Aristotle, Aquinas and Contemporary Theories of Happiness - Coursework Example

Theories of human happiness Aristotle, Aquinas and contemporary theories of happiness Introduction There are various nuances carried by the term happiness and have fallen as well as risen in time. They also vary in the context of culture as well as subcultures. Research done in the western civilization has indicated that happiness can submit to two phenomena’s though they are related. In the first phenomenon, happiness can get a description of being the pleasure of a particular moment. In this phenomenon, happiness can be understood as a state of mind that is qualitative. It is often short-lived state of mind. The second phenomenon is of interest to philosophers and states that happiness is long term and occurs due to a sense of faring well and having a happy life. The document analyses happiness concepts brought about by Aristotle, Aquinas as well as the contemporary theories of happiness (Denise & Peterfreund, 2008). Discussion Aristotle is among the major thinkers in the western civilization. In the theory of happiness, he stated that happiness is dependent on the individual. He did enshrine happiness to be the main purpose of life and also a goal that every person aims to achieve. The Nicomachean Ethics is among the major works of Aristotle where he states the theory of happiness, and it is still relevant to the present date. Aristotle seeks to answer the question of the importance of human existence and the goals that human activities are directed. Aristotle indicated that happiness forms the end of the efforts made by humans in their daily activities. The desire that people have for pleasure, money and honor is because they believe the goods will result to their happiness. Therefore, goods are means to obtain happiness and happiness comes due to the goods a person possess (Denise & Peterfreund, 2004) Aristotle stated “the purpose of a person to live a definite life is an activity that states the rational principle. He also stated that the purpose of man is a noble act on the purposes, on the occasion that the act is performed correctly happiness results to be an activity in the soul of a person and accordance to virtue." Virtue is an important aspect in the theory of Aristotle; it has a close relationship to happiness. Aristotle indicated that an important factor towards the realization of happiness is a good moral character an individual possesses. An individual must work hard to possess all virtues required towards realizing happiness. He records that a person who is happy lives in agreement with the complete virtue and possesses enough external goods throughout his or her life (Bok, 2010). On the case of Aquinas, he states that imperfect happiness can be maintained on earth. Therefore, he got influenced by the theory of happiness from Aristotle. Aristotle argued that happiness is dependent upon the actualization of an individual’s natural faculties (Thomas & Regan, 2003). Among the major faculties in the life of a human being is reason and it can get understood that happiness can get achieved in life in proportion and move to the level of accessible to reason. Aquinas stated that the ultimate happiness in human beings is comprised of contemplated truth. It is an operation in man and no other animal shares the operation (Theron, 2008) Contemplated truth cannot get directed to another end due the fact that contemplation of truth is required for a person’s sake. He also stated that "in the operation, higher beings are united to man." The human operation is carried out by God as well as other separate substances. It can be seen that both Aristotle and Aquinas have a similar understanding that all things have natures. It is the natures that determine the good of a person as well as the bad for them. They also agree on the fact that evil is contrary to the nature in humans (Thomas & Regan, 2003). In accordance to Aristotle, happiness is comprised of achieving all the good things in the course of the life of a person. It may ne health, friends, knowledge or wealth and results to the perfection of human nature. It also causes enrichment in the life of an individual. Due to that fact, there is a necessity to make choices, and some of the choices may be difficult, the lesser goods have immediate pleasure and are more enticing (Bok, 2010). On the other hand, greater goods are painful and needs much sacrifice. The development of good characters needs strong efforts in determination so as to take the right decision in hard situations. Both Aristotle and Aquinas have the similarity in that they indicate that human beings have their own functions and virtue is necessary for the fulfillment (Denise et al, 2004). The ethics of Aristotle and Aquinas have the difference on how the aspect of virtue comes about. It is always reasonable to get virtuous, and honesty is the policy that greatly applies. The aspect of honesty does not need love and on the case on virtue is between both extremes. Therefore, the asset of courage is the centre of foolishness and also vices of timidity. The aspects are sensible however it is felt that Aristotle underestimated the capacity of reasoning to other people. He also underestimated love and its importance. On the case of Aristotle there is link of reason and virtue whereas in the case of Aquinas virtue is related to love (Denise et al, 2008). It, therefore, illustrates that every virtue has its derivation of virtuousness by associating with love. Aristotle indicates that every person can achieve happiness as long as they have a virtue, good fortune and also the know how to rationalize among the excesses and also deficiencies. Therefore in such a condition happiness has complete fulfillment. On the case of Aquinas, God has the revelation to ultimate happiness and can only get attained in death (Denise et al, 2004). Irrespective of luck, Aquinas attributed happiness to the grace of God. It is worth to note that Aristotle and Aquinas agree that intellectual values are required to guarantee moral value; however, people must also understand Theological Virtues so as to attain the goal of ultimate happiness. Both the theorists have indicated that some actions are not right, and it can get understood by intellectual apprehension as well as reasoning (Bok, 2010). Among other differences between Aristotle and Aquinas is that Aquinas indicates that human beings are commanded to an end that is supernatural, and it requires virtues of hope, love and faith to achieve the end. Aquinas also states that God holds the natures and, therefore, divine nature is the root of all truth. He was also convinced that natural law is not understood by reason when it gets understood as the moral law. It can also be based on things and their nature and based in the nature of God as He joins all things together. He roots the moral principles in the value of goods (Theron, 2008). On the case of contemporary theories, they attempt to define the condition of the mind referred to as happiness. They have established typical answers to the question some of them being pleasure, positive emotions and also satisfaction (Denise & Peterfreund, 2004). They also have established prudential value that comes due to happiness. In this perspective happiness are the things that are of benefit to an individual. There are things that make a person benefit, they are better to the person and good to the person. In the present day, research conducted has continued from the statement that it is sensible to do a thing that is virtuous and also insensible to do things that are not virtuous (Thomas & Regan, 2003). However, it can be understood that people do not result to being virtuous when a person reads a book. The book however might result to setting the right path and results to being virtuous when a person can love (Bok, 2010). Various psychologists in the modern day have been attracted to the framework of the utilitarians. They are, however, not convinced with the hedonistic theories, and they have advanced on the same to happiness being life satisfaction. On this understanding, the aspect of well-being holds the idea of assessing happiness in long durations. Satisfaction in life can get achieved what a person thinks is important in his or her life. Satisfaction in life is subjective the same as well-being is based on the individual view of how life proceeds. It results being to a feeling rather than an adjustment (Denise et al, 2008). The main challenge in the contemporary theories is to understand how an individual judges the manner in which he or she is faring. It is because inspirations are hopped up with expectations. It, therefore, becomes important to as oneself whether he or she has judged the happiness they possess correctly. For instance in some societies, expectations would be much lower compared to other societies. Expectations vary from person to another (Bok, 2010). Some theorist in the modern days has indicated that an individual can only make good decisions on personal well-being when he or she is well informed and also autonomous. It, therefore, indicates that contentment is not similar to the overall well-being of the individual. Other theorists have stated that people should judge objectively on the aspect of whether life has been good by the use indicators with independent value (Denise et al, 2004). References Bok, S. (2010). Exploring happiness: From Aristotle to brain science. New Haven [Conn.: Yale University Press. Denise, T. C., White, N. P., & Peterfreund, S. P. (2008). Great traditions in ethics. Australia: Thomson/Wadsworth. Denise, T. C., White, N. P., & Peterfreund, S. P. (2004). Great traditions in ethics. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth. Theron, S. (2008). Thomas Aquinas: Happiness, desire, virtue: an interpretation. Munich: GRIN Verlag. Thomas, A., & Regan, R. J. (2003). A summary of philosophy. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub. Read More