Eudemonia By Alan Paton Essay

During times of war, it is inevitable for loss to be experienced by all. In the poems “The Black Rat” and “The Photograph” written by Iris Clayton and Peter Kocan respectively, the idea of loss is explored through an omniscient narrator recalling a soldier’s involvement in warfare. While Clayton writes of a soldier’s abrupt loss of hope and how this experience negatively affects his life, Kocan explores how the loss of a loved one affects a family sixty years later. While both poems incorporate similar techniques in imagery and narration, the time setting for each poem is different as “The Black Rat” is set in Tobruk, Libya during World War 2 and “The Photograph” is set during World War 1.

Many people say that war is worse than Hell because innocent people die in it. In Beah’s life, this is most definitely true. Throughout the war, Beah goes through many hardships and witnesses the deaths of innocent loved ones, and Beah’s writing reflects how he felt during these times. Beah uses rhetorical strategies like diction, imagery, and detail choice to convey the emotional process he had to undergo in order to survive.

The author’s narrative, ripe with horrifying descriptions, is nonetheless told with compassion appealing to the emotions of the audience

Pollock uses the distribution of power to minorities as a platform to exploring the importance of morality versus justice. Morality is defined as whether something is “right or wrong” and justice is defined as what is deserved. Lizzie is

In this section I will explain Aristotle’s definition of eudaimonia and its relationship to happiness, morality and the virtues. Aristotle defines eudaimonia in the

One of Aristotle’s conclusions in the first book of Nicomachean Ethics is that “human good turns out to be the soul’s activity that expresses virtue”(EN 1.7.1098a17). This conclusion can be explicated with Aristotle’s definitions and reasonings concerning good, activity of soul, and excellence through virtue; all with respect to happiness.

A human life’s innate goodness is reliant upon, or can be vulnerable to, external goods. Upon these circumstances of wealth, health, and family, the fragility of human life rests. Many philosophers have deliberated the ways in which humans can account for the preconditions of these external contingents within the ethical ramifications of “the good life.” Aristotle concludes that humans must acquire more than virtue in order to live a good life, recognizing that luck serves a purpose in this life. He recognizes the scope of luck’s effects when he asserts that, “most people suppose that the eudaimon life is the fortunate life, or not without good fortune, and no doubt correctly, for without the external goods which are in the control of luck,

John Stuart Mill and Aristotle both address the idea of happiness as the goal of human life. They explain that all human action is at the foundation of their moral theories. Mill addresses the Greatest Happiness Principle, which is the greatest amount of pleasure to the least amount of pain. Similarly, Aristotle addresses happiness through the idea of eudaimonia and human flourishing. According to Aristotle, eudaimonia is happiness, it is the state of contemplation that individuals are in when they have reached actualized happiness. Also referred to as happiness or human flourishing, it is the ultimate goal of human beings. Happiness is “living well and acting well.” He explains that once general happiness becomes recognized as the moral standard, natural sentiment will nurture feelings that promote utilitarianism. According to Aristotle, happiness is a state of being. Both Mill and Aristotle agree that in order to attain true happiness, human beings must engage in activities that are distinct to humans and that make them happy. Aristotle’s idea of eudaimonia and human flourishing is a more compelling argument than Mill’s for happiness and the final end because Aristotle explains that the virtues bring human beings to happiness.

As I continued reading, the story peaked my interest with Aron being trapped with little food and water. The book became hard to put down, but gruesome at the same time, because of Aron’s descriptive writing about him cutting off his own arm with a pocket knife; which made me curl up and wince the whole time. Even though I wasn’t excited about reading a nonfiction book, I began to enjoy reading the book. When finished with the publication, the main message I got from Aron’s book is to follow what means most to an individual. The book improved my mindset of making the best of any circumstance, and to enjoy life to the

Paton uses visual imagery the most. ‘Where you stand the grass is rich and thick; you cannot see the soil.' Here, the reader is allowed the visualized the lush, green sea that covers the hills. But he continues to say ' But the rich green hills break down….

It was Aristotle’s belief that everything, including humans, had a telos or goal in life. The end result or goal was said to be happiness or “eudaimonia”. He explained that eudaimonia was different for each person, and that each had a different idea of what it meant. Further, he said that people must do things in moderation, but at the same time do enough. The theory, of “the golden mean of moderation” was the basis to Aristotle's idea of the human telos and concluded that living a virtuous life must be the same for all

The process of addressing memories of private suffering within “The Victims” by Sharon Olds is implied through contradictive perspectives. In the poem there is a shift in focus and tone during line 17. The poem addresses issues of suffering from two distinct perspectives, the first coming from a little girl and the second a grown woman. The narrative, imagery and diction are different in the two contrasting parts of the poem, and the second half carefully qualifies the first, as if to illustrate the more mature and established attitudes of the narrator in her older years – a stipulation of the easy imitation of the earlier years, when the mother’s views dominated and set the tone. Change has governed the poems structure here; differences

Aristotle is one of the greatest thinkers in the history of western philosophy, and is most notably known for expressing his view of happiness in Nicomachean Ethics. Aristotle develops a theory of how to live the good life and reach eudaimonia (happiness). Eudaimonia has been translated into, living a happy and virtuous life. Aristotle’s definition of the good life as the happy life, consist of balancing virtues (arête), the mean, external goods, political science, and voluntary action.

So, how exactly does a person become virtuous? Socrates offers suggestions and explanation for this question as well. Socrates claims that one cannot be virtuous accidentally. Just because you commit a virtuous act does not make you virtuous. An understanding of the concept of virtue is equally important as the virtuous act itself. One needs to understand the nature of virtue which requires reflection of virtue and this reflection is only possible once you grasp your own ignorance about the nature of virtue. This understanding of one's own ignorance is human wisdom. So, since being perfectly happy requires being virtuous and being virtuous requires human wisdom, human wisdom is necessary for perfect happiness.

That is the highest end and the best life we could possibly live. Eudaimonia is translated as happiness. Even though it does not mean what we understand happiness to be. Eudaemonia is so much more than just being happy. Aristotle wrote, “For we have said that happiness is a certain sort of activity of the soul in accord with virtue” (Aristotle 9). To reach eudaimonia, a person has to be functioning well. In order to be functioning well, we have to act using logos, which is our reasoning.