Question

Please I need this philosophy question answered. In Section 5 of Book I of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle tries to clear the way for his own account of eudaimonia (often translated as “happiness,” but better translated as —living well, flourishing, thriving, success, etc.) by arguing against three of the major things (or lifestyles) that people of his day assumed would bring them (or would perhaps be) eudaimonia: (1) sense pleasures, (2) fame or high social status (he calls it “honor,” but we know what he means...), and (3) money-making. (Not much different than our world, is it?) Choosing just one of these three, put Aristotle’s reasoning in your own words, and tell us why you agree or disagree with it. Please quote a section from the reading above your rewording.

Answer 1

All the three life-styles or pursuit to sense pleasures, high social status and money-making often leads people to unhappiness. Especially, money is only a means to achieve something and not the end in itself. Today, money-making has landed people in tremendous stress and the society is in constant trouble because people are increasingly becoming selfish and greedy, so they end-up in illegally accumulating wealth. They don’t treat money as a means to satisfy their needs but they treat money as the only means to achieve all the other pleasures in the world. According to Aristotle, (Aristot. Nic. Eth. 1.5.8) “The Life of Money-making is a constrained kind of life, and clearly wealth is not the Good we are in search of, for it is only good as being useful, a means to something else”. Such people in their pursuit to money making don’t hesitate to trouble others or even kill them.