The Aim of Man

                As I read Aristotle’s “Aim of Man”, I realized that it was hard for me to grasp the concept the author was trying to get across to the reader. I don’t believe it was his fault, but the idea of his work, in general. “Goodness” and “happiness” are such broad notions and their definitions can vary between people and their opinions. Aristotle does not directly define ‘good’ as anything, however, he does state that “every action and ‘purposive choice’ appears to aim at some good; hence the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim” (Aristotle 691). The philosopher continues on to talk about how “if … there is one end and aim of all our actions, this will be the realizable good” (695). At this point, I immediately thought of Gandhi and his idea of “the means justifies the ends”. What Aristotle is trying to say, or in my opinion at least, is that the end result will always be, in a sense, “good”, since the reason that anything is done is for the sake of obtaining this “goodness”.

               Aristotle relates happiness with good by stating that it is the highest good. He discusses the types of happiness (pleasure, honor, health, wealth, knowledge, etc…) and the controversies between these types. Happiness is something that is chosen for its own sake, never for the sake of something else. Aristotle argues that even though some may find happiness in those different types of happiness, they are often chosen for their own sake. I understand that they are often mixed up and I believe that in today’s society, the types of happiness, especially wealth, is frequently associated with happiness. Aristotle argues again that it is “merely useful as a means to something else” (695).