Discussion Of Man's Happiness According To Thomas Aquinas 'Honor'

In Article 2, Aquinas answers the question on whether man’s happiness consists in honors. It starts of with an objection that it would seem that man’s happiness consists in honors because with honor, virtue is rewarded. Aquinas disagrees and states that honor is not in the honored man, but the person who honors. Also, the people who respect the person honored is the one who gives honor so happiness cannot consist in honor. Honor is given with some excellence in the person. This is not related to happiness and therefore, cannot be happiness. If people were to work for virtue, their reward would be happiness, but if people worked to get honor, it would be an ambition of theirs. Therefore, some happiness was attained before getting honors. In Article 3, Aquinas answers the question on whether man’s happiness consists in fame or glory. The objections that he argues against are man’s good is spread by glory more than anything else and that people would have fame in …show more content…
The objections are that people want to become like God so they are able to get power to be like God, people want to rule over others, and men do not want servitude so they try to avoid it. Aquinas then rejects these by stating that power is not perfect in any way unless you are God. There are two reasons why happiness cannot live in power. They are that power has the nature of principle and power has relation to both good and evil. There are also reasons why there is not happiness in the external goods in power. Finally, Aquinas rejects these objections by stating that God only uses his power for good whereas people can use it for good or evil. It does not make them happy. Also, ruling many people would be bad if they make bad use of their power. Finally, servitude is obstacle for good power and that is why people avoid it. Power looks for something further and therefore, would not be happiness because happiness is