Aquinas View On Happiness

“Happiness is in the enjoyment of man’s chief good. Two conditions of the chief good: 1st, Nothing is better than it; 2nd, it cannot be lost against the will” (Augustine 264-267). As human

In Book 1 of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he argues that happiness is the best good, and the goal of an individual and of those leading and governing society. Here, happiness is understood as both living well and doing well, rather than the convention sense of happiness as an emotion. According to Aristotle, happiness is achieved though actions involving reason and in accord with virtue, or the best of the virtues of there are more than one. In this paper, I will provide a brief overview of the work and its author, then proceed to provide an overview of the ideas expressed and the argumentation supporting them, before finally performing an analysis and critique of the ideas expressed.

John Stuart Mill and Aristotle both address the idea of happiness as the goal of human life. They explain that all human action is at the foundation of their moral theories. Mill addresses the Greatest Happiness Principle, which is the greatest amount of pleasure to the least amount of pain. Similarly, Aristotle addresses happiness through the idea of eudaimonia and human flourishing. According to Aristotle, eudaimonia is happiness, it is the state of contemplation that individuals are in when they have reached actualized happiness. Also referred to as happiness or human flourishing, it is the ultimate goal of human beings. Happiness is “living well and acting well.” He explains that once general happiness becomes recognized as the moral standard, natural sentiment will nurture feelings that promote utilitarianism. According to Aristotle, happiness is a state of being. Both Mill and Aristotle agree that in order to attain true happiness, human beings must engage in activities that are distinct to humans and that make them happy. Aristotle’s idea of eudaimonia and human flourishing is a more compelling argument than Mill’s for happiness and the final end because Aristotle explains that the virtues bring human beings to happiness.

In part one of our book, “The Good Life,” we studied five different philosopher’s viewpoints on what is needed in order for a person to have a good, fulfilling life. They all included the concepts of pleasure and happiness to some extent in their theories, but they all approached the ideas in different ways. The two hedonists we studied, Epicurus and John Stuart Mill, place heavy emphasis on the importance of pleasure. They both believe that pleasure is a necessity in the ideal life. Jean Kazez agreed with their viewpoints in her theory and said that happiness was a necessity for a good life. Epicurus and Mill also argue that there is nothing else that we ultimately desire beyond pleasure and that it is an intrinsic good.

Aquinas believes that flourishing is the telos of the moral life. The telos cannot be something outside of a person, like service to others, as Luther believes, as “Man’s last end is something created, existing in him” (Aquinas 5). Because this end is created by oneself the telos can

People consistently pursue happiness and regard happiness as their ultimate goal to accomplish. However, the convoluted nature of happiness leads people to strive it through diverse ways; the obtainment of fame, nobility, ambition, glory, and beauty are all regarded as objectives of happiness. In the Consolation of Philosophy, Boethius refines his understanding of happiness through the guide from Lady Philosophy. He changes his recognition of happiness from mundane accomplishments to interior and instinctive superior goodness by God. The important factor influencing the transformation of Boethius is how Lady Philosophy defines happiness: it is a sufficient and independent state in which people draw satisfaction from something cannot be taken

…. virtue’s semblance. And when a man has brought forth and reared this perfect virtue, he ……. shall be called the friend of god, and if ever it is capable of man to enjoy immortality, it …… shall then be given to him”. (212d) These lines seem to be the entire neglection of material goods, but Socrates is not denying the importance of material goods. He emphasizes on the proper use of the material things rather than the importance of their presence in human life. Socrates is stressing upon the ultimate state of happiness, which would not be disturbed by the absence of material goods. The above line states that happiness is the innate quality of soul. Moreover, he said that when a person realizes his self-equipped and mortal state of soul, then he is able to find the true happiness in his life. The knowledge of true self is the path of happiness in human life. The knowledge of the true self destroys the material desires of people. This quote presents the idea that happiness is the vision of God, which is also a belief of Thomas Aquinas on the ultimate state of happiness (The Pursuits of Happiness) After the thousand years of Socrates’ demise, the master Gautam Buddha is also referred to the Socratic concept of happiness

The concept of happiness has eluded philosophers and intellectuals since the beginning of mankind’s ability to reason; though many have attempted to create overarching theories regarding the phenomenon, all have fallen short of grasping the dual nature of its formation: both demanding of hard work and of faith in some higher, seemingly transcendent force. Giorgio Agamben’s piece “Magic and Happiness,” an excerpt from his work Profanations, is no exception. The passage argues in favor of a belief in “magic,” a divine and all-encompassing force that presents, in his opinion, the solitary path towards true happiness. His argument, formed around the notion that persistent effort and achievement ultimately cannot yield happiness in the long

The first tension, as previously mentioned, is the love of oneself—the magnanimous person loves to do good things, but finds satisfaction in being superior to others. Another tension that the magnanimous person experiences is that although he desperately tries to focus his life on doing great deeds, at the end of the day, he is left with emptiness. However, Aquinas believed that the virtues of gratitude and humility in particular could overcome these tensions. In his writings, he brought up human interdependence. At the essence, he believed all humans needed each other, and that this was a good thing. He asserted that humans are not self-sufficient, and we must be comfortable with this idea because we are a part of a society in which even the

He recommended gaining a rational control over one’s desires, these desires being those that can be harmful to life such as: lust, greed, pride, and power. He argued that the key to human happiness is to turn away from the body and towards the soul. He said that harmonizing the different parts of the soul would produce a divine-like state of inner tranquility that the external world could not alter. A moral life is to be preferred to an immoral life. This view of happiness is linked to other concepts such as justice, virtue, and the ultimate meaning of human existence. Living a moral and just life would lead to a happier life.

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

Aquinas had a strong belief in Jesus Christ and the holy trinity, he believed what was said about the bible was true and he believed that the goal to achieve ‘ultimate happiness which is not in this life” (65). I support what Aquinas was saying about the ultimate happiness not being in this life. A person is able to achieve what he or she believes to be a sense of happiness on this earth by living and obeying Gods commandments for men and women however this sense of happiness is not genuine happiness. This is because a person has ability to live, serve, and have a relationship with their God, but at the end of the day he or she has never officially come face to face with their savior and he or she will still have a sense of fear or worry. Aquinas discusses in great lengths about the ultimate happiness of man, he believed that ultimate happiness is found in heaven, which I find to be remarkably true. Aquinas states “But man in this life, cannot obtain to die. Therefore it is not possible for man to be happy in this life” (65). In the past statement Aquinas is discussing how men fear death, man constantly fears the afterlife, which ultimately makes it impossible for man to achieve ultimate happiness on

In the opening lines of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle states, “Every craft and every line of inquiry, and likewise every action and decision, seems to seek some good; and that is why some people were right to describe the good at what everything seeks.” Aristotle often wrote about happiness, but so did Epicurus. In a broad sense, Aristotle and Epicurus touched on similar points when discussing happiness. They both believed that happiness is the ultimate goal in life, and that all human measures are taken to reach that goal. While Aristotle and Epicurus’ theories are similar in notion, a closer look proves they are different in many ways. In this paper, we will discuss the differences between Epicurus and Aristotle in their theories on happiness, and expand on some drawbacks of both arguments. Through discussing the drawbacks with both theories, we will also be determining which theory is more logical when determining how to live a happy life.

Happiness is the fundamental objective of life. This bold statement is unanimously agreed upon among generations of people on every corner of our planet. However, the real question that has been contested for centuries is the true meaning of happiness? The true meaning of happiness is one of the most highly debated philosophy topics in history. Most famous are the writings of Aristotle and John Stuart Mill who both paint very opposing pictures of happiness. Mill believes happiness is obtained through pleasure and the absence of pain. On the other hand, Aristotle insist happiness is obtained through living a fulfilling, virtuous life. This passage will examine Aristotle 's and Mill 's views on happiness as well as give an opinion one which philosophical theory is most convincing.

Summa Theologiae was written to display the reasonableness of Christian faith and to train future teachers in guiding others through Christianity, (Lecture, 11.14.2016) whereby one ultimately reaches true happiness. While Christians steadily find pleasure in their acceptance of God, Aquinas maintains that perfect happiness is distinct from this, both in what it entails and how it is achieved. Aquinas believes that humans cannot be entirely happy until fully understanding God, the original cause of their own being, which is impossible until reuniting with God in life after death.