Essay Sample on Mill vs. Aristotle and the Concept of Happiness

The definition of happiness is one thing that has been debated over a period of time and hence, various philosophers came up with their different understanding of the meaning of the word happiness. Some of the philosophers that came up with the meaning of the word happiness include Aristotle and John Stuart Mill. Each of the philosophers had his own understanding of the word happiness. In this discussion am going to discuss therefore the different suggestions of the meaning of happiness by Aristotle and John Stuart Mill. Utilitarianism is a tradition stemming from John Stuart Mill and Bentham. It is the process through which action tends to promote happiness if it is right to both the performer of the action and also to everyone who can be affected by the action or the process of doing something wrong that makes the performer of the action and the people affected by it unhappy. Utilitarianism also differs from the ethical theories that state about the rightness or the wrongness of something depends on the motives of agents since it is possible to have the right thing but to be carried out in the wrong method. Mill, he believes that utilitarianism requires both quantity and quality happiness. He argues that happiness is a basis for sole mortality and hence, human beings always desire happiness in their entire life. Mill's view of happiness is supported by the fact that human beings sacrifice their own goodness for the goodness and happiness of others. He, therefore, argues that happiness only exists between an individual and the other people surrounding or around that individual.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

However, the theory of utilitarianism has been criticized for many reasons. Some of the reasons include the following; critics that it does not provide enough protection of individual rights, and also people argue that happiness is complex as compared to how it is reflected in this theory. Mill's argument is comprised of five chapters, whereby, in the first chapter, he introduces the essay. Secondly, he describes the meaning of utilitarianism and gives some of the misconceptions concerning the theory (Scarre, Geoffrey 2002). Thirdly, he discusses the reward that the theory of utilitarianism may have on the people. Fourthly, he discusses the methods that offer validity and support for the theory of utilitarianism, and lastly, he describes the connection that is there between utility and justice and explains that happiness is a great founder of utility.

On the other side, Aristotle's Nicomachean explains happiness to be caused by living one's life accordingly and for a reason and it's the ultimate end of a person's life. He defines happiness as an activity that is rational to the soul in accordance with human virtues. His approach to happiness is technological. Aristotle is a Greek well-known philosopher who suggests that each person has his or her ultimate end and that the purpose of everyone is to reach that end. According to him, the end of a person is good, and therefore, everybody's purpose in life is to reach that goodness. He further judges that the goodness of everybody lies in their functions, and also, the capacity of human beings lies in their functioning, and hence, this is the factor that differentiates them from the other beings on earth. For example, the reasoning of a cat will be different from that of a human being. Therefore for according to Aristotle Nicomachean, happiness is caused by living someone's life well, with a reason and with virtue. According to him, virtue is anything that allows a human being to live his or her life in accordance with reason. Therefore, happiness can be achieved by all human beings through living a life with reasoning and motivation.

Therefore, there are various differences and similarities between Mill's utilitarianism on happiness and Aristotle's Nicomachean view on happiness. Starting with the similarity, both Mill and Aristotle's arguments refer to happiness as the ultimate end of an individual and is required for the happiness of people. According to the mill, happiness is only the desirable end of every human being and according to Aristotle, the final end of every human being is their happiness. In addition, in both Mill's and Aristotle's views of happiness, it is an ultimate end that every individual in the society seeks throughout their entire life (Nussbaum, Martha 67). Both argue that happiness should not only be for an individual but for the whole society. Therefore each person should sacrifice him of herself for the favor and happiness of the other individual.

However, despite the fact that both argue about happiness, each philosopher has his own perspective. According to Aristotle's Nicomachean, happiness lies with on individual reasoning and virtues, and therefore reasoning id the factor that brings a human being into a final end of happiness. On the other hand, Mill argues that happiness is as a result of activities that do not cause pain but instead causes happiness to both an individual and for the greatest number of people. In addition, each of the philosophers has his idea concerning what is good and what is bad. This is the factors that may lead to an individual having his final end of happiness to be either close to him or to be far away from him or her. Aristotle explains that "good" is anything that allows a human being to practice a virtual life while as according to Mill, "good" is the pleasure and happiness that anyone may experience as a result of lack of pain in life (Haybron, Daniel 215). On the other hand, when it comes to "bad," according to Aristotle, is any activity or thing that lead to an individual away from the living a life of virtue that brings about happiness while as for Mill, "bad" is any activity that brings about pain to a human being. Moreover, Aristotle believes that anyone may experience his or her own happiness through his or her own will of practicing and studying. In addition, he believes that happiness involves the final end of full virtue in accordance with the reasoning. On the other hand, for Mill's, he believe that happiness is all about pleasure and nothing else and that it is viewpoint is for the greatest numbers of people.

However, despite the fact that both argue about happiness, each philosopher has his own perspective. According to Aristotle's Nicomachean, happiness lies with on individual reasoning and virtues, and therefore reasoning id the factor that brings a human being into a final end of happiness. On the other hand, Mill argues that happiness is as a result of activities that do not cause pain but instead causes happiness to both an individual and for the greatest number of people. In addition, each of the philosophers has his idea concerning what is good and what is bad. This is the factors that may lead to an individual having his final end of happiness to be either close to him or to be far away from him or her. Aristotle explains that "good" is anything that allows a human being to practice a virtual life while as according to Mill, "good" is the pleasure and happiness that anyone may experience as a result of lack of pain in life (Haybron, Daniel 215). On the other hand, when it comes to "bad," according to Aristotle, is any activity or thing that lead to an individual away from the living a life of virtue that brings about happiness while as for Mill, "bad" is any activity that brings about pain to a human being. Moreover, Aristotle believes that anyone may experience his or her own happiness through his or her own will of practicing and studying. In addition, he believes that happiness involves the final end of full virtue in accordance with the reasoning. On the other hand, for Mill's, he believe that happiness is all about pleasure and nothing else and that it is viewpoint is for the greatest numbers of people.

Therefore with these discussions, it is clear that these two philosophers have brought a both brought different meanings of happiness, which have helped the community to have a close understanding of the words happiness and on how they can achieve it. For Aristotle, he believes that happiness is an end in people's lives and could be caused by living one's life accordingly and for a reason and with certain virtues. Mill, on the other hand, argues that happiness is a result of the least amount of pain and having the greatest amount of pleasure that one can have. Despite their various differences, it is present that the two philosophers believe that happiness is not only to one individual but also to the whole society. Therefore, it is the role of each individual to ensure that he sacrifices anything to make sure that everybody in society is happy and this will help people in society to have a good life.

Works Cited

Haybron, Daniel M. "Two philosophical problems in the study of happiness." Journal of Happiness Studies 1.2 (2000): 207-225.

Kraut, Richard, ed. The Blackwell Guide to Aristotle's Nicomachean ethics. John Wiley & Sons, 2008.Nussbaum, Martha C. "Mill between Aristotle & Bentham." Daedalus 133.2 (2004): 60-68.

Scarre, Geoffrey. Utilitarianism. Routledge, 2002.