Dr. Magada-Ward
Philosophy 1030
4 November 2017
Essay 2 Set forth and discuss the constituents of eudaimonia. Do you agree with Aristotle’s list and his weighting? Why or why not? Furthermore, do you believe that it is possible for us, now, to achieve eudaimonia? In the Ethics, Aristotle contemplates four primary topics-the definitions of virtues and vices, humanity's unique ability to deliberate and choose, how ethics relates to human action, and the point of human striving. Arguably, his discussion about human striving is the most profound because of its implications for humanity as a whole; he contends that the purpose of human striving is to attain eudaimonia, or the ultimate happiness, which brings him to the question of what eudaimonia …show more content…
A person without external goods would achieve little satisfaction with their life if their lives were devoid of honor, respect, and some measure of wealth. A person would be pretty miserable if he or she did not have goods of the body, as well. Without health or beauty, something is lacking in the individual and with that deprivation, and they cannot be truly satisfied. Aristotle weights goods of the soul and virtue more heavily than the other components of eudaimonia, and I think goods of the soul are the most influential in determining a person’s …show more content…
However, I think that it is unlikely. I attribute that inability to our society evolving into an increasingly materialistic one. To illustrate my position, I was sitting in my history 2020 class on November 3rd, and my professor, Dr. Benjamin Sawyer, asked us to all imagine that we owned a factory. He then asked us to imagine that the factory got a machine that would produce double the amount of product in half the amount of time that it would normally take. He then told us to list all the possible outcomes. Students in the class listed possibilities like an expansion of the market for the product, how workers could get laid off because they would not be needed, and how the increased production could unintentionally flood the market. Not a single person mentioned that people could work half the time and still make as much money as they would prior to the machine. They seemed incredulous when the professor mentioned that idea. They were more focused on the accumulation of capital than what they could do with more free time. That example illustrated to me that almost everyone in that class disproportionally places an emphasis on external goods and goods of the body, rather than being happy simply for the sake of being
Philosophy 1030
4 November 2017
Essay 2 Set forth and discuss the constituents of eudaimonia. Do you agree with Aristotle’s list and his weighting? Why or why not? Furthermore, do you believe that it is possible for us, now, to achieve eudaimonia? In the Ethics, Aristotle contemplates four primary topics-the definitions of virtues and vices, humanity's unique ability to deliberate and choose, how ethics relates to human action, and the point of human striving. Arguably, his discussion about human striving is the most profound because of its implications for humanity as a whole; he contends that the purpose of human striving is to attain eudaimonia, or the ultimate happiness, which brings him to the question of what eudaimonia …show more content…
A person without external goods would achieve little satisfaction with their life if their lives were devoid of honor, respect, and some measure of wealth. A person would be pretty miserable if he or she did not have goods of the body, as well. Without health or beauty, something is lacking in the individual and with that deprivation, and they cannot be truly satisfied. Aristotle weights goods of the soul and virtue more heavily than the other components of eudaimonia, and I think goods of the soul are the most influential in determining a person’s …show more content…
However, I think that it is unlikely. I attribute that inability to our society evolving into an increasingly materialistic one. To illustrate my position, I was sitting in my history 2020 class on November 3rd, and my professor, Dr. Benjamin Sawyer, asked us to all imagine that we owned a factory. He then asked us to imagine that the factory got a machine that would produce double the amount of product in half the amount of time that it would normally take. He then told us to list all the possible outcomes. Students in the class listed possibilities like an expansion of the market for the product, how workers could get laid off because they would not be needed, and how the increased production could unintentionally flood the market. Not a single person mentioned that people could work half the time and still make as much money as they would prior to the machine. They seemed incredulous when the professor mentioned that idea. They were more focused on the accumulation of capital than what they could do with more free time. That example illustrated to me that almost everyone in that class disproportionally places an emphasis on external goods and goods of the body, rather than being happy simply for the sake of being