Aristotle Ethics Of Happiness Philosophy Essay

Aristotle Ethics Of Happiness Philosophy Essay In Ethics, Aristotle argues the highest end is the human good, and claims that the highest end pursued in action is happiness. Aristotle also claims that happiness is achieved only by living a virtuous life our definition is in harmony with those who say that happiness is virtue, or a particular virtue; because an activity in accordance with virtue implies virtue. Indeed, we may go further and assert that anyone who does not delight in fine actions is not even a good man.(Aristotle) The virtuous life is full of reasoning for the good. Good is complete and most choice worthy. It is the human good in life that expresses virtue. Happiness is an essential aspect of Aristotles philosophy because for him it was an activity of the soul which attained at a high level of excellence refined over the span of a complete life that accords with virtue. The concept of virtue for Aristotle was anything that makes something good. The good is the result of what someone rationally aims for. If someone performs a job or a task that it is meant to be done and does it well, then it has good virtue. It is specifically the ability to use reason that sets humans apart from the other mammals and creatures. According to Aristotle, human virtue means virtue of the soul and not the body, just like human happiness means happiness of the soul. Virtue of humans also will be the state of character which makes them good and which makes them do their own work well. It is a state of character concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us. Such a mean is determined by a rational principles and reasoning, and it is by reasoning that a wise human will determine it. Happiness in general terms is a belief, an idea and a theory. Just like other theories, beliefs, and ideas may have fallacies, the theory of happiness might too. According to Aristotle happiness is an end, an end result of all the things a person does. Most of our acts are committed for a reason to achieve something else, but happiness is different. Aristotle believes that searching for happiness is for being happy only and not for something else. A happy man is the man that thinks he has everything he really needs. He has those virtues in which he needs to realize his potentials. Once realizing his potentials heà ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚ ¢s able to achieve happiness. Thatà ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬Ãƒâ€¹Ã…“s why Aristotle said that the happy man wants nothing more. Happiness is sought-after in itself and never for the sake of something else. Happiness meets Aristotles criteria for completeness viz. An end pursued in itself, we say, is more complete than an end pursued because of some thing else. (Aristotle) Happiness, according to him is just as self-sufficient as good, because both make life choice worthy. Apart from being chosen for themselves honor, pleasure and wealth, are also chosen for the sake of happiness, judging that by means of them we shall be happy. Desires compiled of wealth, honor, and power are good but, they do not lead to happiness because they are superficial. Happiness, on the other hand, is not chosen or searched for, for the sake of these, or, for anything other than itself. Happiness is something final and self-sufficient. This leads Aristotle to his definition of the happy life as a life made perfect by the possession of all good things such as health, wealth, friendship, knowledge, virtue all these are constituent parts of happiness. Happiness is the whole good of which they are component parts. That is how happiness is related to all other goods. For the question as to why do we want to be healthy, one could answer by saying à ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬ because by being healthy would enable us to do the different kind of work we want to do. If then asked, why do you want to do that kind of work, the crucial answer would be because you wanted to be happy. Now that if you were asked, why did you want to become or be happy, the only answer would be because you wanted to become and be happy. There is an argument as to what constitutes happiness. Is it pleasure, honor, health, wealth, knowledge or something else? Aristotle clarifies that happiness is not found in living for pleasure because such a life is slavish. Nor is it found in seeking honor because honor depends not on the person but on what others think of him. In addition, Aristotle holds that the happiness of a human can be defined by determining the function proper to the human soul. This function cannot be one that plants and animals also perform, because it must be particular to human beings. Therefore, the function must be a part of the practical life of the rational part of a human, the term practical implying determined conduct, which is possible only for rational beings. It follows, then, that happiness consists in the action of the rational part of a human. The ultimate good of a human should naturally flow from performing his function well. To constitute true happiness this action must persist with conti nuity throughout a lifetime. Aristotles argument can be considered flawed when he suggests only human beings with full use of reason can be considered happy because happiness comes by reasoning. Aristotle argues that what sets humans apart from animals are reason and the ability to perform actions that only humans can perform. Children are human, but until a certain age they cannot reason or perform actions. Though they are not animals but their reasoning capability is similar to animals. A child may be happy at any age and hence Aristotle cannot say that happiness is only for humans as they can reason. Animals can be happy, even if they lack reasoning. This level of happiness might not be familiar to humans, but it doesnt mean that they cannot be happy. There is another point in Aristotles argument that can be faulty. Aristotles search for the good is a search for the highest good. He assumes that the highest good, whatever it turns out to be, has three characteristics it is desirable for itself, it is not desirable for the sake of some other good, and all other goods are desirable for its sake. But someone can attain happiness by having other goods. In other words, cant a particular individual reach happiness through wealth, power, and honor? If that same individual has those things taken away, he is not happy. Those other goods are what help that individual reach Aristotles highest end. As without them happiness becomes reliant on those other goods in order for that individual to reach happiness, so happiness in some sense does depend on other goods. Can virtues and pleasures change mans definition of Happiness? It can be decided on that virtues, and pleasures bring happiness because happiness is an end result of these things. But situations can change your definitions of what virtues and pleasures bring you happiness. Thus stating that happiness can not only be attained by having some virtues and pleasures, you must have possessions of all virtues and pleasure to be truly happy and stay that way. However does that imply that you lack some virtues and pleasures, and that you can never be truly happy. For example a poor or sick man can never be truly happy. Can anyone ever be happy? According to Aristotle they can be happy and lead a happy life. If a man adheres to virtues and pleasures then there should be no reason for him not to be able to attain happiness. Aristotle also makes a point about having moral virtues not lying, not taking a personà ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚ ¢s life, and other morally right things. Being moral ly virtuous is a way to living a happy life. By not stealing, or killing, or lying one can be content in knowing he or she is good therefore bringing happiness. But can moral, truth build the absolute definition of good; can some lead a good life without lying in the world? If you are to be put in a situation where you must lie to help or save someone, would you be able to find that happiness even though you are not morally virtuous? If this is possible then is disproves Aristotles belief that you always must be morally virtuous to be happy. These situations can always arise and if one moral virtue is chosen over another does that mean that you will not be able to be happy with the outcome. If you do not need moral virtues, then what is it that is needed to be happy? There are certain traits and virtues which are necessary in todays world in order to ensure a happy life. Traits such as conformity, patience, self content, self assurance, as well as virtues such as justice and temperance are key elements in attaining happiness. If one does not learn to accept himself, reality, then how can he ever truly be happy with his life? We must be moral ly virtuous, but it cannot constitute our lives. Having a good character consists in nothing more than being willing to suffer some immediate pains or willing to give up some immediate pleasures for the sake of obtaining a greater good later on. It consists in nothing more than making the right choices. The right choices are always those that determine on, what is good in the long run. They are hard to make. But if we do not make them, we are likely to have some fun from day to day for a while, and in the long run ruin our lives. In the process of building our lives, Aristotle says we keep our eye on the future, and on the result we want to achieve for our life as a whole, counting all the days to come. What he teaches us is that we cannot become happy by living for the pleasures of the moment. We often have to choose between having a good time and leading a good life. And this is something, Aristotle says, most men often do not do. In this sense Aristotles theory can be credible. H appiness can be attained if a person leads a good life. The term a good life may be interpreted in many different ways, but ultimately a good life must be lead. Then and only then is happiness attained. Happiness cannot be seen as an immediate result, for all that would amount to be is a momentary pleasure. Happiness must be seen as an end result, and in thus being an end result it can only be achieved as a long term goal. To be happy is to attain a balance (the mean) between virtues, morals, pleasures, and goals. If a person can learn to find a balance and become content with his situation as a result of that balance, he will be happy. Throughout time people have claimed to have been happy, and it is universally known of what things we must do in our lives to be happy; be just, virtuous, and morally right. Consider the situation of this final paper It has taken me multiple hours to complete, and I have had troubles in writing it, but I write it to achieve a greater goal, a good grade. By achieving a good grade I will pass this class, and thus be happy, but there is always the chance that I may not get a good grade thus not achieving happiness. This possibility now presents a problem in all theories. No matter what we do, if we complete our duties and if we are morally virtuous, there are always cases that have the possibility of hindering us from achieving happiness even if that was our goal. Thus one must never lead his life by the assumptions of others, on what paths must be taken in order to achieve happiness or a good life. We must lead our own lives to the best of our ability, and in being at ease knowing we have made our own paths, then and only then can we really be happy. Overall Aristotles teachings have pointed out that happiness as an end in itself is the ultimate end and f unction of human beings. The only method of reaching this happiness is through reason. A life that does not exercise the role to reason will end up in some way being incomplete and never reach perfection. Therefore, reason is not only good for us but needed to reach an absolute existence.

Buy or Build a Successful Internet Business :: Sell Websites Buy Web Sites

Buy or Build a Successful Internet Business Reprinted with permission of VotanWeb.com Many people who don’t make their living online believe that the Internet has become very crowded. They are convinced that there are now few opportunities to develop a hugely successful online business. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have launched several websites that were late comers in very crowded niche markets. These websites now dominate their perspective niches and each generates a six figure profit – before the government takes their huge share for contributing nothing. Of course, there are mainstream areas that have become extremely saturated. These markets are easily identified by the absurd pay per click (PPC) costs for keyword phrases targeted at these markets. To succeed you will have to cater products or services to a niche market. The majority of people who start an online businesses do so with little thought and no planning. They find a wholesaler who dropships products directly to customers and then they build a web site. The barriers to entry are non existent. Any a high school student with a parent’s credit card can quickly build a web site, pay for keywords on PPC engines and have a sale all within a few hours. This works because that student comes in at the lowest price and is thrilled making 10% margins or $200 dollars a week. If you wish to develop a successful eCommerce business then it is very helpful if you can create high barriers to entry. As an example, having the exclusive right to distribute a product over the Internet or distributing a product you manufacturer would create high entry barriers. If you don’t currently have access to any exclusive products or services then consider approaching companies who do not market their goods via the Internet and secure an exclusive right to offer their products or services online. Another method of creating high barriers to entry is just plain hard work. When I developed my website for schools there were already many similar websites on the internet. Each of these websites provided information on ten to thirty different schools. I launched my website with information on over 600 schools and within a few months I was the highest ranked website in this category. In general, if I can’t offer ten times what is being offered by established websites in a market niche then I don’t enter an established market.

Discuss the causes of World War I Essay

The most prominent factors which led to World War 1 were nationalism, militarism, imperialism, the Balkan and Morocco crises, and the alliance system. As luck would have it, these factors either started in response to, or because of each other. The alliance system was one of the last factors to emerge before the war. The alliance system was a main cause of World War 1; it came into play because of a few factors, and did not cause the war alone. Nationalism, the love and support of one’s country, has always existed. During this time, nonetheless, it took part in the culmination of one of the most famous wars in history. As so much pride was devoted to countries, it made the potential for peace between past rivals less likely. It also meant that most nations, particularly the great powers, would rather fight a war than back down from a rival’s diplomacy. Since no country felt easy about fighting in a war alone, nationalism was a contributing factor to the alliance system. Allies provided a lot of ease with the growing militaries in almost every country. Militarism, a policy of aggressive military preparedness, in this period of time gave all countries great reason to feel the heavy weight of a looming war. Great Britain had a naval policy to have the largest military force hands down. That, along with the predominate feeling of war, provided countries with a strong reason to create an incredibly strong military force. This led to an arms race, which made the impending war seem certain. The military planning in some countries also caused an increased fear of war. Military machines were being developed; each country was appointing a staff of experts. The greatest problem with this was the fear that the expert would precipitate war under a looming timetable. The alliance system was born from these two factors. If two or more countries are allied with each other they have a better chance of defeating their common enemy if war was declared. They also have a higher likelihood of winning if they have alliances providing support. Imperialism is defined as the control of people by another politically, economic exploitation, or the imposition of culture on another group. This not only played a large part in the creation of the alliance system, but it  also created enemies for many countries, which were grounds for war. For example, Austria wanted to dominate the Balkans in order to check for propaganda coming from Serbia. Germany supported Austria in its Balkan policy because it wanted to exploit the rich resources of Asia Minor, and had to have a peaceful route through the Balkans to get there. In this way, it led to the alliance of Germany and Austria when war was in the near future. Imperialism led countries to have conflicting national interests as well, which also led to war. Each country thought they were right and wanted to convert other cultures to be more like their own. With nationalism, militarism, and imperialism all showing a large presence at the same period, a solid ground was formed for the alliance system to build itself on. The Dual Alliance between Germany and Austria was formed, the Triple Alliance between Austria-Hungary, Germany, and Italy was created, and the Triple Entente was created between France, Russia, and Great Britain. Although the Triple Entente was not an official alliance, they all maintained a very close understanding, and were viewed by many as a threat. The crises in Morocco and the Balkans had a devastating result because it was one right after the other. The 3rd Balkan crisis led to what most would say was the immediate cause of the war. It was what caused the most damage, possibly only because it was followed soon after the first two. On June 28, 1914, the Black Hand, a Bosnian revolutionary, assassinated the heir to the Austrian throne, Archduke Francis Ferdinand. In retaliation, Austria decided to end the South Slav separatism, and issued an ultimatum. Austrian officials must be allowed to collaborate in the investigation and punishment of the assassinators. Austria, with the support of Germany, then declared war against the Serbs, since they had refused the ultimatum. Then, on August 1, 1914, Germany demanded that Russia’s military mobilization cease, and when Russia refused, Germany declared war. Russia then declared war on France, convinced that it would enter anyway. Germany was devastated when Great Britain entered the war. As one country declared war on another all alliances were brought into the war, and the First World War soon took place, thus, the alliance system  holds the greatest responsibility for the breakout of a world war. However, the alliance system might have never occurred had it not been for nationalism, militarism, and imperialism. Furthermore, the Morocco and Balkan crises did not directly cause the war, but they were used as justification for the war to begin. That’s why, many factors contributed to the formation of the alliance system, which led to tension between enemy countries, and the third Balkan crisis paved the way for the Great War to begin. Western Civilization: Since 1500, Chapters 13-29, Vol. 2 : Jackson J. Spielvogel (Paperback)Wikipedia

William Shakespeare s Everyman As An English Morality Play

â€Å"Everyman† is an English morality play whose author is unknown. It dates back to the 16th century and was first seen in England. The play depicts a man who is caught up in a secular world and is more concerned with worldly riches than nurturing his spiritual life. He seems content until Death is sent to tell him his life is over and he must now give an account to God of how he lived his life. The author uses allegory characters to describe moral qualities and abstractions in Everyman’s life. (Allegory, 2010) The central character in the play is Everyman; the author uses him to represent a typical human being. Death is a messenger in the play who has been sent by God to summon Everyman. God is of course our Creator. At the beginning of God’s first speech in the play we know right away that he is angry with us when he says â€Å"I perceive here in my majesty, how that all the creatures be to me unkind, living without dread in worldly prosperity: Of ghostly sight the people be so blind, drowned in sin, they know me not for their God; In worldly riches is all their mind all creatures to me be unkind†. (Anonymous) He talks about how people live to please themselves and have neglected to think about him. Disappointed in mankind, God calls upon Death and refers to him as a â€Å"mighty messenger†. He says that death is instructed to deal with everyone who â€Å"liveth beastly.† People who worship wealth and worldly goods instead of God will essentially be sent to hel l unless he has an account of