In The Morality of Happiness, Julia Annas presents Aristotle to clarify the processes by which one makes sense of life as a whole, from past attitudes and reflections, into future projections. Those who question the structure of life ask for recommendations on how to best live, which should be done, according to Aristotle, through the capacity of resolution known as practical reason. In order to give life structure in this way, what is its unit of consideration? In what follows, this paper will illustrate Aristotle’s argument that the actions for which we construct our lives must be organized around the achievement of a single end, unified by the attempt to obtain a final end.
This section will begin by confirming that each action and choice
…show more content…
As roughly defined, instrumental value is the value of object or a mean to some other good, whether it be physical or conceptual. Instrumental values are worthwhile for the sake of something else and are not goods within themselves. This type of value is subordinated by the superior intrinsic value that is wanted for its own sake, also known as the final good in the hierarchy of ends. An agent's desires, actions, and choices, as confirmed before, are systemized around the achievement of a directed single end termed intrinsic value. In order to reach the highest order, multiple instrumental values must be sought out in and unified. An instrumental value may lead to another instrumental value, means to a different end, or it might lead to an intrinsic value, action means to a further end. The hierarchy of instrumental values eventually lead to the intrinsic value. In some cases, it may appear an agent has multiple intrinsic goals, which conflicts with an agent having a single goal in life. If final ends are in conflict, although completely unrelated, there is no basis to choose between them - it is a decision with no rationale. Assuming multiple intrinsic values did exist in the agent’s life, the values would challenge each other for the title of being the value wanted for the sake of itself, demanding the most time and energy. One intrinsic value would have to be …show more content…
Aristotle applauds his own accounts that an end is something that must be achieve for ourselves and clearly implies seeing life as a whole unit. Seeing a final end in the way which shows life as a whole requires two conditions placed on final ends, completeness and self-sufficiency. He indicates a completeness of a final good puts an end to any further objects of desire. It is wanted for its own sake, never for the sake of something else. The end of the hierarchy, in this case, is the authoritative knowledge comprised of the other subordinated ends but also has a comprehensiveness that includes the knowledge of all of the ends it is comprised of. Contrary to what is assumed, the Second condition or self-sufficiency is not applied to the final good, but rather where one’s life needs originate. This can be found, Aristotle wrote, if a person lacks nothing in life and are independent from the wide range of needs and dependencies that are not concerns or major projects. At this point, life cannot be improved by the addition of more goods, it is assumed to be assumed to stable and hard to
Aristotle believed the highest good is happiness, once we choose happiness as an end that is the ultimate goal. The path a person takes to reach their end goal is numerous or can lead to more means and not to an end, in the New York Times article Man Who Gave Psychics $718,000 ‘Just Got Sucked In’ By Michael Wilson. Niall Rice, was placed in a strange situation he visited psychics whom claimed to reconnect him to his distant love no matter the cost or dimension.
Once a desirable end has been considered the person then deliberates about the means necessary to make their goal possible and they end their deliberation with their choice. Once a person has successfully deliberated and chosen their method for acting they can execute it. Humans have the capacity to ask questions and investigate the object of their desires. They are in control of how things appear to them as well as the means to reaching the end. Humans can think beyond what they see, and change their beliefs when something is at odds with their
Aristotle believes that happiness rests within an absolutely final and self-sufficient end. The reasoning behind this theory is that every man is striving for some end, and every action he does must be due to this desire to reach this final end. He believes that in order for a man to be happy, he must live an active life of virtue, for this will in turn bring him closer to the final end. Although some may believe that these actions that the man chooses to take is what creates happiness, Aristotle believes that these actions are just a mere part of the striving toward the final end. I believe that Aristotle’s great-souled man is the highest virtue of character; His actions are never too extreme and he is appropriate in all his manners. The magnanimous person is within the intermediate state of character. “The deficient person is pusillanimous, and the person who goes to excess is vain” (§35). The magnanimous person surrounds himself with great things. The great things occurs when “he receives great honors from excellent pe...
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.”
In Book I of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle states that the ultimate human goal or end is happiness. Aristotle then describes steps required for humans to obtain the ultimate happiness. He also states that activity is an important requirement of happiness. A virtuous person takes pleasure in doing virtuous things. He then goes on to say that living a life of virtue is something pleasurable in itself. The role of virtue to Aristotle is an important one, with out it, it seems humans cannot obtain happiness. Virtue is the connection one has to happiness and how they should obtain it. My goal in this paper is to connect Aristotle’s book of Nicomachean Ethics to my own reasoning of self-ethics. I strongly agree with Aristotle’s goal of happiness and conclude to his idea of virtues, which are virtuous states of character that affect our decision making in life.
The ultimate end is what the masses strive for. Aristotle proposes that this universal good be thoroughly understood before continuing. All actions are to be built upon another in order to achieve this good; an end that is chosen for the sake of itself, we “choose [happiness] for its...
Aristotle begins his discussion on deficiency, intermediate, and excess by introducing what he is looking to accomplish; and by this I mean what we stated earlier in regard to humans and their respective states and functions. He supports this conclusion with the analogy of “the virtue of eyes” and “the virtue of horses” respectively. In this analogy he explains what I interpret as the following: for a person to be in his best state, he must encompass what it is that makes his genus be in its best possible condition. In other words, in order to be virtuous you must also be the best at what you are designated to be purposeful for.
Aristotle opens his argument with the statement: “the good has been well described as that at which everything aims”(1.1.1094a2). This premise means that all actions aim at an end that is good. Moreover, through this definition of good, there are numerous goods corresponding to numerous actions. How can we know which good is the best, or highest good? Aristotle introduces a hierarchy of goods. In order to have an end there must be an activity, yet “the product (of the activity) is by nature better than the activity”(1.1.1094a6). Rather, each end in turn aims for something else: another end. It seems that this hierarchy would perpetuate into infinity, however Aristotle establishes that there is an action that has an absolute end, meaning that the end aims at nothing else. The action that produces the absolute end is pursued “because of itself;” thus this end will be the highest and best good (1.2.1094a18-22).
The Nicomachean Ethics, written by Aristotle, represents his most important contribution within the field of Ethics; it is a collection of ten books, covering a variety of interesting topics, throughout the collection. Aristotle tries to draw a general understanding of the human good, exploring the causes of human actions, trying to identify the most common ultimate purpose of human actions. Indeed, Aristotelian’s ethics, also investigates through the psychological and the spiritual realms of human beings. Without pretending to exhaust with too many references, it would be rather useful to focus on the most criticized part of the philosopher’s attempt, which is also the very starting point of his masterpiece, identified as eudaimonia (happiness, well being) and ergon (function), in Aristotelian terms.
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).
Aristotle’s thoughts on ethics conclude that all humans must have a purpose in life in order to be happy. I believe that some of the basics of his ideas still hold true today. This essay points out some of those ideas.
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
Happiness is the goal of every human beings according to Aristotle, however what does happiness imply? It is in his attempt to define happiness and to find a way to attain it that Aristotle comes across the idea of virtue. It is thus necessary to explain the relationship between these two terms. I will start by defining the good and virtue and then clarify their close link with the argument of function, I will then go into more details in explaining the different ways in which they are closely related and finally I am going to give an account of the apparent contradiction in Book X which is a praise of the life of study.
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
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...