Philosophical approach presenting Aristotles idea on good

In asking this question-what is good?- Aristotle is not looking for a list

of items that are good
Aristotle assumes that accomplishing a list of items that are good is
easy. (Example: it is good to be healthy; it is good to pass this subject;
it is good to have high grades & so on and & so forth)
Taking this into consideration, there can be many activities pertaining
to good (and these activities always have an end/aim)
In fact, one end can be a means to another end (Example: Activity of
going to market has an end/aim which is to buy food; but the end to
buy food is a means to another end which is to eat well; but the end to
eat well is again a means to another end which is to be healthy)
According to Aristotle: all these activities are good. But it seemed
endless
Because is seemed endless, Aristotles definition of good is the search
for the highest good
According to Aristotle: the highest good is happiness (or eudaimonia)
(a substitute is euzen or living well) Happiness is the end/aim of all
activities
Happiness implies (a) that it is desired for itself; (b) that it is not
desired for the sake of anything else; (c) that it satisfies all desire and
has no evil mixed in it; (d) that it is stable

How can human beings achieve the highest good then?

Aristotle says that human beings must be good to reach the highest
good
According to Aristotle, the good in a human being must have
something to do with being human
Next question then is what sets human beings off from other species?
Their rationality in accordance with virtue
These are the elements of being good then: rationality and virtue
Hence, to achieve the highest good which is happiness, human beings
must be good
How? Human beings must be good in being human beings
How? Being guided by rationality in accordance with virtues
Rationality: the ability to be guided by our reason
: it can be shown through the activities that differentiate
man from other species
Virtues: equivalent to excellence for the Greeks
2 kinds of virtues: intellectual virtues: virtues of the mind
: moral virtues: behaving in the right manner
 Moral virtues are important as it serves as a mean between
deficiencies and excesses of what class vices
Aristotle does not advice indulging in vices
Moral virtues are: temperance; courage; justice; liberality;
magnificence; magnanimity; patience; truthfulness; friendliness;
modesty
End-product: having good moral character- acquired through practice &
habituation
Pre conditions: voluntariness and choice

Applying it in Political Science: Politicians must be good in being

politicians
How? Check their rationality (activities must be related in being public
servants. Why public servants? Use constitution)
How? Check their moral virtue: How to behave in the right manner;
choosing the means over the excesses
In Political Science, teachers must include ethics in their discussions
There are many sources/references telling us how to achieve and
maintain being good particularly: Constitution; R.A 6713; R.A 3019; R.A
7080; Revised Penal Code; Civil Service Code
In teaching Political Science, teachers must be aware (1) what the
highest good is which is happiness and (2) how can human beings
achieve the highest good (by being good as human beings; by being
good as politicians; by being good as students
How? Be guided by rationality in accordance with virtues
Importance: we can assess our government leaders (as to their
actions/policies)

According to Aristotle: there are real goods in this world

1. Bodily goods: health, vigor, vitality (necessary for the body)
2. External goods: food, drink, shelter, clothing, medicine
(embellishments for the body)
3. Goods for the souls: knowledge, skill, love, friendship, aesthetic
enjoyment, self-esteem, honor (necessary for the soul)
Through rationality in accordance with virtue, we can decide what to
choose among these goods making sure that we do not be in excess or
in deficiency
Knowledge of a good life to have happiness and actually living a good
life to have happiness are two different concepts
Knowing what good is, is not essential, we must act on it

In relation to teaching Political Science: we must be models

Criticisms against this approach:

1. Negates relativity
2. Not action-guiding
3. It is self-centered
4. Gives importance to luck