Carlo Natali

One needs to understand that virtue ethics is in many ways irreconcilable with liberal principles. For Aristotle, virtue was not a matter of following particular laws governing a free society, and Eudaimonia had very little to do with happiness in the sense of feeling good as understood by us. The goal of the virtue ethicist is to become an ideal member of the polis: the hierarchical social order. One was a good noble, a good warrior, a good wife, a good slave. Following your own journey towards happiness was not on the agenda. That said, the idea that virtue is not just a matter of good actions but cultivating good character still has enormous value, and can be brought up to date.

If we stop pursuing happiness, as a 'thing' in itself. And instead accept, and understand our true, natural, evolving selves. Whilst living with a healthy dose of general ethics, and compassion alongside. Then very often happiness is a sort of by product - it almost sneaks in like an uninvited, but not wholly unwelcome guest at the party.

Like the old Zen quote "Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. "Happiness" as an aim is fraught with disappointment. People need to stop competing with one another and stop striving and buying things they don't need. Just try to be helpful and nice to others who need help and we need to tell some to fuck off a bit more often also.

I was already doing the being useful, and reasonably ethical, side of things. What I'd neglected was building the self worth, and confidence to be able to tell the 'idiots' to 'sod off’ when it was needed. Now I know I'm pretty much OK, with all the usual selection of 'flaws' and downsides that beset, the average humanoid. But I still think I'm OK, and the idiots will just have to live with that :-)… (más)