Aristotle 14-3

             Before forming into our discussion groups Dr. Oliver elaborated on the differences between Plato and Aristotle, inferring that their core disparities include Plato’s insistence of higher intelligence from an abstract and more unknown perspective, which disagrees with Aristotle’s point of view that obtaining a higher understanding from our senses and concepts which are actually relatable on a human level is what makes the most sense. Personally I would have to agree with Aristotle on this one, since it is almost impossible to properly justify that which we cannot relate to as humans. Not to say that Plato’s idea is irrelevant, but rather it should take a more secondary approach after we become as aware and familiar with the physical as we possibly can.

            Once we got the ball rolling in our group, we discussed what could be considered the general principles of Aristotle from our reading. Well first off, this man was pretty much interested in anything and EVERYTHING at the time of his existence. And why wouldn’t he be? During this time (384-322 BC) so little was known about our world, and he, along with his predecessors Plato and Socrates, were basically setting up humanity for all the big questions that we would eventually start asking ourselves and others for the progression of humanity. Aristotle was quite famous for his ethics, which makes sense considering whom these information and ideas were passed down from, so of course he also taught the notion that ethics are passed down from generation to generation.

            The largest portion of our discussion, however, went towards the “what is happiness?” route, which Aristotle gets into pretty deeply throughout one of the chapters. Although his concept of happiness is quite simple, it is difficult to grasp the fact that not everyone in this Earthly realm is able to understand the unimportance of materialism and temporary pleasures. "One swallow does not a summer make” – this Aristotle remark, new to me, has become one of my favorite quotes upon reading it. In terms of our discussion interpretation, we agreed that Aristotle is implying that even though one swallow (swallows representing a symbol for summer and good weather) may be spotted, that one swallow does not entail summer’s arrival. Similarly, just because we are temporarily made “happy” by material possessions or pleasures, does not mean that we are reaching an overall happiness. These “brief happinesses” do not add up to a happy life, typically, which is the point that Aristotle was trying to make. One thing I found interesting is that Aristotle disagrees that nonconformity can make us happiest since it furthers us away from a sense of community. Maybe if he saw the world as were today, in the obvious worship of material possessions, he would change his tune and embrace nonconformity? Because generally these nonconformists are better off then the rest of the sheep in the flock who are looking for happiness in all the wrong places.

            We carried on the end of the discussion speculating whether or not happiness is universal, in which we came to the conclusion that it isn’t considering everyone’s different perception based on their own experiences. Just within our group we shared a number of different things which do or would make us happy, including, shopping, exercise, skating, soccer, music, family, a sense of accomplishment, and leaving a mark of some form. Regardless of these differences we did agree that achieving happiness is solely an internal/mental affair. Essentially, only ourselves can truly make us happy, with the constant power of positive thought, which in turn leads to positive action, and a positive life. It’s really that simple. I think Aristotle would be quite content with this conclusion, and would have been more than happy to take us in as his own students!

            After going through this discussion again in my head, some questions derived for future discussion. Such as, how does religion fit into the picture for happiness? It’s an interesting focus because people seem to fall back to it or rely on it for happiness instead of finding happiness within themselves, which I find to be a dangerous scenario. Another question to further delve into is how exactly did Aristotle measure this “happiness” if he did at all? Could there be different levels of happiness, or would he see it solely as a happy or unhappy life? Just some things to ponder over the weekend.