So too actions of the wicked can aim at an evil, the action of cruelty is the aim of hurt, thus we understand the aim of action. Now we must find the highest good, which is in itself an end rather than a means. When introducing the idea of the highest good attainable Aristotle says, “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” (6). Thus we find happiness to be the aim. Yet the pursuit of happiness can differ widely among society, often being those things that one lacks. The common run “say it is some clear and obvious good, such as pleasure, wealth, or honor; some say it is one thing and others another” (6). Would pleasure, wealth, or honor not bring consistent and eternal …show more content…
However, the means to happiness remain unclear. Aristotle loosely defines happiness as “some kind of activity of the soul in conformity with virtue” (22). Of course this raises the questions, “what kind of activity?” and “which virtues?” Lets take an “individual who sets high standards for himself…the full attainment of excellence must be added to the mere function” (17). So in regards to man, the function of man is what it is that he does, then in setting high standards he must do that job well, only then can that man attain excellence in his job. For example, the function of a writer is to write, the writer who has high standards must write well to attain excellence. Here we have found that the individual must attain excellence in his function, though it is not reasonable to put each individual under the conclusion that their function is only their