Human behavior derives from persuing “Good”.

​

Every action is a form of seeking Good in the action itself or the result of the action. Each objective is Good under a higher level of Good, which eventually results in an ultimate Good. Politics, being a comprehensive and respectable discipline, persues this ultimate Good. Aristotle proceeds to discuss the true nature of the ultimate Good, although he doesn’t make a clear conclusion, except that  “Goodness” isn’t necessarily more “good” than individual good things. Then he defines Good as the objective of actions and disciplines, which personally seems like presenting the question itself as an answer. The ultimate Good should be a purpose in itself, not a mean.

 

 Therefore happiness is presented as this concept. Of course, happiness needs to be defined here. What is intrinsic to the human being? The action of the soul related to rationality conforming to the best virtue, according to Aristotle. Embracing the public’s definition of happiness, which is associated with pleasure and fun, he defines happiness as “the most Good, most noble, most enjoyable”. Happiness defined like this is something absolute, so a happy man is absolutely happy throughout his life. I don’t agree with this absolute aspect, but I understand the need for seeking the ultimate.

​

 There are two types of virtue: intellectual and moral. These should be born with, taught, and practiced. Aristotle discusses different virtues and mentions that virtue is between excessiveness and lack. A person with virtues is likely happy and persuing this in a collective viewpoint would be politics, as mentioned. The induction of each conclusion is truly remarkable and Aristotle’s objectiveness is very impressive. Following each thinking process can be tiring but this book tells us the essentials of what ethics meant back in ancient Greece.