.
It is like achieving success, you have that feeling where you think you’ve done enough for your family and yourself and at the end you are all happy. Being in the pursuit of happiness takes a lot of criticism by people who want to put you down because they see you doing better than them. People will always tend to bring you down, but that it up to you if you are going to let them. Pursuit of happiness is doing something you want to do, not what other people tell you just because they think it is good for you. It is all about your happiness, success, and supporting your