Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book 1, Chapter 1

Every craft and every investigation, and likewise every action and
decision, seems to aim at some good; hence the good has been well
described as that at which everything aims. (p. 310, 1094a)
What is the aim?
The good. The good is identified as the final cause
We should also note the importance of the concept of telos, which we
might translate as end or goal. The first sentence of the Ethicstells
us that every activity aims at a certain telos. For instance, one might
go to the gym with the telos of becoming fitter. When Aristotle
identifies happiness as the highest goal, he is claiming that happiness
is the ultimate telos of any action. We might understand this idea of an
ultimate telos by imagining the child who constantly asks, why?:

Why are you going to the gym?

To become fitter.

Why do you want to become fitter?

So that I will be healthier

Why do you want to be healthy?

So that Ill live longer and have more energy.

Why do you want a long and energetic life?

Because that makes for a happy life.

Why do you want a happy life?

I just do.

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book 1, Chapter 2

Suppose, then, that there is some end [i.e., purpose, to] the things we
pursue in our actions, which we wish for [for its own sake], and
because of which we wish for [all] other things;

and [suppose that] we do not choose everything [for the sake] of

something else, since (c) if we do, it will go on without limit, making
[all] desire empty and futile;

then clearly, this end will be the good, i.e., the best good. (p. 310,
1094a20-25)
 If there is the infinite regress, and trace back why, either there
comes a point where you say I dont know, or go on and say
because of this, because of that.

surely the knowledge of this good [would be] of great importance

for the conduct of our lives,

[for] if, like archers, we have a target to aim at, we are more
likely to hit the right mark.

we should [therefore] try to grasp, in outline at any rate, what [this

ultimate] good is (p. 310, 1094a20-25)

REASON -> If we dont get to the point of the reason, then were
doing it for no good (reason).
Logic of the final cause, at some point it needs t be final, it need
to ground.
If there is a final good, then its good. The (a) in this is only valid
and the reason were doing this step is to get us to the final
cause, and the final cause is the good.

Analogy of the archer:

What is my final goal in life? Could there be multiple final goods?
If youre an archer, does it increase your chances of being a good
archer is you had a target?
Because, If you dont have a target, it decreases your chances of
hitting any sort of target or end. The imagery of the target tells us
something, it tells us that there is ONE final good or goal.

Thee archer here is a metaphor for:

Never stop acting, the arrow is our one life that we have, we have a
bunch of tasks.
Without having a goal, then what are we living towards.

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book 1, Chapter 4

Let us, then, begin again what is the highest of all the goods
pursued by action?

As far as [the] name goes, most people virtually agree... since both
the [general run of people] and the [wise] call it happiness, and think
that living well and doing well are same as being happy.

But they disagree about what happiness is, and the many do not
give the same answer as the wise. (p. 311, 1095a10-20)
Happiness is the highest good because we choose happiness as an end
sufficient in itself. Even intelligence and virtue are not good only in
themselves, but good also because they make us happy.

We call people good if they perform their function well. For instance,
a person who plays the flute well is a good flutist. Playing the flute is
the flutists function because that is his or her distinctive activity. The
distinctive activity of humans generallywhat distinguishes us from
plants and animalsis our rationality. Therefore, the supreme Good
should be an activity of the rational soul in accordance with virtue. This
definition aligns with popular views of happiness, which see the happy
person as virtuous, rational, and active.

When talking about happiness, we consider a persons life as a whole,

not just brief moments of it. This raises the paradoxical suggestion that
a person can be considered happy only after death, that is, once we
can examine the persons life as a whole. However, a good person will
always behave in a virtuous manner. Even faced with great misfortune,
a good person will bear himself or herself well and will not descend into
mean-spiritedness. Once a person has died, according to Aristotle,
posthumous honors or dishonors and the behavior of his descendants
might affect his happiness somewhat, but to no great extent.

the many [the general run of people] think [that happiness] is

something obvious, like pleasure, wealth, or honor.

[Among the wise,] however, some use to think that besides these
many goods there is some other good that is [worthwhile] in itself, and
also causes all these goods to be goods. (p. 311, 1095a20-30)
General run of people think something obvious = happiness.
Something obvious could be things that are tangible. The good is
not tangible. You cant physically hold it in your hands.
Three types of lives, each with its own assumption about the meaning
of happiness (the ultimate good):

Life is: Happiness is:

1) Life of Pleasure
enjoyment
2) Fame, recognition, social standing, political power
Social/political
life

3) Wisdom
Contemplative
life
*Life of money-making: Wealth, possessions
Life of money-making are obvious things.

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book 1, Chapter 7

Honor, pleasure, reason, and every virtue we certainly choose

because of themselves, since we would choose each of them even if it
had no further result, but we also choose them for the sake of
happiness, supposing that through them we shall be happy.

Happiness, by contrast, no one ever chooses for their sake, or the

sake of anything else at all (p. 312, 1097b1-10)

But [as said, even if everyone agrees is that the best good is
happiness,] what we [still] miss is a clearer statement of what
[happiness] is. (p. 313, 1097b20-25)
One central concept of the Ethics is eudaimonia, which is generally
translated as happiness. While happiness is probably the best
English word to translate eudaimonia, the term also carries
connotations of success, fulfillment, and flourishing. A person who
is eudaimon is not simply enjoying life, but is enjoying life by living
successfully. Ones success and reputation, unlike ones emotional well-
being, can be affected after death, which makes Aristotles discussion
of eudaimonia after death considerably more relevant.

That happiness should be closely connected to success and fulfillment

reflects an important aspect of social life in ancient Greece. The
identity of Greek citizens was so closely linked to the city-state to
which they belonged that exile was often thought of as a fate worse
than death. There was no distinction between the public and private
spheres as exists in the modern world. Consequently, happiness was
not thought of as a private affair, dependent on individual emotional
states, but as a reflection of a persons position within a city-state. A
person who inhabits a proper place in the social structure and who
appropriately fulfills the duties and expectations of that place is
happy because, for the Greeks, happiness is a matter of livingnot
just feelingthe right way.

Aristotle treats happiness as an activity, not as a state. He uses the

word energeia, which is the root of our word energy, to characterize
happiness. The point is that happiness consists of a certain way of life,
not of certain dispositions. In saying that happiness is an energeia, he
contrasts happiness with virtue, which he considers a hexis, or state of
being. Possessing all the right virtues disposes a person to live well,
while happiness is the activity of living well, which the virtuous person
is inclined toward.
[T]he good for man is an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue,
or if there are more kinds of virtue than one, in accordance with the
best and most perfect kind.

The very idea of living well might seem a bit odd as Aristotle
formulates it. In particular, he talks about living well as performing the
function of being human well, analogous to the good flutist
performing the function of playing the flute well. It may seem that
Aristotle has confused the practical and the moral: being a good flutist
is a practical matter of study and talent, while no such analogy holds
for morality. Being a good person surely is not a skill one develops in
the same manner as flute playing. But this objection rests on a
misunderstanding due to a difficulty in translation. The Greek
word ethos translates as character, and the concerns of
the Ethics are not with determining what is right and wrong, but with
how to live a virtuous and happy life.

Well, perhaps we shall find the best good if we first find the function of
a human being.

What makes a guitar player good? Rhythm, creativity, skills,

practice, the ability to learn. Adapt and evolve to have passion.
Need to play well.

If you want to be good, you need to live well.

For just as the good, i.e. [doing] well, for a flautist, a sculptor, and
every craftsman, and, in general, for whatever has a function and
[characteristic] action, seems to depend on its function, the same
seems to be true for a human being, if a human being has some
function. (p. 313, 1097b25-30)

For Aristotle, the soul, or psuche (the root of our word psychology), is
simply that which distinguishes living things from nonliving things. All
living things have a nutritive soul, which governs bodily health and
growth. Animals and humans differ from plants in having an appetitive
soul, which governs movement and impulse. Humans differ from
animals in also having a rational soul, which governs thought and
reason. Because rationality is the unique achievement of humans,
Aristotle sees rationality as our telos: in his view, everything exists for
a purpose, and the purpose of human life is to develop and exercise
our rational soul. Consequently, a human can be human well by
developing reason in the way that a flutist can be a good flutist by
developing skill with the flute.

A things nature (physis), function (ergon), and end (telos)... are

systematically related, since its end is to actualize its nature by
performing its function... (from the editors introduction)
Nature (physis): in this context means the things form or
essence.
Function (ergon): the activity that is unique and characteristic
to the thing (e.g., the eyes function is seeing).
End (telos): what a thing strives for.
Actualization: arriving its mature/best form its fullest essence.

In order to thrive, it needs to be in its element in order to do

what it does best.

What, then, could [our proper function] be?

For living is apparently shared with [other beings], but what we are
looking for is the special function of a human being;

hence, we should set aside the life of nutrition and growth. The life
next in order is some sort of life of sense-perception; but this too is
apparently shared with horse, ox, and every animal. The remaining
possibility, then, is some sort of life of action of [the part of the
soul] that has reason. (p. 313, 1097b30-1098a5)

Types of Life (genus and species) according to their functions

(characteristic activities):
 All life (including vegetative):

nourishes, grows, reproduces.

Animal life (a life with soul):

nourishes, grows, reproduces, and also

perceives, desires, self-moves.

Human life (a rational animal):

a harpist function [for example] is to play the harp, and a good

harpists is to do it well

Now we take the human function to be a certain kind of life, and take
this life to be the souls activity and actions that express reason.

Hence, the excellent mans function to do this finely and well. (p.
314, 1098a10-15)

Each function is completed well when its completion expresses the

proper virtue. Therefore, the human good turns out to be the souls
activity that expresses virtue (p. 314, 1098a15-20)

Aiming at living well:

Life is something we need to live.
We need to do it well or we will be a terrible human being

It would be wise for us to know the goal in our life.

It would be wise for us to know what living is.
Moreover, it will be in a complete life [that happiness is achieved].

For one swallow does not make a spring, nor does one day;

nor similarly does one day or a short time make us blessed and
happy. (p. 314, 1098a15-25)
This, then, is a sketch of the good; for, presumably, the outline must
come first, to be filled in later.

If the sketch is good, the anyone, it seems, can advance and

articulate it, and in such cases time is a good discoverer or [at least] a
good coworker. (p. 314, 1098a20-25)

for the [beginning] seems to be more than half of the whole, and
makes evident the answer to many of our questions. (1098b5-10)

If you are a human being, that being a really good dog is not going to
satisfy you. You need to know what your element is and what you are
designed for. What you are good for.

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book 1, Chapter 9

if the gods give any gift at all to human beings, it is reasonable for
them to give happiness also

But even if it is not sent by the gods, but instead results from virtue
and some sort of learning or cultivation, happiness appears to be one
of the most divine things... (p. 315, 1099b 10-25)

And since [in fact] it is better to be happy this ways than because of
fortune, it is reasonable for this to be the way we become happy

it would be seriously inappropriate to entrust what is greatest and

finest to fortune. (p. 315, 1099b 10-25)

Whats the connection between being rational and being political?

Language -> Degrees of communication

TO HAVE VIRTUE, IS TO LIVE WELL

The more active a life is, the more it is actual, the more happy.
The more actualized your nature is, the more active you have
become.

Happiness cannot be sent by the gods. Virtue is a matter of happiness.

Happiness would have no meaning if it was given by the gods.
Happiness is a building of character, it is not done by winning the
lottery or through anything you get. It is obtained through a whole
lifetime. IT IS ABOUT WHAT HAPPINESS IS, NOT HOW ITS GIVEN BY THE
GODS.
What is my final goal in life?
It is the precondition of you wanting to know your goal in life. If you
dont know or dont have a goal in life, then youre not living.

Happiness is the final cause or end. Happiness is a point that you will
not arrive at, its a goal or feeling. You always need to work and build,
and gradually you will become more and more at peace.
It doesnt matter what happened in the beginning, its how you moved
forward or how you lived.
Ex- How you learned from your mistakes, how you overcame hard
times and what youve taken from them.
When you went through a breakup: 3 years later, that experience will
have became an integral part of your character. It is apart of who you
are.

How did you go through theses experiences, and even if you went
through them badly, you will have gained a little more happiness once
you can look back at the bad times and understand them and then say,
I would not change a thing.

There is no point, there is no end where you can say I am fulfilled now.
There is an element of fulfillment though. You need to learn, you need
to trust yourself, you need to persevere instead of being frustrated or
suffering.

We are never there because we are not gods, were not stars. We do
become more and more at peace. PEACE IS THE ACTIVE STATE.
HAPPINESS IS THE END STATE. HAPPINESS IS AN ACTIVITY.