Introduction
In the first section of the reading provided, various matters determine the human good. According to the book, one can be happy depending on the decisions made and actions taken regarding the choice made about an issue. For example, if one builds a house, they will feel happy, and if they also feel healthy, the aspect of good is also revealed. In other words, the writer is trying to help the reader navigate that the human good can be achieved under everything as long as the subject is affiliated with the person behind it. Human beings choose some of the factors to define their happiness and aspect of goodness (Aristotle 8). Most people choose general instruments of life such as wealth, flutes, and many others.
Assessment of Important Issues, Themes, and Concerns of the Readings
Complete good is determined by self-sufficiency, which means a person will live according to the estimated limit when dealing with matters. The aspect of human good can be extended from one party to another, such as from parents to their children or friends to friends (Aristotle 8). According to the inner picture portrayed by the book, it seems human beings are structured in political, social, and economic settings that come in different formulas for achieving the common good. Happiness can be an agreeable subject, measured by what people feel concerning the completeness of human anatomy and general ways of living. Some elements such as the interdependence that people have with the environment can be associated with human good. Therefore, what is spoken or conveyed during sensitive societal settings defines the completeness of human beings (Aristotle 9). For example, if one is educated and has the roots of success, it means that the people who have been backing the person may benefit from the same, hence building the goodness more.
The sketch of good can be drawn by showing what one has and what one lacks. The degree to which people seem to be satisfied by normal happenings such as rainfall, weather changes, and relationships with others can be a measure of good (Aristotle 9). A carpenter example is given to show the extent of discipline they have when it comes to measurements. In this matter, people have to do what appears more logical even if it may not be what they wish. These factors will be a limit to human beings, and they show the restrictions that are important in life.
Some questions may arise from this context, and the reader may be baffled by the issues discussed in the book. First, how possible is it for human beings to be good to everyone if every aspect of the common good is self-centered? Second, can all people be the same in terms of traits that make them happy? And if they must be happy and do human good, what about the deficits left more so the environment such as plants, pets, and world animals? Thus, interrogating such issues in one’s mind may help one understand the account of human good and life perspectives.
Critical Analysis of the Text
The author has given a defense of the account of the good by supporting it with various elements. The main idea here is that the conclusions that people make from given premises will be harmonized by the true accounts of the subject matter (Aristotle 10). The truth must be compromised with false, and therefore, the clash between the two variables is seen in terms of the reaction and outcome of the matter. To understand the human good that the writer is talking about, people must think about the external, bodily, and soul perspectives. These three elements may notably categorize the metrics that can define the accounts of good in human life (Aristotle 10). The soul is often considered to offer a full account of the good from what people reason and decide to do with their reasoning.
The author means that the soul is more powerful than the body in that the cognition of the account or the outcome of a task is articulated from the soul. It is important not to overlook the body as the doer. The context brought to light is that accounts of human goods are structured and reasoned by the soul before getting to the external perspectives. Happiness is a form of justifying the accounts of human good since many consider it a virtue (Aristotle 12). For example, if one is asleep or ill, they may not be feeling happy about it as some consider sleeping a measure of laxity while others say that illness is brought by evil. In short, human beings must engage in societal frameworks that define the ways of living, and the cultural essence is felt significantly at this point.
Active people always feel happy about the level of engagement they have daily. For example, a person working in a busy food outlet may feel pleased by the nature of their job for various reasons. First, it enables them not to see a long day and keeps them focused and developing their minds and souls. Second, the personal interactions with the guests during food and beverage service may make them learn various aspects of life (Aristotle 12). Hence, they may feel like they have a significant role in teaching others the same. These factors make people happy, and they are considered the root sources of human good.
Happiness is achieved in various ways, according to the text. By reading the topic well, indeed, one may not be able to differentiate whether happiness is achieved by learning or habituation (Aristotle 12). To elaborate on this matter, it is more reasonable to say that it is cultivated from both. Here, a reader has to understand a critical point on this note. First, creating own happiness is a way learned from life exploration. Second, habits that one has grown with may be a determining factor in achieving happiness. For example, if one knew that going to church is one way of becoming morally stable in society, then such people may be active in religion as they feel it strengthens their human good. By this point, it will be true to say that they have achieved happiness from habituation.
Though, by keenly reading the book, one may wonder why happiness was not given as the super element of human good, assuming that it is a gift from God (Aristotle 11). This question probes one to investigate the possibility of having achievements that may not make one happy. The other concern from the topic is the level of happiness that one has to achieve, given that it can be a matter of self-efficacy and sociological well-being. The issue of fortune is a contentious matter at twilight since the book may not unveil the natural state of fineness that can be entrusted to bring human good.
While reading the topic, it is clear that happiness is an activity of the soul, as mentioned earlier in this essay. Some goods determine the necessary conditions for happiness. The writer means that if one is healthy, wealthy, or successful, one can be triggered by the inner spirit from the soul to feel happy (Aristotle 14). These accounts of goods in human anatomy make it possible to achieve happiness. The political setting in the current society makes people express their happiness, and therefore, the metrics involved may be as forms of human goods. For example, diplomatic tensions probe people to start analyzing the power a given country has over the other. This, people, become happy when they notice their side is winning while the other party is losing.
Similarly, a successful person may not be prosperous in matters in life, and that at some point, levels the human way of living hence, creating ways for people to experience good. If one had a breakthrough almost in whatever undertaking they came across, but they fail in the end, no one can say they die while happy (Aristotle 14). Therefore, the author means that happiness must be simultaneous with life aspects driven by cultural and ethical cues.
There is concern about whether a human being may be happy during their lifetime through the book. For a reader to understand this, they must think about whether it is possible for one to be happy every time. According to the facts of life, the dead knows nothing, and therefore, they cannot feel happy when they do not live anymore. That brings the focus on whether or not human beings can be happy during their lifetime. It is important to consider the matters that make one happy and the duration in which the issues last to answer the question. For example, if one lived in blessings that made their life to be bright, it means at that point they were happy, and they had been satisfied by the human good.
However, these kinds of people may at one point suffer from misfortune or unfortunate event that distorts their happiness significantly. From the understanding of the chapter, it is normal to experience both evil and good when one is living (Aristotle 15). Therefore, human beings can never be happy all their lifetime due to the uncertainties that come from time to time. However, a significant portion of human life is characterized by happiness from the human good (Aristotle 16). Even when someone is poor, they have many elements that make them happy as long as they feel contented with the little owned. Therefore, human goods that define happiness must balance the period in which one lives to determine if one can live happily or not.
Conclusion
The above text has given a rationale for human accounts of good when it comes to life. The book has given strong points about human good such as the decisions and actions that are taken to determine happiness. Additionally, human good is influenced by people’s perceptions concerning various events in life. The gap that has been left and needs to be researched is the relationship between human good and social well-being. Does it mean that it is difficult to have everyone happy and satisfied in their life? And if it is hard to please everyone, what measure of human good or the level of the subject can neutralize life situations so that everyone is happy? From researching the above elements, it will be easy to establish human good that drives people towards happiness and breakthrough in life.
Work Cited
Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by Terence Irwin. 3rd ed., Hackett Publishing Company, 2019, pp. 8-17.