Happiness for Its Own Sake: Aristotle’s Concept of Eudaimonia in "The Nicomachean Ethics"

According to modern definitions of ‘happiness,’ it is a state of feeling some sort of emotion that results from pleasure. A happy person has a positive outlook on life, often is socially outgoing and popular with other people, and often is seen as successful or having some reason to be happy. This modern perspective on happiness predispositions readers from understanding concepts of happiness as set forth by classical philosophers such as Aristotle.

Contrasting modern definitions, Aristotle’s concept of happiness is not of a fleeting emotion, but rather a representative of the entire course of a person’s life. It is not a sense of feeling in which the subject of happiness is passive, but rather a form of action in which the subject controls whether he is happy or not. Happiness is a goal, a lifelong pursuit, characterized by the definition of its Greek word, eudaimonia, which translates not only to “happiness,” but also to “human flourishing” or “success.” 

Similar to Plato’s philosophy on the pursuit of the good, Aristotle says that this good includes pursuing a life of happiness. Some people attain happiness because they make the right decisions to lead them to this destination. However, just as Plato explains that some seekers of the good are misguided by their own ignorance, Aristotle states that some people, “though happiness is open to them, seek it in the wrong way from the start.”

This becomes evident in Aristotle’s other stipulation that happiness is not defined by separate events within a person’s life, but rather a summary of all these events as a whole. Why does Aristotle make this connection between study and happiness? It does not make sense that, because different people have different interests, one way of life is the only way to achieve happiness. 

In order to answer this question, the reader must refer to Aristotle’s works to understand how the concept of happiness relates to the individual and to the community. Since the question of whether a life of study is the best way to achieve happiness, the answer may lie in simply investigating the other options of life’s pursuits. This investigation may give perspective as to why a life of study is superior to any other lifestyle. 

As previously stated, Aristotle himself only investigates three of the most popular concepts of the good life, which are respectively gratification, political activity, and study. According to Aristotle, the life of study is superior to the other two, and this superiority affords it a truer form of happiness. In order to understand why this is, the reader must first identify what sets a life of study apart from lifestyles of gratification and political activity.

Gratification is the method which is taken by the vulgar masses, and which modern perspectives would probably define as "happiness." Their definition of happiness is not eudaimonia, but rather is temporary satisfaction of their basest appetites. To gain this temporary satisfaction they live a passive existence, and “appear completely slavish, since the life they decide on is a life for grazing animals.”  Aristotle argues that in order to actively pursue a goal, the individual must rely on reason, not impulse, to attain it. The vulgar masses cannot use reason, because they allow themselves to be enslaved by their desires, and therefore cannot actively choose to pursue a life which results in happiness. 

The second most popular form of the good life is one of political activity, pursued by cultivated yet misguided citizens who participate in their community. These politicians believe that the pursuit of honor is the most admirable, and therefore it is the best manifestation of eudaimonia. However, Aristotle rebuts that it seems to depend more on “those who honor than on the one honored,” since to attain honor these politicians are subject to the opinions of others just as much as vulgar masses are controlled by their raw appetites. Since honor is subjective to public opinion of an individual and not sufficient in itself, Aristotle discards this option as viable for a life of true happiness.

With these two lifestyles eliminated, Aristotle concludes that the life of study is the most self-sufficient choice, being independent of both individual appetites and the desires of others. This life of course was geared toward the aristocratic citizens of Aristotle’s world, where the only self-sufficient people were wealthy males. These individuals were also the most likely to be educated, and therefore have the most capacity for making intelligent, well-reasoned decisions in order to choose happiness. 

Another reason Aristotle considers the life of study to be the logical life of a person seeking happiness is that self-sufficiency is required for happiness to be chosen in and of itself. Other virtues—honor and pleasure included—can be chosen not only for these virtues alone, but for the byproduct of becoming happy through them. Happiness must be chosen for its own sake and not for any benefit that might come with it; the lifestyle that is most self-sufficient is the only choice for achieving true happiness. Because a life of study does not choose eudaimonia for any outside benefit, devoting one’s life to study makes this desire for happiness into what Aristotle argues a happy life should be: a lifelong pursuit representative of the entire course of a person’s earthly existence.