Aristotle’s approach to moral ethics, virtue ethics, borders around yardstick for ascribing moral responsibility to individual agents, moral evaluation based on virtues and vices, and how humans can achieve happiness. The crux of Aristotle’s argument is the question of character or personality - how do we adjudge an individual human being to be a good person.
For Aristotle, seeking to know what is good for man is not for mere accumulation of knowledge, but for the purpose of been better at achieving what is good for man. In addressing the question of what is good, He did not seek a list of items that are good, he assumed that such a list is not far fetched, because it could be easily compiled. For instance, most people would not object the fact that it is good to experience pleasure, to be honored, to be healthy, to wealthy and to have a virtue like courage (which in his explanation is the “mean” between rashness and cowardice). “For some identify happiness with virtue, some with practical …show more content…
Goods could be categorized as: (a). external goods(power, fame, friends, honor wealth), (b). goods of the body (health, good looks, physical strength, athletic ability etc) and (c). goods of the soul (knowledge, education, creativity, recreation, friendship etc).
This thought engenders the problem of ascertaining how these goods actually relate to happiness. In addressing this challenge, Aristotle’s position is that some specific goods, such as life and health, are inevitable requirement for happiness and that some others like wealth, fame and honor are secondary requirement that only promote a good life for a virtuous person. It is the possession and exercise of virtue that constitute the main essence of happiness. Thus, the virtuous person can on his own achieve happiness in spite of unfavorable
For Aristotle, seeking to know what is good for man is not for mere accumulation of knowledge, but for the purpose of been better at achieving what is good for man. In addressing the question of what is good, He did not seek a list of items that are good, he assumed that such a list is not far fetched, because it could be easily compiled. For instance, most people would not object the fact that it is good to experience pleasure, to be honored, to be healthy, to wealthy and to have a virtue like courage (which in his explanation is the “mean” between rashness and cowardice). “For some identify happiness with virtue, some with practical …show more content…
Goods could be categorized as: (a). external goods(power, fame, friends, honor wealth), (b). goods of the body (health, good looks, physical strength, athletic ability etc) and (c). goods of the soul (knowledge, education, creativity, recreation, friendship etc).
This thought engenders the problem of ascertaining how these goods actually relate to happiness. In addressing this challenge, Aristotle’s position is that some specific goods, such as life and health, are inevitable requirement for happiness and that some others like wealth, fame and honor are secondary requirement that only promote a good life for a virtuous person. It is the possession and exercise of virtue that constitute the main essence of happiness. Thus, the virtuous person can on his own achieve happiness in spite of unfavorable