Aristotle's Ethics: Luck, Virtue And Happiness

HUMA 12400
Yizhou Hu
Luck, Virtue and Happiness
The idea that non-virtuous people is possible to be better off than virtuous people like Priam seems to acknowledge that happiness is ultimately determined by luck. Indeed, by emphasizing that certain amount of fortune is necessary to happiness, Aristotle focuses on the relationship between luck, virtue, blessedness and happiness in Chapter 8 of Book 1. In the end, he takes a more intermediate stand toward fortune, claiming that virtue is the determinant of happiness and luck is relevant and complex in a happy life. Virtuous activity itself would be enough to lead one toward happiness. Meanwhile, moderate luck and bad luck have no significant influence on the happiness of virtuous person. On the other hand, extreme luck will make virtuous person blessed while extreme bad luck will make him unhappy. Finally, a vicious person will never be happy. With extreme luck he is still unhappy and without it, he will be miserable. The extreme misfortune, falling upon virtuous person like Priam, is defined by its very nature instead of quantity. For Priam, as suggested by Aristotle, even if he survives the war he will still be virtuous yet unhappy. In other words, luck is something that has its own value, which increase or decrease (might to negative amount) quantity of happiness, and has no impact on the quality of happiness and virtue.
Happiness is determined by virtue, and goods of fortune essentially facilitate virtue. Aristotle first asserts that “activities in conformity with virue constitute happiness, and the opposite activities constitute its opposite”. [NE 1100b] It means that once a person continuously acts virtuously, he will be happy no matter he possesses or lacks fortune, which provides none of the necessity of happiness. However, Aristotle also points out that “…a happy man also needs the goods of the body, external goods, and the goods of fortune, in order not to be obstructed by their absence.” [NE 1153B] Indeed, this is not the only time Aristotle indicates that some goods of fortune are necessary for happiness. But this sentence implies furthermore that the absence of luck never actually change the course of one’s virtuous activity. Lacking fortune merely hinders the virtuous activity, the loss of which directly detracts from happiness. It can be best understood and proved from the example of Priam, which is the extremely bad luck that could ever happened.
The extreme misfortune like that of Priam violates the proper functions of a human being, hindering the virtuous activity and diminishing happiness. In Chapter 7, Aristotle approaches the question of what happiness is composed of by “ascertaining the proper function of man” [NE 1097b]. He notes that a flute player, a sculptor or any experts all are functioning well in accordance with their nature. But in a general sense, what is the unique function of human being? Aristotle claims that “the proper function of man, then, consists in an activity of the soul in conformity with a rational principle or, at least, not without it.” [NE 1098a]
Then in a rational sense, what is Priam’s function? As a king, he is a fighter to rule and protect his kingdom. As a father, he must educate and protect his children. However, after a close reading of Iliad, one finds that Priam failed both of his functions. “The old king cried out, ‘ How lucky you are, son of Atreus…Look at the vast Achaean armies you command. Years ago I visited Phrygian rife with vineyards…and I took my stand among them, comrade-in-arms the day the Amazons struck…” [Iliad 3.221-3.230] Priam not only admires Agamemnon’s mighty army, but also is jealous of him as a strong king. He realized that he could no longer stand in to fight with his army and to fulfill his function as a fighter king. Meanwhile Hector, as his beloved son, is his final and only weapon to fight against Achilles. But how could a father hand in his son to a fight he couldn’t win? “Oh Hector! You’ll meet your doom at once, beaten down by Achilles, so much stronger than you…Back, come back! Inside the walls, my boy!” [Iliad 22.46-22.66] Priam as a king has to protect his country, yet his only approach is to risk the life of his son. One of his functions violates the other, resulting in his tragedy. Priam is still virtuous in the sense that he gave up his own son to protect his city and he showed the greatest grievance toward the death of his son. However, his virtuous activity is inevitably hindered by the presence of misfortune, namely the unresolvable contradiction of his two personal functions, thus he is no longer happy no matter how virtuous he could be in the past.
To view the goods of fortune as some “extra bonus” for one’s virtuous activity seems to solve Aristotle’s claim that “opposite activities constitute its opposite”. Since a vicious person is at first not on the right track. He can only improve his miserable life instead of changing it when he receives extreme fortune. After examining misfortune on virtuous life and fortune on non-virtuous life, one inevitably will need to pay attention to the third sort, the fortune that makes happy life blessed. Aristotle claims “a number of major success will make life more perfectly happy”. [NE 1100b] The perfectly happy here is namely blessedness. However, this kind of fortune raises two questions both focusing on the definition of happiness. First, happiness is self-sufficient, that which “taken by itself makes life something desirable and deficient in nothing”. [NE 1097b] Then how can someone be happier since happiness is already final and can’t be enhanced? Second, if luck can make happy life happier, it means luck is itself part of happiness. However, only contemplative life is the only access to virtue and happiness: “For he will always or to the highest degree both do and contemplate what is in conformity with virtue; he will bear the vicissitudes of fortune most nobly and with perfect decorum under all circumstances”. [NE 1100b]
The second question can be solved in order to understand the first one. Here contemplation is considered as the foundation of virtuous activity, reason being the same as the last quote in the preview paragraph. Already viewed as the facilitator of virtue, luck itself will not enhance one’s ability to contemplate, but facilitate the process and expand the possible outcome. Aristotle recognizes that “theoretical wisdom is the most pleasant” and “self-sufficient” and furthermore, “a wise man is able to study by himself and the wiser he is the more is he able to do it.” It means that that knowledge itself can be expanded with more capacity in human being. Next, Aristotle acknowledges that “Perhaps he could do it better if he had colleagues to work with him”. [NE 1177a] It means while studying can be done by oneself, with the help of others, or more resources in better environment, the quality of contemplative life can be improved. The first question can be solved because it’s been proved that the degree of happiness is directly related to the level of intelligence. “In other words, a life guided by intelligence is the best and most pleasant for man…this kind of life is the happiest.” [NE 1178a] Consequently, with extreme luck one can expect most leisure time, most beneficial friends and most ideal environment to develop his intellectual life and this kind of life is blessed.