Collin Laguzza
PL215-TAY
Paper A
10/8/2015
Aristotle attempts to identify what the greatest good for mankind truly is in his Nicomachean Ethics. To do so, Aristotle asks himself how we can live our lives while giving meaning at the same time. He directs the answer by looking at an end, more so, a purposeful life with a goal. For instance, the purpose of medication is to seek good health. It is the end result that matters most. So what exactly is this goal that is an end in itself? Happiness is where Aristotle begins his argument. He claims that happiness is not necessarily targeted by humans; rather aiming for happiness within a lifetime seems to be a natural conception. According to Aristotle, the greatest good for mankind is happiness. …show more content…
Happiness today is not just an end to a self-satisfied accomplishment. Rather, happiness is more of a never-ending desire. Still, our definition of happiness remains unclear and will differ from person to person. Some may claim that happiness is being aware of your blessings, having the freedom to do as you please, being conscience of ones surrounding, having your place in society assured, or simply having inner peace. Despite these options, happiness to me is not a result of circumstances. Happiness is an attitude, an attitude that prevails amongst any circumstance. Happiness is not a required trait of the human mentality, but is something that has to be learned. Happiness requires other physical and mental traits like patience, prosperity, and endurance. For instance, one must have learned patience in order to endure the unwanted experiences throughout life and still have the ability to remain happy. Such a trait seems to be something you can only pursue and never have a tight grip on. If one has done nothing but good in their life and has to ask themselves if they are happy, can they really claim to be happy? Or do they see happy as only being content? Clearly, happiness is individualized since it is what makes one happy alone and not the same for all men. Aristotle claims that happiness can be achieved by all men, and that happiness, when it is achieved, is the same mutual feeling for all men or one true conception. That is where I disagree. Happiness is not one centralized feeling that all men can achieve. Happiness is till strived upon but is not rationally targeted at times. Rather than a goal, I would prefer to look at happiness as mental prosperity that can easily be
PL215-TAY
Paper A
10/8/2015
Aristotle attempts to identify what the greatest good for mankind truly is in his Nicomachean Ethics. To do so, Aristotle asks himself how we can live our lives while giving meaning at the same time. He directs the answer by looking at an end, more so, a purposeful life with a goal. For instance, the purpose of medication is to seek good health. It is the end result that matters most. So what exactly is this goal that is an end in itself? Happiness is where Aristotle begins his argument. He claims that happiness is not necessarily targeted by humans; rather aiming for happiness within a lifetime seems to be a natural conception. According to Aristotle, the greatest good for mankind is happiness. …show more content…
Happiness today is not just an end to a self-satisfied accomplishment. Rather, happiness is more of a never-ending desire. Still, our definition of happiness remains unclear and will differ from person to person. Some may claim that happiness is being aware of your blessings, having the freedom to do as you please, being conscience of ones surrounding, having your place in society assured, or simply having inner peace. Despite these options, happiness to me is not a result of circumstances. Happiness is an attitude, an attitude that prevails amongst any circumstance. Happiness is not a required trait of the human mentality, but is something that has to be learned. Happiness requires other physical and mental traits like patience, prosperity, and endurance. For instance, one must have learned patience in order to endure the unwanted experiences throughout life and still have the ability to remain happy. Such a trait seems to be something you can only pursue and never have a tight grip on. If one has done nothing but good in their life and has to ask themselves if they are happy, can they really claim to be happy? Or do they see happy as only being content? Clearly, happiness is individualized since it is what makes one happy alone and not the same for all men. Aristotle claims that happiness can be achieved by all men, and that happiness, when it is achieved, is the same mutual feeling for all men or one true conception. That is where I disagree. Happiness is not one centralized feeling that all men can achieve. Happiness is till strived upon but is not rationally targeted at times. Rather than a goal, I would prefer to look at happiness as mental prosperity that can easily be