I believe that it is difficult to have a similar concept of happiness to Aristotle if we do not believe in his concept of the soul and its four parts. The basic concepts of the soul describe it as a capacity to be filled. Looking at the point of view that happiness is dependent on an individual’s activities and experiences, it is hard to imagine how one would be able to reject Aristotle’s idea of the soul. These experiences and activities are what fill each of our “capacities” of a soul contributing completely to the four categories in Aristotle’s view of growth, desire, listening to reason, and reason itself. These capacities are what directly influence our ultimate happiness, making Aristotle’s concept of the soul and happiness clearly go hand in hand.
Our modern conception of happiness does differ from Aristotle in some aspects, but I also think that there are striking similarities between the two ideas. Aristotle believes that happiness is achieved through virtue, and in order to possess virtue, one must be a virtuous person. Being a virtuous person also translates into being an excellent person. As we discussed in class, Aristotle's use of the word "excellence" implies productivity, success, and achievement. If we are successful in becoming an excellent person, then we are fulfilling our human function. This human function can also be called having a "purpose," which is something that modern, Western culture emphasizes as a critical part of life. Finding one's "calling" and feeling fulfilled is one of the main purposes of attending college. It sets you up to study your passion, translate that into a career, and ultimately become a productive member of society. This "human purpose" is something we believe will lead to happiness. This is also what Aristotle believes; happiness is the end goal. I think where we differ is that we see happiness as something personal and different for everyone. Aristotle is less open to say that happiness can be derived from many different sources, which makes it a concept that is hard to place in one neat category.
I strongly agree with everything Larissa has posted above. I would however like to add a couple things. Humans in the modern world are so concerned with the their own pleasures and their own happiness. Many people forget that it does have to do with your soul. As most people say, money can't buy happiness. This is just one example but it shows us that the materialized pleasures we all seek to have are not all that goes into our well-being and happiness. Also, in class we discussed that Aristotle believes that to achieve happiness, we have to be a virtuous person. I strongly agree with that because life goes beyond just making yourself happy. There are others around who can benefit from the virtuous things you do. example: community service.
I agree with both Maisie's and Larissa's posts above. I would like to point out that Aristotle does understand and point out that external factors can play major roles in one's happiness as well. He uses the example of the death of a loved one or having the unfortunate circumstance of being deformed in some way. So in this regard, one can pursue all of the virtuous actions that he wishes, but he may not experience complete happiness. The same goes for one who does not possess the same concept of the soul, they can be happy based on external factors but may not experience the same bliss associated with living in accord with the soul and virtue while void of negative external factors.
Today in class we talked about happiness and the concept of the matrix. This topic was proved very interesting for me and brought up a lot of different ideas for me. The first thing that I thought of was how Aristotle thinks that living a complete life can bring on happiness. If this is true, then the simulation would prove that there is no happiness because you do not get to feel the bad things in life. Many people as well as myself argue that if you aren't able to feel the bad things, then you won't know what the good things are telling you. I guess the matrix idea could tell you the thinks that they think will make you happy but you still aren't living a full life. My second point is that you must be very upset with your life to want to subject yourself to the matrix. Yes, people have bad days but it's not all the time. Life has great moments as well. One thing that I know for sure is that I would not want to leave my family and friends behind. Their love and support is what makes me happy and knowing that it was in a fake machine wouldn't be anywhere close to the real thing.
The idea of the happiness machine is unquestionably thought-provoking. As the drug addict experiences false happiness, so would we if we decided to use this machine since we would have no conception of reality versus fantasy. The machine not only destroys the falsifiability component of happiness; it also prevents us from having the experience of anticipating the event or thing that will contribute to our happiness. The build up to the experience in addition to the actual experience and then its confirmation of reality are all components to happiness. This is why Sosa compares happiness to knowledge. Like knowledge, happiness is not solely dependent on our state of mind; it is also highly affected by our experiences. The idea of the machine is a false sense of happiness. Similarly to the drug addict, this false happiness is actually momentary pleasure. Happiness is not created instantaneously. It’s built upon as you begin to feel fulfilled and as you flourish in your life. The drug addict is not flourishing and a happiness machine cannot allow us to flourish either.
I believe that it is difficult to have a similar concept of happiness to Aristotle if we do not believe in his concept of the soul and its four parts. The basic concepts of the soul describe it as a capacity to be filled. Looking at the point of view that happiness is dependent on an individual’s activities and experiences, it is hard to imagine how one would be able to reject Aristotle’s idea of the soul. These experiences and activities are what fill each of our “capacities” of a soul contributing completely to the four categories in Aristotle’s view of growth, desire, listening to reason, and reason itself. These capacities are what directly influence our ultimate happiness, making Aristotle’s concept of the soul and happiness clearly go hand in hand.
ReplyDeleteOur modern conception of happiness does differ from Aristotle in some aspects, but I also think that there are striking similarities between the two ideas. Aristotle believes that happiness is achieved through virtue, and in order to possess virtue, one must be a virtuous person. Being a virtuous person also translates into being an excellent person. As we discussed in class, Aristotle's use of the word "excellence" implies productivity, success, and achievement. If we are successful in becoming an excellent person, then we are fulfilling our human function. This human function can also be called having a "purpose," which is something that modern, Western culture emphasizes as a critical part of life. Finding one's "calling" and feeling fulfilled is one of the main purposes of attending college. It sets you up to study your passion, translate that into a career, and ultimately become a productive member of society. This "human purpose" is something we believe will lead to happiness. This is also what Aristotle believes; happiness is the end goal. I think where we differ is that we see happiness as something personal and different for everyone. Aristotle is less open to say that happiness can be derived from many different sources, which makes it a concept that is hard to place in one neat category.
ReplyDeleteI strongly agree with everything Larissa has posted above. I would however like to add a couple things. Humans in the modern world are so concerned with the their own pleasures and their own happiness. Many people forget that it does have to do with your soul. As most people say, money can't buy happiness. This is just one example but it shows us that the materialized pleasures we all seek to have are not all that goes into our well-being and happiness. Also, in class we discussed that Aristotle believes that to achieve happiness, we have to be a virtuous person. I strongly agree with that because life goes beyond just making yourself happy. There are others around who can benefit from the virtuous things you do. example: community service.
DeleteI agree with both Maisie's and Larissa's posts above. I would like to point out that Aristotle does understand and point out that external factors can play major roles in one's happiness as well. He uses the example of the death of a loved one or having the unfortunate circumstance of being deformed in some way. So in this regard, one can pursue all of the virtuous actions that he wishes, but he may not experience complete happiness. The same goes for one who does not possess the same concept of the soul, they can be happy based on external factors but may not experience the same bliss associated with living in accord with the soul and virtue while void of negative external factors.
DeleteToday in class we talked about happiness and the concept of the matrix. This topic was proved very interesting for me and brought up a lot of different ideas for me. The first thing that I thought of was how Aristotle thinks that living a complete life can bring on happiness. If this is true, then the simulation would prove that there is no happiness because you do not get to feel the bad things in life. Many people as well as myself argue that if you aren't able to feel the bad things, then you won't know what the good things are telling you. I guess the matrix idea could tell you the thinks that they think will make you happy but you still aren't living a full life. My second point is that you must be very upset with your life to want to subject yourself to the matrix. Yes, people have bad days but it's not all the time. Life has great moments as well. One thing that I know for sure is that I would not want to leave my family and friends behind. Their love and support is what makes me happy and knowing that it was in a fake machine wouldn't be anywhere close to the real thing.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of the happiness machine is unquestionably thought-provoking. As the drug addict experiences false happiness, so would we if we decided to use this machine since we would have no conception of reality versus fantasy. The machine not only destroys the falsifiability component of happiness; it also prevents us from having the experience of anticipating the event or thing that will contribute to our happiness. The build up to the experience in addition to the actual experience and then its confirmation of reality are all components to happiness. This is why Sosa compares happiness to knowledge. Like knowledge, happiness is not solely dependent on our state of mind; it is also highly affected by our experiences. The idea of the machine is a false sense of happiness. Similarly to the drug addict, this false happiness is actually momentary pleasure. Happiness is not created instantaneously. It’s built upon as you begin to feel fulfilled and as you flourish in your life. The drug addict is not flourishing and a happiness machine cannot allow us to flourish either.
ReplyDelete