Introduction
It is not a secret that people all across the world strive to be happy and independent of their social or financial position. However, the universal need for happiness does not mean everyone defines it similarly. An example of such a difference is the philosophies of Aristotle and the Stoics. While there are distinct similarities between the two given theories (happiness depending on virtue), there are specific differences.
The Stoics are differentiated from Aristotle in that they believe in virtue as the source of happiness and living in harmony with nature. According to the Stoics, human nature is to be able to use reason (“Stoic ethics,” n.d.). A reasonable person is prone to making more conscious decisions that serve not only their own good, but also the good of others. The Stoics’ ethics regarding happiness are superior due to their adherence to reason and, therefore, the greater good.
Aristotle’s Philosophy
Aristotle’s philosophy regarding happiness is a highly complex matter. He viewed a happy life as the superior form of living that all human beings should strive towards, after coming to the conclusion that people make decisions based on what pleases them. Virtue is significant for Aristotle as it is for the Stoics; however, it does have a broader meaning.
In essence, virtue is an action that is not simply moral but also excellent. This excellence is pronounced in the rhetoric of achievement and is prominent in Aristotle’s ethics (“Aristotle,” 2020). For Aristotle, happiness means excellently obtaining the good aspects of life—wealth, knowledge, and health.
The Stoics’ Philosophy
The Stoics’ philosophy is determined by its focus on the end of human activity, which is called eudaimonia. Eudaimonia translates to happiness or flourishing, which means that the Stoics viewed happiness as the end goal of human existence. For them, happiness was seen as living in agreement with nature, a complex subject in their theory.
On the one hand, nature is viewed as fate, meaning that all occurrences happen for a reason. On the other hand, nature is a force that governs all living beings according to their inherent features. The Stoics derived this idea from observing the natural patterns of animal and plant behavior (“Stoic ethics,” n.d.). For humans, this feature is the ability to reason.
The Superiority of the Stoics’ View
While both of the presented theories have their own advantages and exciting points, ultimately, the Stoics’ view prevails. First, the idea that happiness is decided by an excellent accumulation of goods and virtues, while not unacceptable, is certainly flawed. For certain people, the striving for ultimate perfection can be detrimental to their mental health.
The philosophy of the Stoics, which requires simply employing reason to create a happy life, is more appealing as it focuses on living according to a person’s own needs. In Stoicism, the requirements for happiness and how they are achieved are not predetermined. Furthermore, reason allows people to consider their happiness and the well-being of those around them.
Conclusion
In conclusion, both theories provide an adequate idea of happiness. However, Aristotle’s focus on achievement makes his philosophy slightly less appealing than that of the Stoics. Aristotle believes in excellence, while the Stoics emphasize agreement with nature in following the human inherent feature—the ability to reason. This ability allows individuals to focus on the people around them and prioritize their mental health instead of the pursuit of excellence.
References
Aristotle. (2020). Web.
Stoic ethics. (n.d). Web.