In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle contributes subjects such as art, actions, pursuit, and inquiry to the nature of humans. He categorizes all of these elements as good and argues that goodness is essential and inter-webbed in the nature of humans. Not only does he describe goodness as merely an intricate part of human nature, but also he states that is good that is at the center of the human aim. Thus, it is the nature of humans to seek, establish, create, and exert goodness amongst other human beings, the overall universe, and us. Aristotle argues that because goodness is natural to humans, knowledge of goodness is natural to humans as well. The author furthers his comment on goodness and its relation to human nature by stating that humans …show more content…
In order for one to feel the human benefits attached to goodness, one must first have knowledge and understanding of the subject. It is the knowledge of goodness in sometimes its in entirety or in an accessible portion that produces happiness for man. Thus, it is possible for human beings to possess goodness and be exposed to goodness but not be cognizant of its presence. Such human beings are not able to experience the happiness that naturally should be a result of goodness. Aristotle also discusses the correlation between the nature of happiness and education. He suggests that education allows us to be good judges. Thus, education provides humans with the opportunity to be if not happy at least content in their decisions. Also, Aristotle argues that it is the nature of man to have different perspectives on the nature of happiness. Aristotle states some of the elements that are mistaken for happiness but are not attributable to the nature of happiness such as wealth. Because it is the nature of man to pursue honor, the nature of happiness is also associated with this pursuit. However, it is the nature of man to aim for happiness despite each individual’s particular view of the concept. Although Aristotle acknowledges these different views that are attributable to happiness, he highlights the …show more content…
Aristotle argues that science directs the happenings and occurrences that go on within the universe. Because the nature of human beings is subject to the nature of the universe (because human beings are affected by the universe which we live in), Aristotle is able to effectively argue that science’s attachment to the nature of the universe allows it to dictate the actions and outcomes of not only the nature of the universe, but the nature of human beings as well. Also, science has the power to implicitly state what human beings should abstain from and what she partake in concerning the nature of the universe. Furthermore, Aristotle discusses the subject of “ends” in its relation to the nature of the universe. He argues that is the nature of the universe to produce endings in every possible occurrence. These ends can be described out some time point of achievement for human nature. Thus, it is the nature of humans to follow the nature of the universe and attain ends. In addition to its’ attribution to the nature of human beings and happiness, goodness is present in the nature of the universe. According to Aristotle, goodness can be seen in the substance and the quality of the universe. Furthermore, in Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle’s discussion is mainly around the actions and arts are that are essential to the nature of the universe. This text does a great job
To do this I must first explain several concepts of Aristotle which are: (1) how he concludes that the human function is reason, (2) what he means by happiness and how it is the human good, and (3) why he believes that the activity of the soul must be virtuous to become
Happiness, or eudaimonia, according to Aristotle, is defined simply as human flourishing. The act of flourishing
In Book I of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle brings up the idea that in order to discover the human good we must first develop a certain understanding and identify the function of a human being. Aristotle’s function argument is brought up through his belief that the human function is rational activity, meaning that our good as human beings is rational activity performed fine because this is what leads to living well. The good Aristotle tries to get across can be seen in many different forms depending on how it is viewed, because of the idea that the main function of anything is to reach a final end, the final end is considered the good. “The end of medicine is health, that of shipbuilding, a ship, that of military science, victory…” (Nicomachean,
“Every skill and every inquiry, and similarly every action and rational choice, is thought to aim at some good; and so the good has been aptly described as that which everything aims. But it is clear that there is some difference between ends: some ends are activities, while others are products which are additional to the activities. In cases where there are ends additional to the actions, the products are by their nature better than activities.” (Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics, as translated by Crisp, 2000, p. #3) Aristotle was the first philosopher who wrote a book on ethics titled, Nichomachean Ethics.
Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics begins by exploring ‘the good’. Book I argues that, unlike other goods, “happiness appears to be something complete and self-sufficient, and is, therefore, the end of actions” (10:1097b20-21). In other words, happiness is the ultimate good. But how does one achieve happiness? Aristotle formulates this in the context of work, since for all things, from artists to horses, “the good and the doing it well seem to be in the work” (10:1097b27-28).
In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he outlines the different scenarios in which one is responsible for her actions. There is, however, a possible objection which raises the possibility that nobody is responsible for their actions. Are we responsible for some of our actions after all? If so, under what circumstances?
The term “livability” has become very popular especially in last years due to the appearance of rankings measuring this phenomenon in different cities. The word “livable” is used in countless ways to describe quality of life and standards of living that every city aspires to achieve. But already in ancient Greece, people were focusing on improving their quality of life in cities. Everyday life, in the city-states like Athens, was based on many amenities considering public life and recreation. Men were spending time socializing in agoras, getting fit in gymnasiums or exploring culture in theaters.
It is critical to recognize Mill’s argument that a degree of contentment can exist in periods of less happiness. However, Aristotle’s view of perceiving wellbeing or goodness as ultimate is more pronounced. Worth emphasizing, Aristotle deeply explores his arguments basing them on functions of a rational man and virtues out of habits. Today, a virtuous citizen is one whose actions are inward, in response to conscience and moral obligations as a member of society. Such a person, not waivered with intensities of pleasures, honor, and wealth but seeks to have a satisfactory level of happiness with friends, co-workers, and family among other
To reach this conclusion, I will be splitting this passage into 3 parts. The first section is Aristotle’s introduction to
Therefore, if one wishes to be healthy, he can choose to eat healthy and practice sports, but his choice of being healthy just by its own will not predict the outcome of actually being healthy. Conclusively, “choice relates to the means and wish relates rather to the end”. Additionally, Aristotle also expatiates on anger and appetite. These characteristics, for Aristotle are related to pleasure and feelings which are themselves relate to all animals. However, choice is not for that choice is only related to rational beings.
Throughout the history, there have been heated discussions on what constitutes a good life. Philosophers have given different annotations on the meaning of good life based on their beliefs, perspectives or even scientific-based evidences. Some view a good life as an accumulation of material goods that brings “large amount” of pleasure to oneself. On the other hand, Mencius and Aristotle advocate good life as possessing of pleasure that incorporates ethical values and they believe that by doing so one will experience enduring happiness. There is no ultimate right or wrong for these interpretations since this is not a factual question.
In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, the concept of happiness is introduced as the ultimate good one can achieve in life as well as the ultimate goal of human existence. As Aristotle goes on to further define happiness, one can see that his concept is much different from the 21st-century view. Aristotelian happiness can be achieved through choosing to live the contemplative life, which would naturally encompass moralistic virtue. This differs significantly from the modern view of happiness, which is heavily reliant on material goods. To a person in the 21st-century, happiness is simply an emotional byproduct one experiences as a result of acquiring material goods.
The chief good is good for its own sake and all other goods are means. Aristotle purposes that happiness is the chief good. It makes since if we think about it. Happiness is desirable, I can’t use happiness to achieve any
In order to do this, we need to 'know thyself ' and become as learned as we can, knowing the good for all, while also being humble. We are all naturally good people, so we must promote the good in the world. According to Aristotle, however, happiness, his goal for all humans is not that easy to obtain. He claims that "happiness is a certain sort of activity of the soul in accord with virtue (Aristotle, p.12). On the Aristotelian model of how to obtain happiness, it deals a great deal with the issue of particulars.
At the end of everyone’s lives, the goal appears to be about attaining happiness. Describing how to obtain happiness has been an issue that was debated in the past but is still talked about now . In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle expands on his view of happiness and he focuses particularly on how reason helps recognize and pursue what will lead to happiness and the good life. I feel that Aristotle’s philosophies on happiness are important works within the field of philosophy and he considered one of the………of it . In this paper, I will explore Aristotle’s beliefs regarding happiness then compare and contrast them to those of Martin Seligman.