Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
The purpose of the Nicomachean Ethics is to understand the nature of human well-being and improve people’s lives. Aristotle considers ethical virtues, such as justice, friendship, and continence, to be central to everyone’s life. He believes that practical wisdom requires a combination of learning general rules and applying social and emotional skills in practice. The philosopher has devoted particular attention to the issue of pleasure, presented in book VII and book X. He provides two accounts that are quite similar in addressing the value of pleasure, the theory behind, and opposing views. This paper presents an overview of Aristotle’s consideration of pleasure, as well as its critical evaluation. It focuses on the main arguments the philosopher articulates and their critical assessment.
Aristotle’s Position on Pleasure
Aristotle’s principal concern is to find a place of pleasure in the life of a virtuous person. He wants to identify whether happiness involves enjoyment, as humans naturally tend to avoid pain and choose enjoyable actions. According to Aristotle, pleasure is an unimpeded exercise of a natural state (Ross, 2009). This position allows understanding why it has an intrinsic value that individuals seek. Three standard opposing views are that pleasure is not a good, either in itself or incidentally, pleasure is not the chief good, and most pleasures are evil (Ross, 2009). These views are trying to challenge the moral nature of pleasures because they hinder conscious thinking.
When discussing the first view that no pleasure is good, Aristotle points out to the dual meaning of a good itself. One specific thing can have inherent value but bring harm to a person, depending on his or her intent. Hence, there can be many things called pleasures, which, in reality, are not ones. He also gives an example of curing a patient that involves painful medical interventions. These interventions are not pleasing, but they will bring relief and improve health as an outcome. In his perspective, pleasures gain only instrumental value as they are restricted to specific processes. Furthermore, various activities, such as playing a musical instrument or just sleeping, lead to a different level of satisfaction. Thus, pleasure cannot be a measure of goodness because these activities’ relative values are not equal. As a counterargument to the third opposing view, Aristotle stresses that pleasures interfere with each other. He claims it is vital to determine and select those that are better.
Since Aristotle is trying to discern the goal of human life, he is inclined to think that pleasure is not a chief good. However, he points out that it is part of happiness that we choose for its inherent worth, not as a means for achieving something else. According to Aristotle, the ultimate human goal is Eudaimonia, which is not pure hedonistic pleasure. It reflects rational activity aimed at pursuing worthwhile sets of priorities. Eudaimonia encompasses an achievement of complete excellence or virtuousness when individuals aspire to high moral standards and perform corrective actions. The philosopher further develops the concept of pleasure in book X, stating that it has to accompany something, an activity, thought, or event (Ross, 2009). Experiencing pleasure activates and fosters an ability to excel specific skills or develop as a virtuous human being. Therefore, humans do not always pursue pleasure merely for its own sake.
Critical Evaluation of Aristotle’s Arguments
Aristotle tries to set out arguments in a coherent way to offer the application of his thoughts in the realm of practical philosophy. The philosopher constructs the reasoning to discover the balance between pain and pleasure to reach Eudaimonia. I find it fair when he notes that what human beings desire is not always a good. Moreover, a good is not easy to define as it concerns various categories, including quantity, quality, substance, or even relationships. Aristotle rejects the idea of a good being strictly binary. Even though a good has boundaries, it possesses degrees too, because one person can be more courageous than the other. I believe Aristotle does not want to find a definite and straightforward description of pleasure.
On the opposite, he accepts the assumption that some pleasures can be more problematic than others. For example, wealth is desired by many people, but it can come from either noble or wicked sources. Therefore, depending on this source, the pleasure associated with wealth will have different characteristics. The deficiency of this claim is the lack of guidance on how to detect and select virtuous pleasures. The most significant premise of Aristotle’s account of the issue is the connection to action, which proves to be logical. Every pleasure arises from Energeia or activity; however, it is not a process of coming-into-being. Unlike movements, people do not describe pleasures as fast or slow. Senses, such as hearing or seeing, act in relation to its objects, and help individuals gain fulfillment. In this case, pleasures that follow excel these objects or actions. However, it is getting challenging to track where Aristotle’s arguments lead the reader.
The book X reveals that he is preoccupied with comprehending the nature of enjoyment as opposed to what people actually enjoy. Aristotle attempts to distinguish between the question of “What is enjoyable?” and “What is the nature of pleasure?” These questions require separate answers; at the same time, little is said about where to find the answers. I reckon the philosopher misses the fact that everyone can learn to appreciate the real pleasure, or develop a habit of defining what is truly enjoyable by nature. Nonetheless, I agree that sources of pleasure influence its relative value. Therefore, Eudaimonia can be reached when a person is motivated by honesty and reason. Seeking pleasure for its inherent worth is not a disreputable desire, but it may not lead to happiness. Receiving pleasure from teaching or making art does not have the same worth as the one coming from self-indulgence.
The Nicomachean Ethics is one of the core works of Aristotle that explores good action, which contributes to the prosperous human well-being. He wants to explain that virtue, pleasure, friendship, wealth, and justice fit together in a bigger life picture. According to Aristotle, the good and honorable man is the measure of things. Everyone has to develop a standard of value and pursue only virtuous activities. His arguments are built around the notion that pleasure stems from action that is neither dynamic nor static. Desire to achieve Eudaimonia, in turn, shapes one’s behavior and inspires humans to find the proper function. Even though Aristotle’s opinion on the essence of pleasure slightly changes, he manages to convince readers that it can exist in harmony with virtue. However, he pays little attention to the idea that it is vital to nurture social and emotional skills to appreciate the right pleasures.
Reference
Ross, D. (2009). Aristotle. The Nicomachean ethics. (L. Brown, Ed.). Oxford University Press.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.