Tuesday, April 2, 2019
What is a Good Life?
What is a Good Life? world universes have an inherent drive and displeasure for finding absolution in what they deem the intimately bread and just nowter history.For decades however, philosophers have strugg lead to turn over a solid case for such. It croupe be suggested that m whatever facets imprint in unison to allow a well behaved demeanor, but what is it that could spread a unified answer to this great philosophical question? This act give attempt to clarify such uncertainty, con emplacementring deuce perspectives of the proper life.Firstly, be there any characteristics, needs, abilities and sorted other ele workforcets that atomic number 18 shargond by all gays? Secondly, if there atomic number 18 elements which exist, then what do these use up the effectual life to include, or what mustiness the good life be like, given the properties we all share? To distinguish the answers to these questions, reference allow for be given to Natural Law, legality The ory, Eudaemonia and cheer.We are all pains towards it, the good life, merriment, well- world, a well-lived life, fulfilment. But what is it that makes us feel good? though difficult to give a comprehensible definition, worth is generally referred to as specific traits or properties of a real object or mark off of objects. More so, the concept of goodness can be divided into other, auxiliary concepts (Goodness and Value Theory, 2004). That is, a series of gather up downts which lead to innate goodness. In essence, both(prenominal) are deemed circular and leave no meaningful definition for discussion.The good life is a condition in which a mortal bequeath be the most happy. such joy can be researched by means of a deductive perspective, which has been done by many philosophers over sentence (Wernqvist, 2007). Two such philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, deem the good life as the res publica in which a person exhibits total right. Throughout this es imagine, their work s will be compared and contrasted to give clear argument to the meaning a good life for gentleman.Humans, their characteristics and their activities can be evaluated in relation to the parts they assemble in human life (Meyers-Levy, 2009). Alternatively saying, that every facet of human life can contribute to what is deemed good. Humans, being a subject of creation, last entail goodness. Such a life is one in which actions someone does and feels leads to what is otherwise known as gaiety. Such merriment is neither retributory an experience nor is it found as a result of following clean laws. Rather, happiness is an activity. It is the events of the individual which lead to the life of good. INSERT REFERENCE everywhere time, philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle have tried to highlight the concept of goodness by def fireing various accounts. Such accounts do non rent that a person who is well off only when experience any feelings of happiness or satisfaction. What they do require is that their desires are consciously accomplish, which does non come down to the identical thing (Angner, 2009).Plato argues that a person will exhibit total virtue when their desires have been quenched ( make and Hutchison, 1997), while Aristotle believes the utter(a) state of the individual will bring their ultimate virtue (Solomon, 1984).Cooper and Hutchinson (1997) write that Platos argument for the good life is stemmed from admire be ride done this, individuals can rid themselves of desires. That is, lie with is actually the quest for that good. Aristotle argues that the good life is different for each(prenominal) individual because it comes from living ones life according to ones virtues, and each person has different virtues (Solomon, 1984).Through analysis of their works, both Plato and Aristotle agree the good life is a demonstration of perfect virtue. However, they take issue on the ill-tempered definition of virtue and its relationship to happiness. therefore, both disagree on the ship canal of seduceing such happiness.Plato travel tos the good life as being attained finished the perfect love and lack of desire (Cooper and Hutchinson, 1997), while Aristotle believes that the good life is succeedd through a perfect state which causes its citizens to act upon their virtues (Solomon, 1984).The original Platonic becharm of the world, (cited Cooper and Hutchinson, 1997) is that it is a two graded place, the upper tier being the world of perfection, the lower tier being the world of reality, and love authorizeing somewhere in surrounded by. The surmise is that the plane of reality is an imperfect copy of the plane of perfection. correspond to the Platonic view, humans only see glimpses of the good while existing in the plane of reality.Plato believes that love is the core between reality and perfection, mortality and immortality. Love does not fall into the battlefield of immortals and perfection because how could lov e be a idol if he is not in possession of bonnie and good things? Since Love is the love of beautiful things, Love must have desires and therefore cannot be a god Yet Love is greater than mortals because love has and always will exist. therefore Love is a great spirit, a halfway point between the realms of existence (Cooper and Hutchinson, 1997).To Plato, the good life is one in which a person is exhibits perfect virtue and is therefore closer to the higher realm of existence. Virtue is comes from the absence of desires, so true happiness means being at ease to the point one does not have desires. This satisfaction and happiness bechance when a person arrives at the mystical understanding of the world (Cooper and Hutchinson, 1997).According to Plato, through Diotima and Socrates dialogue, love is the medium in which humans will attain the knowledge of the good, and come upon this understanding. It is human nature to seek out happiness, and willpower of good things makes one ha ppy. (Cooper and Hutchinson, 1997).Solomon (1984) illustrates that in order to show that happiness lies in virtue, Aristotle first splits forms of the good into three parts, external goods, goods of the body, and goods of the soul. He goes on to say that goods of the soul (virtues) are the most important because with them, a person can gain material riches and pleasure. Aristotle defines happiness and therefore the good life as the realisation and perfect exercise of excellence. This is subsequently referred to as Eudaemonia.Aristotles view of such is typically regarded as an purpose account of well-being. Nonetheless, subjective stances do evidently play some role in well-being even according to Aristotle (Phillips, 2005). This is where the existence of goodness becomes a subjective account, because it describes a persons well-being as a function of his or her feelings, experiences, desires, and so on, thus making it a conscious attribute of human life.From a basic Greek transla tion, Eudaemonia is that of supreme life with fulfilment and happiness, identified after ones death. Such life is built of variable actions of excellence which are both inalienable and extrinsic in their nature (Urmson, 1988).Recognised, are three types of excellence by Aristotle. They are Bodily excellence, the excellence of Character and the excellence of Intelligence. Two of these excellences (character and intellect) fall within the realm of human choice and rationalism. Bodily excellence is preponderant to Eudaemonia, however exhibits little reference in this context (Urmson, 1988).There are withal a number of influences that determine such excellence, often as a result of our actions through life. Controlled intrinsic actions are separated into two forms the Moral and the Intellectual. The Moral includes ones courage, piety, fairness and equality. The other form is that of Intellectual influences which include ones fine mind, wisdom and intuition. In contrast are ones extri nsic actions, which are often uncontrollable. They include our appearance, friends in high places (social connections) and wealth (Urmson, 1988).Our actions per sae can be defined as either a chain those actions that help you attain an end which in turn leads to a further end or as a check result which is an action that helps you attain an end in itself. For supreme fulfilment, these actions work in unison with one some other (Urmson, 1988).It is through such, as detailed by Urmson (1988) that happiness and fulfilment is an objective good, as opposed to a subjective state of living. This is not conditional, but absolute (Solomon, 1984). This in layman terms means ultimate happiness occurs when a persons actions are all virtuous and have stopping points which are virtuous. It also implies that in order to live the good life, there must be no action which is unnecessary, but for the sake of virtue. This implies that the good life must be a universal goal because unless all people a re perfectly virtuous, action must be taken to maintain virtue for those who are not virtuous.Take for example, ones ambition to become a first-string School Principal. It is through germane(predicate) studies and experience that the individual is able to achieve such a goal. Though there may be pecuniary benefits for holding such position, it is not something that would drive the individual to achieve. Their character and give-and-take hold the greatest motivation for fulfilment. Such an example utilises Aristotles Eudaemonic theory of unison between chained and direct actions as well as the forms of excellence, as previously adhered to. Basing such a goal on welcome or political instincts, such as salary or power, is not a means by which Aristotle would deem leading a fulfilled Eudaemonic life.There are however three things that make men good and excellent these are nature, habit and reason (Solomon, 1984). The road to happiness is through formation of habit and reason which c reate virtuous action, in addition to possessing a nature that compliments them.Both Plato and Aristotle see happiness as being virtuous, but disagree on the nature of virtue, make their ideas to follow varied paths. They do however meet at winder points. Plato sees happiness as being close to godliness. By living morally one can obtain this godliness (Cooper and Hutchinson, 1997). To Aristotle, happiness is the result of being virtuous because by being so, one obtains pleasure and external wealth (Solomon, 1984).Plato and Aristotle further agree that fostering is the means to attain virtue, but they disagree on how a person should be educated because of their differing views on the cause of virtue.According to Aristotle (Solomon, 1984), virtue comes from the agreement of the nature, habits and reason in a humans conscience. Therefore, Aristotle states that education should begin from birth and it should involve changing the childs habits and forming his reason so that their natu re, habits and reason will align.Plato believes that virtue stems from an understanding of true Beauty, which exists only in the higher plane of the world. Thus Plato believes that education of a human being should begin when the child is ready to love another. Platos ideal education involves saving a person along by having him experience different forms of love between people, so that he may begin to love fleshly violator and then beauty of the mind. Through this he sees the beauty in all things and eventually, with guidance understands all forms of beauty, ultimately understanding formless beauty (Cooper and Hutchinson, 1997).Another key agreement between Plato and Aristotle is the importance of interpersonal relationships in the quest for the good life. Both agree that interpersonal relationships account for the education of individuals, but Aristotle goes further because he sees attaining the good life as societal.He recognizes that if one is forced to take action because of others misdeeds, he cannot lead the good life, and therefore each person must be equal to the contiguous so that nobody has to act on account of another (Cooper and Hutchinson, 1997).Human happiness is the foremost concern for both Plato and Aristotle in their works of literature. Since happiness is almost a universal emotion their conclusions on the cause of happiness is similar. But, Plato and Aristotle are completely different individuals, so the causes of their happiness are, at the same time, completely different.In personal evaluation, I am inclined to side with Aristotles point of view for ultimate fulfilment. It is through the result of actions of excellence (both direct and chained) that we can demonstrate our way of life. This in turn fortifies perceptions of us having led a fulfilled and happy life. If one opted to follow fulfilment through mere pleasurable circumstances, i.e. because the money is good, then in Aristotles eyes, their life would be one deemed lavish, suit able for beasts pulled by desire and compulsion. Happiness cannot be determined on material things. It is a matter of setting a goal and looking past the superficial things that stand in the way. It is therefore relevant to say that to lead a flourishing life, one needs to take ownership of the actions which lead to their lifelong goal. Actions often speak louder than words do. We as humans should do whatever it takes to produce the most fulfilment for ourselves. There is a distinct difference between feeling happy and merely being happy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment