Ergon, Eudaimonia, & Psyche in Artistotle´s De Amina

In the work, Nicomachean Ethics, the philosopher Aristotle creates a guideline for those who are serious about pursuing happiness. Aristotle's recommendations for finding happiness are not accepted today without some struggle and careful examination. In Aristotle's time, slaves, women and children were not truly considered human; so in many cases the philosopher is directing his words towards free males only. It is necessary to understand that by overlooking this discrimination and applying it to all people, one can discover the timeless wisdom of Aristotle.

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.

The most important difference between Sophocles’ play Antigone and Duccio’s the Maestá is in how they related to the societies they were created in. Although both of the societies in which the works of art were made were grounded by a profound sense of faith and religious values, each of them affected their audiences in a different way. On one hand you have Antigone, which challenged the people’s beliefs by presenting to them a scenario in which they had to choose the better of two goods. On the other hand, you have the Maestá, which brought together an entire people and strengthened them in their faith. This is the most important difference between the two works of art because of the crucial roles their religious values had in the societies in which they were made, one through doubt and the other through affirmation.

Appeal to emotions, individualism, and intellectual achievement were three important elements of Romanticism. This essay will explore the degree to which Cyrano de Bergerac exemplifies these elements of Romanticism.

Aristotle’s thoughts on ethics conclude that all humans must have a purpose in life in order to be happy. I believe that some of the basics of his ideas still hold true today. This essay points out some of those ideas.

The definition of happiness has long been disputed, and in order to establish a general definition one must discover mankind’s function (1095a.20). The distinct function of human beings will differentiate man from all other beings, thus it cannot be related to the characteristics of animals or plants. Aristotle explains that all living beings grow, and that man and animals share instinct. Through elimination, Aristotle establishes the distinct function of man as logic. Only human beings contain three souls and have the ability to use reason. Aristotle states, “the function of man then is activity of soul [thinking well and doing well] in accordance with reason” (). Ultimately, logic allows human beings to use reason in decision-making and to be virtuous.

Throughout time society has developed a system from which humans are able to define good and bad, Ethics. Although Ethical norms have been adapted throughout the passing of time, its most intrinsic values have prevailed, enabling individuals to agree on standards of what good and bad are built on their moral standards. Morals are what give the individual the capacity to distinguish good from bad. In the ancient Greece morals were indeed the individuals perception of good, and bad however, these perceptions were greatly abided and driven by the divine laws imposed by the gods. In Antigone, a tragedy written by Sophocles, we see the how the main character defies the kings rules and stands for her own perception of what she believes is the rightful thing to do .We are able to able to see the decision chosen by the two main characters, Creon and Antigone are the ones to define and condemn their faith and the one of those who live around them. In Bernard Knox’s Introduction poet T. S. Eliot states, “Antigone did the right thing for the wrong reason”(pg53). I believe that Antigone by deciding to mourn for her dead brother does indeed the right things but for the wrongs reasons. Through her actions she evidently follows the ethical norms imposed by the Greek divine laws, but it is her moral judgment the one to ambiguously expose her true reasons, the fulfillment of an unalloyed lust, creating a rupture beyond the scopes of rationality by incarnating the simple desire of taking upon

Aristotle defines the function of a human being as an activity of the rational soul. He argues that most functions of humans, such as being alive or having sense perception, are shared with plants and animals and cannot be distinct functions of human beings. The only remaining possibility which is not shared with things other than human beings, according to Aristotle, is the part of the soul that has reason. Human function, therefore, is an “activity of the soul in accord with reason or requiring reason.” But further qualification must be made when referring to the something’s function in the context of a greatest good; in this case, it is not sufficient for something to simply function, it must also function well. For example, the function of a pianist is to play the piano, but the function of a good pianist is to play a piano well. According to Aristotle, adding a function’s best virtue to it will work without qualification to make something excellent in every case. So, the function of a human being is an activity of the rational soul and the greatest good for a human is activity of the rational soul in accordance with its virtue.

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

To find out what the function of a human being is, Aristotle looks at what is distinctive about humans. He discovers that the good of the human is to act in accord with reason well, which can translate into acting in accord with virtue. One cannot have happiness without virtue, just as it is impossible to be virtuous with the absence of rational thinking. Because man is a rational creature, rather than plants which are vegetative, happiness for man must include the excellent functioning of the rational faculties.

Aristotle begins his exploration into the most outstanding life by attempting to figure what the highest possible good achievable is for human beings. He comes to the conclusion that most people will agree that happiness is the most sought after good. Happiness is self-sufficient and is the complete end of things pursued. However, they cannot seem to agree how to achieve happiness and what happiness is. In order to figure out what happiness is, Aristotle must evaluate the true function of human beings. This true function, as seen by Aristotle, is the key to achieving happiness. Aristotle describes happiness by saying:

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.

One of Aristotle’s conclusions in the first book of Nicomachean Ethics is that “human good turns out to be the soul’s activity that expresses virtue”(EN 1.7.1098a17). This conclusion can be explicated with Aristotle’s definitions and reasonings concerning good, activity of soul, and excellence through virtue; all with respect to happiness.

Aristotle is one of the greatest thinkers in the history of western philosophy, and is most notably known for expressing his view of happiness in Nicomachean Ethics. Aristotle develops a theory of how to live the good life and reach eudaimonia (happiness). Eudaimonia has been translated into, living a happy and virtuous life. Aristotle’s definition of the good life as the happy life, consist of balancing virtues (arête), the mean, external goods, political science, and voluntary action.

Aristotle presents a short analysis of the rational part of the soul, dividing it into two parts, a part that uses reason and a part that obeys reason. He sees life as supported by activity and not just the capacity to do something.