Thank you for doing this series! I read After Virtue over the summer, and although it was gripping, I know I need to reread it to get all the key points, so I'm looking forward to rereading it along with your videos. Also, if you end up enjoying After Virtue, I hope you followup with MacIntyre's expansion of After Virtue's ideas in Whose Justice, Which Rationality?
I have several questions regarding virtue ethics: 1) Let us imagine a person who says something like "money, not virtue makes me happy", and this conclusion is based on one's experience or even rational thought. From Aristotle's point of view, this conclusion is certainly wrong. Does it mean that happiness is objective and it is not up to a person to decide? Then it is completely unclear how to become happy because you can not trust your own feelings anymore. 2) Aristotle claims that all people strive to be happy because it is a natural end of human beings. But If a person says "I don't want to be happy". Is this person mistaken again? From a religious point of view, these two questions can be easily answered. We can say that God gave humans a certain purpose(which is not up to a human to decide). Fulfilling this purpose(being virtuous) is the only way to become happy. It is more obvious now that first and second individuals are mistaken. I am curious how would Aristotle answer these questions, without using any religious arguments?
I think Aristotle would accept the premises of both 1 and 2, not the likely conclusions. As in; he would say money can actually make someone happy (to a limited degree) but it would pass into expediency in and of itself, not anything lasting or meaningful. I could chase an essentially full pot of wealth for my life by dedicating it to selling houses or something. That's what I was raised on, maximising that end of human nature is a rational thing to do no? Sure - you get plenty and that feels fine. But what about a family, what about legacy, and numerous other things that may be irrational on a whime? These transcend what we'd conventionally mean by persuit of happiness, it should be said there's confusion here to be had since english isn't a great translation for a number of Greek words. Hope this helps
Thank you for your work. Very helpful, useful contextualisation and very timely to my current researches.
Thank you for doing this series! I read After Virtue over the summer, and although it was gripping, I know I need to reread it to get all the key points, so I'm looking forward to rereading it along with your videos. Also, if you end up enjoying After Virtue, I hope you followup with MacIntyre's expansion of After Virtue's ideas in Whose Justice, Which Rationality?
Really an excellent explanation. Thank you.
🙏, I believes that our goal are Eudaimonia. Thank you again
I have several questions regarding virtue ethics:
1) Let us imagine a person who says something like "money, not virtue makes me happy", and this conclusion is based on one's experience or even rational thought. From Aristotle's point of view, this conclusion is certainly wrong. Does it mean that happiness is objective and it is not up to a person to decide? Then it is completely unclear how to become happy because you can not trust your own feelings anymore.
2) Aristotle claims that all people strive to be happy because it is a natural end of human beings. But If a person says "I don't want to be happy". Is this person mistaken again?
From a religious point of view, these two questions can be easily answered. We can say that God gave humans a certain purpose(which is not up to a human to decide). Fulfilling this purpose(being virtuous) is the only way to become happy. It is more obvious now that first and second individuals are mistaken.
I am curious how would Aristotle answer these questions, without using any religious arguments?
I think Aristotle would accept the premises of both 1 and 2, not the likely conclusions.
As in; he would say money can actually make someone happy (to a limited degree) but it would pass into expediency in and of itself, not anything lasting or meaningful. I could chase an essentially full pot of wealth for my life by dedicating it to selling houses or something. That's what I was raised on, maximising that end of human nature is a rational thing to do no? Sure - you get plenty and that feels fine. But what about a family, what about legacy, and numerous other things that may be irrational on a whime? These transcend what we'd conventionally mean by persuit of happiness, it should be said there's confusion here to be had since english isn't a great translation for a number of Greek words.
Hope this helps