Aristotles view of happiness essays

Aristotles view of happiness essays Aristotle, in Nicomachean book I, says that every human action is intended to some end, which is considered as good. He also discusses that everybody tries to attain a supreme good, which is happiness. I agree with Aristotle that every human being craves for happiness, which is the highest good and ultimate goal of any activity. In this paper I will explain his arguments and explore the concept of happiness in terms of human beings. Aristotle believes that happiness is the universal goal of every human being; however every person has a different way of achieving happiness. We choose happiness as the highest good because happiness is sufficient as an end in itself, which means that the final answer of any question is to achieve happiness. He further explains that intelligence and virtues are good only because they make us happy. According to Aristotle people are judged good or bad by their activity and their function. He justifies his statement by giving an example of flutist; a person who plays the flute well is a good flutist. Playing the flute is the flutists function as it distinguishes him or her from other people. The distinctive activities performed by humans distinguish them from other living beings. Therefore Aristotle defines supreme good as an activity of the rational soul in accordance with virtue. We humans are the rational souls; Thus Aristotle describes virtue, rationality and activity as the ch aracteristics of a happy person and claims happiness as the highest good for all human beings. Aristotle says, But presumably the remark that the best good is happiness is apparently something agreed, and we still need a clearer statement of what the best good is (1097b22-24). Aristotle means that, it is clear that everybody desires to be happy, but they chase happiness by different ways. I agree with Aristotles reasoning of the purpose of human nature. Happiness is different ...

Political Morality Essays - American Political Philosophy

Political Morality Essays - American Political Philosophy Political Morality topic: American History- Winthrop, Hutchinson Political Morality In Webster's dictionary, morality is defined as "principles of right and wrong in conduct; ethics." The principles of morality have countless times evolved over the ages. In earlier times, death was an easy penalty for many crimes. These crimes today are considered minor and are penalized with a slap on the hand. Is this considered wrong? Who is the correct authority to consult on what is right or wrong? In today's society, two major factors concern how the way members of society act and behave. The first is our national government. Members of our government in positions of authority decide everything in our lives in the form of laws which determine our behavior. One of the most important documents written by our government is the Declaration of Independence. The monarchy was taking away power from the colonists and putting more demands on. In return, the colonists declared their freedom from their tyrant. In this document, it states, "All men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." The great men who wrote this down had a strong sense of morals. They believed that men were given rights by God that no one could take away. This is essential to the issue of morality because it determines the rights- that are agreed upon all- are wrong. This brings us to religion. Religion is a major contributor to how we think and act because it mirrors our beliefs in what we hold as right or wrong. An example of this is the native tribes of africa and South America where a number of tribes practice cannibalism. While this is considered a sin in most christian religions, the tribes have evolved into cannibalism as a way to survive in life and have no objections to their eating habits. The problem arises when the line between government and religion is crossed. While religion does not have to power to punish one physically, but rather soulfully of one has sinned. The government has the power to sentence punishment, yet should have no power concerning God. Many different religions have evolved all over the world and in the process, have people have been prosecuted in their faith. The first settlers in the new world came here to avoid prosecution from the powerful church/government of that time. Specifically, the Church of England headed by the king. Puritan leaders led their followers to a place where they could express their religion with no fear of other faiths. One such leader was John Winthrop. John Winthrop was a powerful Puritan governor in the colony of Massachusetts Bay. He believed that this was a calling from God for him to lead the new religious experiment-a covenant with God to built a model for mankind. "We shall be a city upon the hill." declared Winthrop. As governor Winthrop held considerable power. He distrusted the commoners and thought democracy was the "meanest and worst" forms of government. Anyone who brought trouble or had indifferent thought were severely punished to "save their soul." As one of his extensions of his powers he banished Roger Williams, a popular Salem minister with radical ideas and an unrestrained tongue, and Mistress Anne Hutchinson, A strong willed women who challenged the authority of the clergy by stating the truly saved need not bother to obey the laws of God or man. Several problems arise throughout this banishment. I am for a democratic society in which one can express his or her thoughts without the fear of prosecution. They did not have the luxury of this. The need for the expressment of ideas is essential for a growing environment. If no growth is made, then expansion of the community is halted to a standstill. The limit of new idea's must have a point, though. In recent news, the Unabomber has issued a ultimanium with his manuscript. In the past, such a request would have been rediculous. In his manuscript he expresses his view on the evils of technology. While a citizen is entitled to free speech and press, threatening murder is not such an option.

Fiscal condition of the federal government today Essay

Fiscal condition of the federal government today - Essay Example The US financial crisis threatens not only its constituent states but also the world at large. The crisis has been around for some time. It started slowly with fears of the worst since 2003. As the years progressed, the fears came to pass with the present financial status leaving more to be desired in the financial markets.The last six months have demonstrated financial volatility (not only in US but world over) that has never been witnessed may be since the great depression (O'Connor, 2001. pp.10-15). This paper seeks to evaluate the present fiscal condition of the US federal government with emphasis on the causes of the crisis and an exploration of the effects of the crisis on both the public and private domain. The federal government fiscal crisis is echoed by the serious struggle by the states and local governments through unfathomable and prolonged fiscal crisis which has since spread from the federal government to haunt them. The states', not mentioning the federal government's , revenues are declining sharply or if they are growing, then this growth is indeed very slow to be noticed. This is made worse by the federal government out spending its revenues. The crisis is likely to continue unless some quick and informed remedial measures are not taken.According to the 2002 financial year report, as at September 2003 the federal government had more than $1 trillion reported assets with slightly more than $8 trillion in liabilities leaving $7 trillion accumulated deficit with a reported $365 billion operating deficit and a $158 billion unified budget deficit. The projection by the general comptroller and CBO was that the situation was headed for worse with the unified budget deficits likely to hit $401 billion and $480 billion in 2003 and 2004 respectively. This means that there was no hope in 2002 and the situation was expected to worsen with time. 2008 was recorded the climax of the financial market redundancy and thus you can imagine the situation in 2008 i f it is worse than the figures projected for 2003 and 2004. The 2008 was marked with acute financial crisis with the financial market feared to be headed for a clash. The cause of the situation was immediately credited to the borrowers who were at the verge of insolvency and thus pulling down the lenders. These borrowers include the auto industry which has since received $15 billion bailout. Based on this insolvency, most lenders declined to lend thus affecting the mortgage industry and the stock market. Apart from the cause mentioned above, the other causes of this sticky financial crisis may be traced down to the weakening economy, the 1990's tax cut policies taken by the federal and state governments, sharp decline in stock markets, and the structural anomalies in the state and federal government tax systems among other seen and unseen causes. Focusing on policy, it is common knowledge how federal policy can impact state finances. Since the 1990's, the federal government set policies to provide subsidies to the state and local governments. The subsidies were to be provided because the federal government asked the states to reduce the cost of taxes on the taxpayers. This tax cut was later to haunt the federal government. The federal government also exempted interests on bonds from the federal taxation. Another tax policy is the fact that the federal government managed the entire estate tax and shared the tax revenues amongst the states. The 2003 Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconcili ation Act (JGTRRA) came with a counter- cyclical fiscal relief or subsidies for the states. The fiscal relief amounted to $20 billion over 2003 and 2004. The fiscal reliefs to cover the tax cuts instituted by the federal government ate significantly into the federal governments financial reserves. This together with the ever increasing demand for better Medicaid and Medicare funding thoroughly utilized the federal finances. The percentage allocation for Medicaid, Medicare and other social welfare programs increased to more than 60% raising concern