Robert Nozick (1938-2002) refuted the Hedonistic idea that happiness is the only end that people pursue. Ethical Hedonism views individual welfare in terms of pleasure and pain. Hedonists claim that pleasure experiences are intrinsically good and experiences of pain are intrinsically bad (Dimmock and Fisher 11). Hedonists believe that what defines a successful life is directly related to the amount of pleasure in life, and no other factors are relevant. Nozick presented a thought experiment involving an experience machine. In his proposition, he asks to imagine a machine developed by neuropsychologists that would give an individual any experience they desired without realizing that this experience is fake for the rest of their lives. Nozick argues that most people would opt not to plug into the machine because they will be leaving behind their friends, family, and life experiences and favor a fake pre-programmed life (Dimmock and Fisher 12). Nozick concludes that there is more to life than mere happiness or pleasure experiences. The above argument leaves one to question what an idyllic good life is supposed to be. I will present my arguments based on Aristotle’s discussions on virtue and the good life in answering this question.
Aristotle claims that humans pursue eudaimonia, translated from Greek as happiness, as the top end because achieving it makes life worth living. However, mere happiness is not informative of what a good life entails. Aristotle further claims that the highest good of human beings concerns their purpose, which involves rational activity guided by virtue (Dimmock and Fisher 50). Therefore, this implies that a “happy life is guided by reasoning, and it involves the relationship with other people within the society” (Dimmock and Fisher 51). Thus, it is likely for an individual to prefer an actual life with obstacles and failures over a fabricated life provided by a machine.
Additionally, Aristotle contends that to possess virtues, one needs practical intelligence. Having the virtue of practical intelligence involves having sound judgment about practical matters. This intelligence involves the capacity to determine the right manner of feeling and action in contexts that call for some virtuous response. Intelligence is the overarching virtue involved in having more specific virtues such as honesty, generosity, and benevolence (Dimmock and Fisher 55). Hence, an individual cannot learn or possess any virtues in the machine because they do not exercise rationality, nor do they face moral dilemmas that would require them to use practical intelligence to solve. The life provided by the machine is inactive; it has no challenges because whatever a person desires, the machine fulfills.
According to Aristotle, all human activities aim at some end or good; hence the good for human beings is some end that is the most preferable among the various ends one pursues. The highest good must be an end for which all other ends are pursued, thus making it unconditionally complete and self-sufficient. Ends like pleasure lack absolute completeness because there is something further for which people choose such ends, which is happiness (Dimmock and Fisher 49). Thus, the teacher’s pleasure from teaching is not the ultimate end; the teacher should pursue eudaimonia. In addition, the good of teaching is subjective and relative to the individual teacher because people may have the same purpose, but their application of rationality in executing their functions may vary.
Work Cited
Dimmock, Mark, and Andrew Fisher. Ethics for A-LEVEL. OPEN Book Publishers, 2017.