Essay on Aristotle's Notion on Eudaimonia and Virtue

To begin, one must learn what happiness means to Aristotle. He considers happiness to be simply the name of the good life. This is not to say that the good life produces

The definition of happiness has long been disputed. According to Aristotle, happiness is the highest good and the ultimate end goal—for it is self-reliant. This idea contradicted other common beliefs and philosophical theories. Aristotle opens his work by describing the various theories, neutrally examines each idea, and discloses how he thinks the theory is wrong and why his idea of happiness is more accurate.

After describing the source of virtues, Aristotle offers an explanation pertaining to the nature of “virtuous” actions and behaviors and the subsequent reasoning behind their categorization as such. Firstly, the individual in question must be fully aware the action and its anticipated outcome. The individual must then deliberately, and of by their free will and not out of habit choose to act virtuously. A virtuous outcome as a result of an accidental action does not constitute a virtuous act, as the intent and expectation was not to perform virtuously. Lastly, the action must be rooted from the individual’s “firm and immutable character.” The motivation behind their virtuous action must be a part of the person’s character, not simply the result of external forces (or supervision.)

In this section I will explain Aristotle’s definition of eudaimonia and its relationship to happiness, morality and the virtues. Aristotle defines eudaimonia in the

Eudaimonia is the Greek word for happiness, but also has undertones of the words flourishing and success. You see, Aristotle teaches that every action or move in life is held to aim at some good. He states as such in the first chapter of his book Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics. He goes on to explain that happiness is a Telos: Telos, meaning an end or a goal of an action. In fact, it is of the highest end or Telos because there is nothing to achieve after it has been attained. Unfortunately, Aristotle states that not all people regard happiness in the same way, “… in the opinion of some, happiness is a virtue; of others, prudence; of others, a certain wisdom; in the opinion of still others, it is these, or some of these things, together with pleasure or not without pleasure.” (Aristotle, Bartlett, Collins 15). Aristotle’s definition of happiness is something that one chooses for itself and not on account of something else, and therefore it is of a higher end. It is also not something that has to do with pleasure but rather attained though virtue. Regrettably, there is not a particular pathway to get to Eudaimonia as he explains in chapter three of the first book, “The inquiry would be adequately made if it should attain the clarity that accords with the subject matter. For one should not seek out precision in all arguments alike…” (Aristotle, Bartlett, Collins 3). He does however, point out that virtues are something that cannot be taught but only acquired by experience, and a person cannot be deemed a virtuous one, unless they possess all the qualities of his outlined

Aristotle says that we become virtuous by doing virtuous actions, however he addresses a possible argument that can be used against this view. Aristotle suggests three criteria’s to determine this. In this following essay I will explain and identify the argument that is against this statement.

Aristotle argues that individuals seek Eudaimonia, which means happiness. Happiness has intrinsic value being that in itself it is good and is not a mere means to achieve a set goal. Shafer-Landau writes on how Aristotle believes that a good life is one in which an individual has made wise choices and worthy pursuits, along with the inclusion of virtues. When an individual forms a habit such as driving their car to work every morning this leads to a constant action known as a routine. In comparison to a routine, a virtue is developed by habituation, being that it is persistent, reliable, and a characteristic feature of a person. Aristotle argued that virtue does not always guarantee a good life. For example, if a virtuous individual were to

Aristotle argues in his work, “Ethical Virtue: Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics” found in Western Philosophy, that his theory of Ethical Virtue, while living the life of virtue you must have eudaimonia, which can translate into happiness. This is not a stagnant state of being but a type of activity. The necessary attributes of the ultimate good are that it is whole, ultimate, and endless. This theory consists around

This video showed many people that were searching for ways to be happy. Not just momentarily happy, but happy for the long run. We saw the journeys that; Jimmy, Diana, Jerry, Catherine, Richard, Tim and Chris, went on to find true happiness. Aristotle believed that happiness was called Eudaimonia, meaning good interior spirit. This interior spirit was more permanent and solid than what happiness is.

However, we do not achieve Eudaemonia by actively seeking it out. It is attained through the appropriate ordering and pursuit of appropriate goals, in the right manner. From this it might be said that Eudaemonia is something that is greater than the sum of its parts, and as we don’t seek it, it is something of an additional by-product of conducting our pursuit of all other goods. Similarly exemplified as, studying in university and realizing you have achieved profound personal growth. A further quality of Eudaemonia is that it is desired for itself and not for the sake of some further good. No one tries to live well for the sake of some further good. You try to live well to live well, and there is nothing beyond that. Aristotle’s conception of happiness is not just a mental state, he is asking what is good for human beings and also what it is to be a good human being. In addition, critics have argued that there cannot be a single description for the best sort of life for everyone because there is simply too much variety between people. Based on a direct translation to happiness, Eudaemonia in this sense is relative to different

Aristotle gave two ways virtue can be obtained, the ways in which humans acquire virtue. “Virtue of thought and character.” Mostly virtue is obtained from habit, “virtue of character” which is ethical. It can be through moral principles, knowledge, or socially, which completes us as humans. It becomes a habit, when see the habit every day or been taught about it, from a young age. We work towards this behavior and act upon that virtue as a lifestyle. “Virtue by contrast, we acquire, just as we acquire crafts, by having first activated them” (285). Just like the phrase “practice makes perfect,” it is a virtue if we keep on to it, doing the same thing over again and believing in that which brings happiness.

Ethics is the philosophical study of moral judgements (Solomon: 2010). Moral philosophy has long been dominated by two basic theories; deontology, inspired by Immanuel Kant, the eighteenth century philosopher and; utilitarianism or consequentialism, which derives its modern day instructions from eighteenth and nineteenth century philosophers Jeremey Bentham and J. S. Mills, respectively (Hursthouse:1999). Increasing dissatisfaction with these theories and their variants has led in recent years to the emergence of a different theory, the theory of virtue ethics (Statman: 1997). It can be argued that, of the ethical stances considered over the course of this subject, Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics as defined in his Nicomachean Ethics, is the most comprehensive. Unlike the other theories presented, which focus on principles or rules of action as the basis for morality, Aristotle presents us with a classic formulation, an alternative basis for ethical reasoning (Baker: 2013). In virtue ethics, the emphasis is on cultivating a virtuous character rather than following rules of action; that is, with philosophical consideration, it is decided which virtues would, in combination, comprise a fully developed excellent character, and how those virtues contribute to each other and to our overall character (Athanassoulis:2012). It is also known as the ethics of self-realisation (Solomon:2010).

Aristotle argues that in order to achieve happiness one must be virtuous, but being virtuous does guarantee that one will achieve a happy life. According to Aristotle, happiness is the highest obtainable end goal of anyone’s existence. To achieve this goal, one must fulfill his responsibilities completely. In contrast to the state of being of happiness, virtues are described as, “states of character” (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, p.957). These states of character are described as somewhere in between the vices of excess and total lack of some quality. Virtue is required to achieve happiness because having virtue is the only way to have one’s obligations fulfilled. If one doesn’t apply his virtue to his duties though, it’s essentially the

Eudaimonia. This is the key to an ideal life, well according to Aristotle. Eudaimonia is the Greek translation for happiness, “human flourishing”, or well-being. One of Aristotle’s main questions in his work, Nicomachaen Ethics, is “How should we live?” As stated in Aristotle’s Nicomachaean Ethics to live a eudemonic life or “to flourish,” you must first become a great-souled person. To Aristotle the great-souled person is the ideal human being, the person we all aspire to be (Yonkins 34). Aristotle believes that happiness or aretê is the main goal that we all should be reaching for in life. As long as a person is striving to do good deeds, good deeds will also happen to them in return thus making them a more happy and virtuous person. As stated

“Aristotle and the Ethics of Virtue and Character” explains the “theories” that make up a moral situation. First, we have expectations for the outcome of a moral situation to be utilitarian or sometimes produce another desirable result. We also have restraints that govern the actions we make to produce those outcomes. Last, certain character traits define who is prepared to perform the necessary actions and be content with the results. Aristotle’s “The Moral Virtues” explains how the mean of an excess and a deficit is the virtue. It is nearly impossible to act perfectly within the mean, which is why Aristotle recommends that one keep away from the extreme that is more opposed to the mean, be wary of pleasant things, and notice the direction (toward excess or deficit) toward which one, personally, will tend. Finally, in “Habit and Virtue,” Aristotle defines virtue as a result of habituation. Character is developed through the repetition of activities, and therefore the aim of the