Analyzing Aristotle: An Examination of his Ethics

In Books I and II of his work, The Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle describes happiness as the ultimate end to good. His next step is to define happiness. Interestingly, he does not consider happiness a mere emotion. Rather, Aristotle believes it comes after a lifetime of living virtuously and being lucky. He does admit, however, that happiness means different things to different people. Though according to his main definition, children cannot be happy. This is a strange thing to say, considering the modern belief that children are happier than adults. Although the modern definition of happiness varies with Aristotle’s, modern thought is not entirely wrong here. Happiness is not limited to people that have lived long, virtuous, and fortunate lives. In older people, happiness can stem from these qualities. In children, happiness is more dependent on mood and parental love. That does not mean children cannot be happy; children are very capable of virtue. How many times have children been heard to say, “That’s not fair!”? Furthermore, Aristotle stresses the importance of understanding the underlying spirit of virtue. Therefore, although many children may not understand an in-depth analysis of right and wrong, it does not follow that they are incapable of perceiving the spirit of right and wrong, and therefore the spirit of virtue.

Aristotle’s talk of happiness raises a question for Christians: is happiness possible without God? Well, it is possible to be fairly virtuous and to have a clear conscience, which Aristotle says is the main precursor. Then, after that, if a person is fortunate they will have friends and family that they care about. After all of this, maybe the person will be happy. However, even when everything is right in a person’s world, and the world of their closest friends, there is still a void that only God can fill. One of the reasons for this is because if a person is virtuous, which Aristotle says results in happiness, that person would realize the disparity in the world and would be bothered by it. Aristotle lists justice as a virtue, so a just person would be pained by injustice in the world. How, then, is the pain felt as a result of virtue transformed into happiness? Is the righteous person supposed to care just enough to be virtuous, but not so much that their happiness is unaffected? Aristotle suggests that happiness is not an emotion. Logic, though, insists that the emotions must be at peace in order for happiness to occur. Perhaps Aristotle believes that by being virtuous people will be ‘doing their part’ for the poor, friendless, less fortunate, etc. After doing this, perhaps their compassion is reconciled.

Furthermore, the weight of the entire world is not our burden to bear. Without God, virtue demands that the virtuous person behave like God, because there are serious problems in the world that need to be fixed. This is an impossible task that will only lead to discouragement. For this reason, God is necessary for happiness. However, for the Christian happiness is probably not the main goal in life. Though in selfishness, it may be pursued occasionally. Happiness tends to be the side effect of pursuing God wholeheartedly. Which Aristotle would describe as virtue, but let us now return to my original point. God does not intend for humans to worry about the entire world’s welfare. That may sound harsh, but hear me out. He calls us to compassion and caring for the downtrodden, as stated in Exodus and elsewhere throughout the Bible. This probably does not mean we moan and groan about how awful the world is and live in despair. God calls us to live joyfully, and Jesus says to let tomorrow’s problems stay in tomorrow (Matthew 6:34). Recall that the entirety of the world is God’s responsibility, because only he is big enough to understand the thing in its entirety. This does not imply that Christians should disregard other people’s problems, but to be compassionate, help where we are able, but not to worry excessively and fall into despair.

With all of this talk of happiness, virtue, and compassion, there is a trap. God calls people to action, and they ought to act. Wholeheartedly, if possible. Aristotle is very blunt about people that are all talk: they are very foolish. Talking about goodness and happiness does not therefore make a person good or happy. George MacDonald wrote something similar in an unspoken sermon on justice. He says, “Oh the folly of any mind that would explain God before obeying Him! That would map out the character of God instead of crying, Lord, what wouldst thou have me to do?” (Lewis 104). Most of the time, people know what right and wrong actions are. This may be why Aristotle spends little time explicitly defining the virtues, and why MacDonald disapproves of theorizing instead of doing. It is important to actually live virtuously, and have compassion in deed and not simply in word.

MacDonald quote pulled from George MacDonald, a collection of his quotations compiled by C.S. Lewis.

Disclaimer: I am not a theologian.