Aristotle once stated that, “But if happiness be the exercise of virtue, it is reasonable to suppose that it will be the exercise of the highest virtue; and that will be the virtue or excellence of the best part of us.” (481) It is through Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics that we are able to gain insight into ancient Greece’s moral and ethical thoughts. Aristotle argues his theory on what happiness and virtue are and how man should achieve them.
Is an action choice worthy for its own sake only if it would be a worthy choice, whether or not it served further ends? How, then, can such virtuous actions be choice worthy for their own sakes? This research paper will examine Aristotle’s views of virtue and happiness based on his Nichomachean Ethics. The Nicomachean Ethics was the first book written on ethics that was meant to teach us on how to be virtuous. Aristotle assumes that all of our actions should be aimed toward one ultimate end, and that is for the highest good. The goal of every person in life is too be happy and to have the ability to choose between different courses of actions; this concept of happiness is implied throughout Nichomachean. In it, Aristotle states that happiness consists in being noble and having the excellence of character and of thinking.
Unlike Plato, Aristotle questions and concludes that virtue does not suffice happiness. His definition of happiness is the activity of the soul in accordance with the most perfect virtue. He believes one must be active and make full use of his/her rational capacities to function well. This perfecting of ones character was Aristotle?s key to happiness.
In consideration to Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle’s view of the great-souled man is that of an individual that represents happiness and obtains the five virtues: wisdom, justice, bravery, self-control, and the overall goodness within an individual (happiness). The magnanimous person is very complex and displays the proper virtues at the proper time, and in the proper way. In addition, the great-souled man accommodates to his surroundings where he is honorable but not boastful in his actions. Aristotle believes that it is only possible to attain happiness within a political organization because happiness represents living well without being concerned with others, they solely live for the truth and not approval.
Both Plato and Augustine offer unusual conceptions of what one must acquire to live a truly happy life. While the conventional view of happiness normally pertains to wealth, financial stability, and material possessions, Plato and Augustine suggest that true happiness is rooted in something independent of objects or people. Though dissimilar in their notions of that actual root, each respective philosophy views the attaining of that happiness as a path, a direction. Plato’s philosophy revolves around the attainment of eternal knowledge and achieving a metaphysical balance. Augustine also emphasizes one’s knowing the eternal, though his focus is upon living in humility before God. Both assert that human beings possess a natural desire for true happiness, and it is only through a path to something interminable that they will satisfy this desire.
Living a life of happiness is what most people value. In Daedalus, a journal that consists of articles about happiness and its true meaning, has an article named “A Faustian Bargain” by Bernard Reginster that explain the meaning of happiness from philosophers Arthur Schopenhauer and Friedrich Nietzsche. “Can Happiness Be Taught?”, another article in the journal by Martin E. P. Seligman focuses on the three different lives that contribute to happiness. With the help from my interview with Gale Colby, I gained a better understanding of what these two articles indicate.
Humans, throughout recorded history, have searched for a proper way of living which would lead them to ultimate happiness; the Nicomachean Ethics, a compilation of lecture notes on the subject written by Greek philosopher Aristotle, is one of the most celebrated philosophical works dedicated to this study of the way. As he describes it, happiness can only be achieved by acting in conformity with virtues, virtues being established by a particular culture’s ideal person operating at their top capacity. In our current society the duplicity of standards in relation to virtue makes it difficult for anyone to attain. To discover true happiness, man must first discover himself.
Aristotle accepts that there is an agreement that this chief good is happiness, but that there is a disagreement with the definition of happiness. Due to this argument, men divide the good into the three prominent types of life: pleasure, political and contemplative. Most men are transfixed by pleasure; a life suitable for “beasts”. The elitist life (politics) distinguishes happiness as honour, yet this is absurd given that honour is awarded from the outside, and one’s happiness comes from one’s self. The attractive life of money-making is quickly ruled out by Aristotle since wealth is not the good man seeks, since it is only useful for the happiness of something else.
Epicurus provides some great ideas towards what constitutes happiness and ‘the good life’ that can be applied to many facets of life, however I believe some aspects must be further contemplated to find a more infallible theory. The view that one can only feel pleasure in the absence of pain seems to be one that is very black and white and does not seem to take in the intricacies of modern society. Fundamentally, the pursuit of certain pleasures and the minimisation of pain would likely result in happiness, however a mild dosing of the contrary could also contribute to ‘happiness and the good life’.
People who are viewed as happy in our culture today are also seen as being rich, having a loving family, and a great occupation. Our society is attracted to material things, rather than spiritual ones. Can a person who does not have many possessions and an elevated social position still live a happy life? Epicurus believed that each one of us could achieve true happiness, and our only problem is that we stubbornly search for it in all the wrong places. Epicurus states that we only need three things to be happy besides the essentials needed for survival: friends, freedom, and an analyzed life. I will be comparing contemporary American notions of happiness to the Epicurean view.