Aristotle Happiness Analysis

Register to read the introduction… In context, that would be like saying to have fun, one must play basketball. This is obviously incorrect, because people have different preferences when it comes to sports and games. The same can be said about happiness and each individual's preference when it comes to activities that people seek to be happy. Additionally, the most accepted definition of happiness would be something in regards to what people seek in leisure. Even if one's job was virtuous in nature, they would not say that doing work makes them happy. They would seek to do alternate activities when they were not working. A teacher, for example may pride himself in the action of helping others learn, yet even the most dedicated of teachers would be hard-pressed to do nothing outside of those activities. Even though the objections to this argument may be daunting, Aristotle provides reasoning as to why study is the most supreme activity for happiness. As for the first objection, we can infer that Aristotle doesn't mean to say that happiness only exists while studying, but rather that one cannot be happy without extensive study in their lives. Study may not elicit the same emotions as "joy" or similar ideas of happiness, though to "flourish" as a human requires more than simply feelings of …show more content…
The action of "study" is in itself interpreted very differently from person to person. Study can be anything undertaken to become more learned. This activity can be leisurely in the sense that there is no pace or deadline. Additionally, theoretical study is practically weariless. One should not grow tired of scholarship, because there will always be other things to study. In the case of the teacher that believes their work life to be considered study, they must be mistaken--study should be undertaken for personal reasons and with no tangible extrinsic