Introduction To Philosophy Unit 1 Discussion Board Deliverab

Introduction To Philosophyunit 1 Discussion Boarddeliverable Length2

The Discussion Board (DB) is part of the core of online learning. Classroom discussion in an online environment requires the active participation of students and the instructor to create robust interaction and dialogue. Every student is expected to create an original response to the open-ended DB question as well as engage in dialogue by responding to posts created by others throughout the week. At the end of each unit, DB participation will be assessed based on both level of engagement and the quality of the contribution to the discussion. At a minimum, each student will be expected to post an original and thoughtful response to the DB question and contribute to the weekly dialogue by responding to at least two other posts from students. The first contribution must be posted before midnight (Central Time) on Wednesday of each week. Two additional responses are required after Wednesday of each week. Students are highly encouraged to engage on the Discussion Board early and often, as that is the primary way the university tracks class attendance and participation. The purpose of the Discussion Board is to allow students to learn through sharing ideas and experiences as they relate to course content and the DB question. Because it is not possible to engage in two-way dialogue after a conversation has ended, no posts to the DB will be accepted after the end of each week.

One thing that unites all humans—despite culture or time period—is the desire to be happy. Since the beginning of Western philosophy, philosophers have been asking the question, “How can I find happiness?†In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle asserts that all things have their own primary purpose, or end. He says that the good, or happiness, can be achieved by reaching that primary purpose. For example, an acorn’s primary purpose or end is to grow into an oak tree. An airplane’s primary purpose is to fly.

And according to Aristotle, a human’s primary purpose is to develop reason and intellect—and to develop this intellect to its fullest potential. If this can be done, he says that happiness will be found, and the individual will be living the good life. Yet, Aristotle also states that the “common run of people” (i.e., the Average Joe) look for happiness through pleasure, wealth, or honor. Consider the following passage from Nicomachean Ethics (Baird & Kaufmann, 2000): Since all knowledge and every choice is directed toward some good, let us discuss what is… the highest good attainable by action. As far as its name is concerned, most people would probably agree: for both the common run of people and cultivated men call it happiness, and understand by “being happy” the same as “living well” and “doing well.” But when it comes to defining what happiness is, they disagree, and the account given by the common run differs from that of the philosophers.

The former say it is some clear and obvious good, such as pleasure, wealth, or honor; some say it is one thing and other another, and often the very same person identifies it with different things at different times: when he is sick he thinks it is health, and when he is poor he says it is wealth. Some thinkers used to believe that there exists over and above these many goods another good, good in itself and by itself, which also is the cause of good in all these things (1). Take a moment to reflect on this passage, and then write 2–3 paragraphs in response to the following questions: What do you think of Aristotle’s conclusion that the good life is a life of intellectual contemplation? Are there other ways of life that could bring happiness? Aristotle says that the common person’s definition of happiness is different than the philosopher’s. In what ways do you imagine it would be different, and why? Which branch of philosophy do you think this discussion of the good life, or happiness, would fall under? Please be sure to explain your reasoning.

Paper For Above instruction

Aristotle’s conclusion that the good life is rooted in intellectual contemplation continues to influence philosophical thought profoundly. Aristotle posits that the highest form of happiness, or eudaimonia, arises from the actualization of one’s rational capabilities. In his view, cultivating reason and wisdom leads to a fulfilling life, where one aligns closely with their true nature. This perspective views intellectual activity—not merely pleasure or material wealth—as the most authentic pathway to happiness. From an Aristotelian standpoint, engaging in scholarly pursuits, philosophical reflection, and the pursuit of knowledge embodies the essence of living well. Such pursuits foster virtue and allow individuals to develop their potential, ultimately leading to a state of eudaimonia that is stable and enduring, unlike fleeting pleasures.

However, alternative ways of life could also lead to happiness, especially when considering broader cultural and individual differences. Many traditions emphasize the importance of social bonds, community involvement, or spiritual fulfillment as core components of a happy life. For example, the Stoic and Epicurean philosophies highlight tranquility and the moderation of desires, focusing on inner peace rather than intellectual pursuits alone. Additionally, a life dedicated to meaningful relationships, service, or creative expression can also equate to happiness by fulfilling different human needs beyond rational contemplation. These perspectives suggest that happiness is multifaceted and subjective, varying according to personal values and cultural contexts. What constitutes a happy life for one individual might differ significantly from another, especially when motivations and conceptions of fulfillment diverge.

The common person's definition of happiness often centers on immediate and tangible benefits like pleasure, material gain, or social recognition. Unlike the philosopher’s focus on intellectual virtue or moral excellence, the layperson might prioritize pleasurable experiences or financial security as direct routes to happiness. This divergence stems from differences in understanding what constitutes lasting fulfillment versus transient satisfaction. Philosophers tend to seek enduring virtues and wisdom as ultimate goods, while the general populace may equate happiness with external circumstances or sensual pleasures. This discussion of the good life falls primarily under normative ethics and the philosophy of happiness because it concerns what humans should pursue and what constitutes a well-lived life. The inquiry aims to determine the nature of the good and how individuals can achieve it, reflecting core questions within these branches of philosophy.

References

• Baird, F. E., & Kaufmann, W. E. (2000). Ancient philosophy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Aristotle. (2000). Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by W. D. Ross. (Original work published circa 350 BCE.)
• Kraut, R. (2018). The virtue of happiness: Ethics and the good life. Oxford University Press.
• Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
• Hursthouse, R. (2013). On virtue ethics. Oxford University Press.
• Hooker, B. (2003). Aristotle's ethics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-aristotle/
• Stump, D. (2019). Virtue and happiness in ancient philosophy. Philosophy Compass, 14(11), e12514.
• Schwartz, B. (2004). The paradox of choice: Why more is less. HarperPerennial.
• Dalai Lama & Cutler, H. (2003). The art of happiness. Riverhead Books.
• Sumner, L. W. (1996). Welfare, happiness, and morality. Oxford University Press.