H. P. Grice's Eudaemonism

GRICE’S EUDAEMONISM.. eudaimonia ethos, see êthos êthos Ancient Greek philosophy, ethics [Greek, character, disposition, from êthos, habit, custom; the transliteration of its adjective êthikos is ethics and literally means being concerned with character] Êthos is not the same as ethos. Aristotle divided arête (virtue or excellence) into two kinds: intellectual virtues and êthika arête. The latter is generally translated as moral virtues, although excellence of character or virtue of character might be more accurate. According to Aristotle, êthos is a significant element for us to gain êthika arête, but practical reason is also indispensable. “Virtue of character [of êthos] results from habit [ethos], hence its name ethical, slightly varies from ethos.” Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics etiquette Philosophy of social science, ethics The set of manners and hypothetical imperatives governing social behavior, which is inherited through oral tradition rather than written code, and is manifested in virtually every aspect of social life in a community. To know the culture of a society is essentially to know its etiquette. Etiquette helps in establishing communal harmony, although its requirements are not as strict as those of morality. It changes continuously over time and helps to form the cultural tradition of a society. “The rules of governing the least socially important customs are the rules of etiquette for that society.” Feldman, Introductory Ethics Eubulides Ancient Greek logician from Miletus, member of the Megarian school, author of the sorites paradox and possibly author of the liar paradox. eudaemonism Ethics [from Greek eudaimonia, happiness or wellbeing] An ethical stance which claims that happiness is the property by which all intrinsic goods are good and by which all our rational behavior is ultimately justified. Hence we ought to seek happiness as our ultimate end in life and pursue everything else for the sake of happiness. This ethical eudaemonism is related to psychological eudaemonism, but not identical with it. Psychological eudaemonism proposes that all intentional behavior of an agent aims at the agent’s own happiness. Although happiness has been taken in the history of Western ethics to be the ultimate good, there is no agreement about what constitutes happiness. For example, for Aristotle happiness is rational activity, but for the Epicureans and the utilitarians, happiness is a life of greatest pleasure and least pain. Through its concern for ends, eudaemonism is teleological in nature. It was criticized by Kant, but has been revived in contemporary virtue ethics. “It [the moral theory which prevailed in Kant’s time] may be generally described as a system of eudaemonism which, when asked what man’s chief end ought to be, replied Happiness. And by happiness eudaemonism understood the satisfaction of the private appetites, wishes, and wants of the man: thus raising the contingent and particular into a principle for the will and its actualization.” Hegel, Logic -- eudaimonia Ethics, philosophy of mind [Greek, human flourishing, from eu, good + daimon, a divinity or spirit, having a good divinity to look after one] The highest good for humans. Eudaimonia is normally translated as happiness, but this is not precise, because happiness tends to be identified with pleasure or the satisfaction of our sentient nature, and this is only one element in Greek eudaimonia. Another, and philosophically more important, element is the satisfaction of our nature as active beings. In this sense, it is equivalent in Greek to living well or doing well. Because eudaimonia concerns the shape of one’s whole life rather than particular moments or parts of one’s life, it is also translated as well-being. For many Greek philosophers, including Plato, Aristotle, and Epicurus, eudaimonia is the state of life which is most worth living. For Aristotle eudaimonia is the state of life in which man deeply fulfils his nature, and it is the complete end or telos of one’s life. He defined eudaimonia as activity in accordance with virtue, so the genuine pursuit of happiness and the virtuous life are one and the same. In practical life, eudaimonia is generally activity in accordance with moral virtue and practical reason, but ideally it is activity in accordance with the virtue of the theoretical part of the soul, although we take part in this activity not insofar as we are men, but only insofar as there is something divine in us. Attempts to reconcile these claims affect our reading of Aristotle’s ethics. “As far as its name goes, most people virtually agree [about what the good is], since both the many and the cultivated call it happiness (eudaimonia), and suppose that living well and doing well are the same as being happy.” Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics