NATURAL LAW ARISTOTLE AND HAPPINESS

Who was Aristotle? Born in 384 BC in Stagyra, Macedonia. Son of a wealthy court physician. Studied in Plato’s Academy for nearly 20 years. In 343 became tutor to the young Alexander the Great. In 335 founded his own school in Athens. Died in Chalcis in 322 aged 62.

EUDAIMONIA Aristotle believed that eudaimonia, or happiness, is the fundamental goal of life: Aristotle believed that eudaimonia, or happiness, is the fundamental goal of life: It is the only thing that people pursue for its own sake. It is the only thing that people pursue for its own sake. It is the goal that lies beneath and holds together every other goal. It is the goal that lies beneath and holds together every other goal. It makes life worthwhile. It makes life worthwhile.

What exactly did Aristotle mean by eudaimonia? What exactly did Aristotle mean by eudaimonia? A situation in which a person both: A situation in which a person both: a. lives well and a. lives well and b. behaves well. b. behaves well. * Eudaimonia is not a selfish searching for personal happiness – it includes the idea of virtue.

Therefore, for Aristotle, happiness is not simply the same as pleasure. He claims there are three types of life. Therefore, for Aristotle, happiness is not simply the same as pleasure. He claims there are three types of life. He shows contempt for a, recognises the need for b, but says c is the most important: He shows contempt for a, recognises the need for b, but says c is the most important: a. a life of gratification b. a life of politics c. a life of study.

“ The many, the most vulgar, seemingly conceive the good and happiness as pleasure, and hence they also like the life of gratification. Here they appear completely slavish, since the life they decide on is a life for grazing animals.” DO VIRTUE AND HAPPINESS ALWAYS GO TOGETHER? DO VIRTUE AND HAPPINESS ALWAYS GO TOGETHER?

Aristotle’s idea of happiness is potentially achievable, not some impossible ideal. Aristotle’s idea of happiness is potentially achievable, not some impossible ideal. He disagrees with Plato’s view that the Form of the Good is something eternal, of which individual good things here are mere copies. He disagrees with Plato’s view that the Form of the Good is something eternal, of which individual good things here are mere copies. To Aristotle, goodness here on earth is the real thing, not a pale imitation. To Aristotle, goodness here on earth is the real thing, not a pale imitation.

REASON Aristotle divided the human into 3 distinct parts: a. Material substance, i.e. skin, bone, blood. b. Form or soul = gives shape, purpose and direction to our life. c. Reason, the supreme human virtue. REASON IS NEEDED TO BE FULLY HUMAN.

What exactly did Aristotle mean by reason? What exactly did Aristotle mean by reason? a. the faculty of thinking logically, and a. the faculty of thinking logically, and b. a moral sense. b. a moral sense. This means it is not enough just to know what is reasonable, you also have to act on it. This means it is not enough just to know what is reasonable, you also have to act on it. This is why reason is related closely to eudaimonia, the ultimate goal of humans.

People can use reason to work out their chosen purpose or telos. People can use reason to work out their chosen purpose or telos. The ability to think about actions and match them up with a chosen telos is called phronesis (prudence). The ability to think about actions and match them up with a chosen telos is called phronesis (prudence). For Aristotle, the ideal human telos = a. rational b. balanced c. independent d. good company. The ultimate telos is eudaimonia – to live well and behave in a way that shows rationality.

THE MEAN Aristotle’s idea that doing right involves a balance between extremes. Aristotle’s idea that doing right involves a balance between extremes. A possible implication of this is that emotions and actions are morally neutral in themselves: it is only an extreme form of them which counts as a vice. A possible implication of this is that emotions and actions are morally neutral in themselves: it is only an extreme form of them which counts as a vice.

This idea has been criticised, for example by Alisdair MacIntyre. Surely there are some emotions, e.g. malice, and actions, e.g. murder, which are inherently evil. This idea has been criticised, for example by Alisdair MacIntyre. Surely there are some emotions, e.g. malice, and actions, e.g. murder, which are inherently evil. Aristotle does actually take this into account, saying that some actions and emotions are inherently bad. Aristotle does actually take this into account, saying that some actions and emotions are inherently bad. Aristotle does not take into account the circumstances in which an action is performed or emotion experienced. Aristotle does not take into account the circumstances in which an action is performed or emotion experienced.

Aristotle’s ideas about eudaimonia and reason are important because they influenced the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas is the philosopher most associated with Natural Law.