Marcus Aurelius and Stoic Philosophy

I will argue that Epicurus’s version of happiness is false and Nozick’s Happiness helps show that. Epicurus’s version of happiness is the lack of pain and the meeting the basic needs. Epicurus also believes in having pleasurable things in life. Nozick’s shows how happiness is more than just pleasure or pain. He also shows how happiness is not the only important thing in life.

Rather, the good life for a person is the active life of functioning well in those ways that are essential and unique to humans. Aristotle invites the fact that if we have happiness, we do not need any other things making it an intrinsic value. In contrast, things such as money or power are extrinsic valuables as they are all means to an end. Usually, opinions vary as to the nature and conditions of happiness. Aristotle argues that although ‘pleasurable amusements’ satisfy his formal criteria for the good, since they are chosen for their own sake and are complete in themselves, nonetheless, they do not make up the good life since, “it would be absurd if our end were amusement, and we laboured and suffered all our lives for the sake of amusing ourselves.” Happiness can be viewed as wealth, honour, pleasure, or virtue.

Life is not always fair or work out as planned. That said, utilitarianism 's goal is to maximize happiness in both quality and quantity. Yes, the quality of happiness would be better if the oppressed had the autonomy and freedom to overcome their oppression and reach an authentic level of happiness. But is it not better to have a life of pleasure that lacks autonomy over a life of suffering with autonomy—even if the pleasure is artificial? Ignorance is bliss.

In Mill’s Utilitarianism, he described what he defines what is happiness and unhappiness by using the greatest happiness principle. The greatest happiness principle is where the action is justified if it promotes happiness and is wrong when they promote the opposite of happiness. Happiness occurs when there are elements of intending pleasure and having an absence of pain. Since the elements of happiness are things that are ends in themselves, and the only thing is good. Happiness having no higher means of life makes other occurrences or experiences wanted only to a certain extent because it produces pleasure.

A just person is happier than the unjust person for this reason, which the just person's soul is in order, whereas the unjust person's soul is in decay and disorder. Secondly, the just person's desires are satisfied, since their rational parts limits their desires, whereas the unjust person's desires are rampant and out of control. In conclusion, I would have to agree and disagree with Socrates, for all people are immoral and they strive to become moral, but no one person is ever truly moral, although it is favorable for a person to strive towards morality and value it. On one point I would have to agree with Thrasymacus, on the basis that all people are hypocrites and many only give the illusion of morality, but in reality they are immoral. Overall, a person who strives for morality is superior to anyone who is immoral.

A final consequence was examined which showed that virtue is necessary but not sufficient for happiness, and that only a subset of the individuals who acquire virtue might acquire happiness. However, while this final consequence might seem problematic or counterintuitive, Aristotle offers that happiness is actually one of the most divine things and seems to suggest that our concept of ‘happiness’ in the context which makes this seem so troubling is not a fully conceived notion. That is, you can still lead a good or blessed life without happiness, but the most blessed life is a happy one. Works Cited Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics.

Mill explains happiness as pleasure lacking pain and that pleasure can differ in levels of quality and quantity. Many people misinterpret utilitarianism by interpreting utility in confliction with pleasure but in reality, utility is described as pleasure itself lacking pain. Another label for utility is the Greatest Happiness Principle. This opinion embraces that "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure.” Meaning that, deeds are perceived to be good after they lead to a larger happiness and bad after it cuts down happiness.

c. Many non-virtuous people live happy lives, many virtuous people are miserable d. Cultural relativism – whose virtues are best? e. We recognise that some non-virtuous people are useful in our society; life would be dull without them 2. What are the strengths of using a virtue ethics approach to resolve your case study? One of the desirability of virtue ethics is the elasticity to measure each situation independently, searching for action guidance in bearing in mind what a naturally virtuous person would do. This would be clarified and informed by the pertinent facts and personal ethical sensitivities of that situation.

An action could be morally wrong or morally right, depending on what action brings out the best outcome out of the... ... middle of paper ... ...s theory, often called hedonism. There is no benefit as to having utility as a single standard in which all applies to pleasures, because if you have one measurement to all it signifies that happiness is the same for all. If one’s end goal of human action is pleasure and that is all, how can one type of pleasure be essentially better than another? Compare the pleasure of living a life happy but completely deluded, seen from the perspective of “The Matrix” heroes of a life with happiness in which you are completely aware of on your own. The measurements of pleasure wouldn’t be the same because they are two completely different environments.

According to John Stuart Mill, The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, ... ... middle of paper ... ...r abstract thought separates them from any other creature on earth, but it also makes them unique unto themselves. What makes one person happy may or may not make another person happy. Happiness, in and of itself, in my opinion, in unattainable. To be content with a minimum of worries is as close to absolute happiness as a person can come.