Good according to Aristotle
[[Eudaimonia]] is the ultimate good according to Aristotle → [[Eudaimonia according to Aristotle]]
Regarding activities (teleological conception of goodness) → Measuring success
[[Aristotle]]think that all human intentional activities have an end or goal (telos)- He calls this end or goal of our activities good
- This means that, for example, an activity is good to the extent to which it successd in reaching its end or goal.
- He remarks that some activities have ends or goals outside of themselves (e.g. producing a shoe) while others do not (e.g. dancing).
- In the former cases, the end is better than the activity (i.e. more desirable)
Hierarchy among activities
if something is done for the sake of another, the end is better
In the text NE 1.1
Some of these fall under some one capacity, however, as bridle making falls under horsemanship, along with all the others that produce equipment for horsemanship, and as it and every action in warfare fall under generalship, and, in the same way, others fall under different ones
He thinks that the upper activities have ends that are more choiceworthy than the lower ones since the lower ones are pursued for the sake of the upper ones
The Ultimate Good
NE 1.2
If, then, there is some end of things doable in action that we wish for because of itself, and the others because of it, and we do not choose everything because of something else (since if that is the case, it will go on without limit so that the desire will be empty and pointless), it is clear that this will be the good—that is, the best good. Hence regarding our life as well, won't knowing the good have great influence and like archers with a target—won't we better able to hit what we should?
This is the good - the human good - something that we all seek as the ultimate goal of our life because it is that which, when reached, makes our life good (in fact, best)
Aristotle thinks that we even have a word for it, namely happiness → [[Eudaimonia]].
But although we have a word for it, we do not agree on what it is.
Takeaway for Politics
Politicians shouold have a very good grasp on what makes Happiness and it should be their goal to increase the Happiness of the Community
Eudaimonia according to Aristotle
[[Good according to Aristotle]] → ultimate goal is Happiness
Important
- Contemplating the Good of the Universe is Happiness
- Happiness cannot be counted as 'one good among many' since it is the highest, most complete good which is self-suficient → Completeness
The Criteria are objective and can influence the Good of your life retroactively - if the children get hurt for example. The subjective feeling of goodness of life is a part of that, but not the whole.
The form of Happiness (what must the good be?)
(similar to the requirements you'd have for a car)
(Formal Criteria of Happiness: Nicomachean Ethics 1.1-2,5,7)
Some Intuitions of happiness concern the form - they are about the kind of thing that that which makes life good must be:
Completeness
(NE 1.7)
- Ends or goals can be pursued or be choiceworthy (NE 1.1-2):
- For the sake of something else
- For the their own sake
- For their own sake as well as for the sake of something else
An end or goal which is choiceworthy in its own right (for its own sake) is more complete than an end which is choiceworthy for the sake of something else.
The most complete goal or end is one which is always choiceworthy in its own right right and never for the sake of something else. This end is complete without qualification
Why not Happiness as one good among many
- Assume that happiness is a good, one alongside pleasure, honor, wealth, and such
- If that is so, that the goodness of happiness could be increased by addding pleasure to it
- But that would mean that happiness is not the highest (best) good, since happiness+pleasure would be better.
- This shows that happiness cannot be 'one among many' goods, it must stand apart from all other goods, so that no addition can increase its goodness.
Self-Sufficiency
It must suffice for a life involving other people
- Human beings are social beings and that means, among other things, that our doing well involves and depends on a number of social roles: parent, child, spouse, friend, colleague, citizen and so on. Thus whatever happiness turns out to be, it must be such that, when present, it makes the life good in all these respects.
Notice
One can have honor but what if the lives of one's children are miserable? One can also have pleasure, but what if one causes suffering to one's fellow citizens? In neither of these cases would one's life be unqualifiedly good, even if it does contain something that is good
Contradiction
In the end of NE, he says that one can be happy on their own, which contradicts this
Separateness
Wrong Subjective Criteria for Happiness
(Formal Criteria of Happiness: Nichomachean Ethics 1.1-2,5,7)
Aristotle thinks that we have intuitions about the kind of thing that happiness is.
Some of these concern the content - they are about what it is that makes life good
Pleasure, Honor, Wealth, Knowledge
It's not just pleasure
→ People who just seek pleasure have lives worthy of cattle, but not humans.
A bird that can't fly can't have a good life, even if it has everything else. The good life requires exercises capacities
It's not honor
Honor is a token of a good action, but by itself is not anything. It derives its value from the actually good actions.
It's not wealth
Wealth is just a tool for achieving something else.
Aristotles Function Argument
alias Ergon
The formal criteria will help us decide whether what we find is a good candiate for happiness.
What is a function (ergon)?
- It is the characteristic activity of a given thing as belonging to its species (or genus)
- Sculptor: her ergon is production of statues.
- Eye: its ergon is sight (seeing).
- Hammer: its ergon is driving nails.
- Dog: its ergon will be whatever it is that is typical for dogs as dogs to do
Difference to Telos (it's end)
They are closely related. Ergon is the activity to reach the Telos.
A bird can fly so flying is part of the ergon of a bird, but that is not necessarily the goal of his life
What is the human beings Ergon?
- Neither nutrition nor reproduction (even plants do that → they are not carecteristic of human beings)
- It is not perception (all animals do that)
- The ability to reason AND to act in accordance with reason is unique to humans
→ Human Function: the activity of the sould in accord with reason or requiring reason