The concept of Happiness presented by the Greek philosopher Aristotle in his classic work Nicomachean Ethics lies beyond the traditional notion of Happiness that has developed in the collective consciousness. Happiness is not determined by the amount of wealth or the constant pleasures that a person is able to experience in life. For the philosopher, money is not a vice in itself, but worrying exclusively about money is a sin that alienates a person from Happiness. Pleasure can also lie outside ethics and therefore not bring true Happiness, being only the satisfaction of inner vices. The concept of Happiness lies beyond material wealth, despite the fact that Happiness can only be achieved by living and being fully involved in the surrounding life.
According to Aristotle, the task of a person striving for Happiness is to preserve their righteousness, that is, the ability to live in accordance with human ethics. The pleasure principle can be expressed in actions so hedonistic that the pursuit of pleasure alone is, for Aristotle, a sign of animalistic life (Elliott, 2017). The pursuit of pleasure cannot be the final guarantee of Happiness. In any case, it will be a lower, less valuable happiness for a person who does not value the best and the highest in oneself, who does not know what they are capable of representing.
Happiness for Aristotle is undoubtedly connected with ethical principles and the desire of a person to live according to the principles of virtue. A person with positive characteristics such as generosity or courage, according to some higher attitude, finds themselves in a situation when it becomes necessary to show these qualities. A person who does not act according to their own internal parameters and characteristics cannot be truly happy since they independently and voluntarily deny their own nature. The pleasure of living according to the principle of virtue may not appear immediately and must be practiced diligently (Hoipkeimer, 2018).
However, when such a life becomes a constant condition for the existence of a person and becomes their second nature, a person begins to receive real pleasure from their actions. Thus, moral virtue requires constant realization. A person can come closer to Happiness if they act in accordance with their nature – provided that their nature is ethically correct, that is, strives for virtue.
Expressing a position on this issue, it seems necessary to stipulate how Aristotle’s ethics works in the context of society and other people. One gets the feeling that the moral character of a person can, in fact, be constructed by a society that dictates what is right and necessary. In the modern world, for example, the principle of pleasure is placed on a very high pedestal, while ethical principles are used only to condemn people and criticize their actions. In the current times, the principles of Aristotle seem inapplicable at first, but it should be borne in mind that they require the inner consent of a person with their principles (Stein, 2019). A truly beneficent person, according to “Nicomachean Ethics,” will not ignore the injustice being done and will try to change the world order that seems vicious to them.
At the same time, it would be unreasonable to assume that a beneficent person must definitely fight since the preservation of themselves and their life well-being, in this case, is no less important. That is, a person will not overcome themselves and take a huge risk trying to live according to their ethics since such principles can make them an outcast of society. It can be concluded that a person striving for Happiness will look for those ways of expressing their virtue that will not jeopardize their basic life attitudes. Fighting for justice by risking one’s life in this way is not a recipe for Happiness. A virtuous person thus runs the risk of being unhappy and not being able to do good to other people in the future.
Morality seems to be a condition of Happiness in the concept of the soul proposed by Aristotle, but this link requires additional clarification. A person cannot be truly happy, contrary to their virtuous nature, preventing it from realizing itself. However, the manifestation of this nature also requires some basic conditions of comfort in which a person feels like a full-fledged and comprehensively developed personality. Thus, not wealth but certain economic prosperity is also fundamental for those who want to show their virtue. The desire for pleasure, on the other hand, can manifest itself not in its most animalistic manifestations but in such actions as, for example, a philosophical conversation.
However, a moral person must still strive for justice and act in accordance with the call of their heart – otherwise, they cannot be happy. By acting against their nature, for example, by admitting obvious injustice, people obviously strike a blow to their conscience. A person with a polluted conscience who thinks that they have not sufficiently realized their virtue could not be happy because they will experience mental anguish.
Works Cited
Elliott, J. R. (2017). “Aristotle on virtue, happiness and external goods.” Ancient Philosophy, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 347-359. Web.
Hoipkeimer, M. (2018). “Justice, not happiness: Aristotle on the common good.” Policy, vol. 50, no. 4. Web.
Stein, S. (2019). “Hegel and Aristotle on ethical life: Duty-bound happiness and determined freedom.” Hegel Bulletin, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 61-82. Web.