Eudaimonia

Transcription

Eudaimonia

Karl Loren
Eudaimonia
http://www.academyanabiology.com
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the moth, see Eudaemonia (moth).
Eudaimonia or eudaemonia (Greek: εὐδαιμονία ),
sometimes anglicizedas eudemonia ( /juːdɨˈmoʊniə/), is a Greek word
commonly translated as happinessor welfare; however, "human flourishing" has
been proposed as a more accurate translation. [1] Etymologically, it consists of the
words "eu" ("good") and "daimōn" ("spirit"). It is a central concept
in Aristotelian ethics and political philosophy, along with the terms "aretē", most
often translated as "virtue" or "excellence", and "phronesis", often translated as
"practical or ethical wisdom". [2] In Aristotle's works, eudaimonia was (based on
older Greek tradition) used as the term for the highest human good, and so it is the
aim of practical philosophy, including ethics and political philosophy, to consider
(and also experience) what it really is, and how it can be achieved.
Discussion of the links between virtue of character (ethikē aretē) and happiness
(eudaimonia) is one of the central preoccupations of ancient ethics, and a subject of
much disagreement. As a result there are many varieties of eudaimonism. Two of
the most influential forms are those of Aristotle[3] and the Stoics. Aristotle takes
virtue and its exercise to be the most important constituent in eudaimonia but does
acknowledge the importance of external goods such as health, wealth, and beauty.
By contrast, the Stoics make virtue necessary and sufficient for eudaimonia and
thus deny the necessity of external goods.
Contents [show] Definition
[edit]
In his Nicomachean Ethics, (§21; 1095a15–22) Aristotle says that everyone agrees
that eudaimonia is the highest good for human beings, but that there is substantial
disagreement on what sort of life counts as doing and living well; i.e. eudaimon:
Verbally there is a very general agreement; for both the general run of
men and people of superior refinement say that it is [eudaimonia], and
identify living well and faring well with being happy; but with regard to
what [eudaimonia] is they differ, and the many do not give the same
account as the wise. For the former think it is some plain and obvious
thing like pleasure, wealth or honour… [1095a17][4]
So, as Aristotle points out, saying that eudaimon life is a life which is objectively
desirable, and means living well, is not saying very much. Everyone wants to be
eudaimon; and everyone agrees that being eudaimon is related to faring well and to
an individual’s well being. The really difficult question is to specify just what sort of
activities enable one to live well. Aristotle presents various popular conceptions of
the best life for human beings. The candidates that he mentions are a (1) life of
pleasure, (2) a life of political activity and (3) a philosophical life.
One important move in Greek philosophy to answer the question of how to achieve
eudaimonia is to bring in another important concept in ancient philosophy, "arete"
("virtue"). Aristotle says that the eudaimon life is one of “virtuous activity in
accordance with reason” [1097b22–1098a20]. And even Epicurus who argues that
the eudaimon life is the life of pleasure maintains that the life of pleasure coincides
1 of 14
differentiating hedonia vs eudaimonia
10/11/2012
Karl
Loren So the ancient ethical theorists
with the life of
virtue.
tend to agree that virtue is
closely bound up with happiness (areté is bound up with eudaimonia). However,
they disagree on the way in which this is so. We shall consider the main theories
in a moment, but first a warning about the proper translation of areté.
As already noted, the Greek word areté is usually translated into English as virtue.
One problem with this is that we are inclined to understand virtue in a moral sense,
which is not always what the ancients had in mind. For a Greek, areté pertains to
all sorts of qualities we would not regard as relevant to ethics, for example, physical
beauty. So it is important to bear in mind that the sense of ‘virtue’ operative in
ancient ethics is not exclusively moral and includes more than states such as
wisdom, courage and compassion. The sense of virtue which areté connotes would
include saying something like "speed is a virtue in a horse", or "height is a virtue in
a basketball player". Doing anything well requires virtue, and each characteristic
activity (such as carpentry, flute playing, etc.) has its own set of virtues. The
alternative translation excellence (or "a desirable quality") might be helpful in
conveying this general meaning of the term. The moral virtues are simply a subset
of the general sense in which a human being is capable of functioning well or
excellently.
Main views on eudaimonia and its relation to areté
[edit]
Socrates
[edit]
What we know of Socrates' philosophy is
almost entirely derived from Plato’s
writings. Scholars typically divide Plato’s
works into three periods: the early,
middle, and late periods. They tend to
agree also that Plato’s earliest works
quite faithfully represent the teachings of
Socrates and that Plato’s own views,
which go beyond those of Socrates,
appear for the first time in the middle
works such as the Phaedoand
the Republic. This division will be
employed here in dividing up the
positions of Socrates and Plato on
eudaimonia.
French painter David portrayed the
philosopher in The Death of
Socrates(1787).
As with all other ancient ethical thinkers
Socrates thought that all human beings
wanted eudaimonia more than anything else. (see
Plato, Apology 30b, Euthydemus280d–282d, Meno 87d–89a). However, Socrates
adopted a quite radical form of eudaimonism (see above): he seems to have
thought that virtue is both necessary and sufficient for eudaimonia. Socrates is
convinced that virtues such as self-control, courage, justice, piety, wisdom and
related qualities of mind and soul are absolutely crucial if a person is to lead a good
and happy (eudaimon) life. Virtues guarantee a happy life eudaimonia. For
example, in the Meno, with respect to wisdom, he says: “… everything the soul
endeavours or endures under the guidance of wisdom ends in
happiness…”[Meno 88c].
In the Apology, Socrates clearly presents his disagreement with those who think
2 of 14
10/11/2012
Karl Loren
that the eudaimon
life is the life of honour or pleasure,
when he chastises the
Athenians for caring more for riches and honour than the state of their souls.
Good Sir, you are an Athenian, a citizen of the greatest city with the
greatest reputation for both wisdom and power; are you not ashamed
of your eagerness to possess as much wealth, reputation, and
honours as possible, while you do not care for nor give thought to
wisdom or truth or the best possible state of your soul [29d]. [5]
… it does not seem like human nature for me to have neglected all
my own affairs and to have tolerated this neglect for so many years
while I was always concerned with you, approaching each one of you
like a father or an elder brother to persuade you to care for virtue.
[31a–b; italics added]
It emerges a bit further on that this concern for one’s soul, that one’s soul might be
in the best possible state, amounts to acquiring moral virtue. So Socrates’ point that
the Athenians should care for their souls means that they should care for their
virtue, rather than pursuing honour or riches. Virtues are states of the soul. When a
soul has been properly cared for and perfected it possesses the virtues. Moreover,
according to Socrates, this state of the soul, moral virtue, is the most important
good. The health of the soul is incomparably more important for eudaimonia than
(e.g.) wealth and political power. Someone with a virtuous soul is better off than
someone who is wealthy and honoured but whose soul is corrupted by unjust
actions. This view is confirmed in theCrito, where Socrates gets Crito to agree that
the perfection of the soul, virtue, is the most important good:
And is life worth living for us with that part of us corrupted that unjust
action harms and just action benefits? Or do we think that part of us,
whatever it is, that is concerned with justice and injustice, is inferior to
the body? Not at all. It is much more valuable…? Much more… (47e–
48a)
Here Socrates argues that life is not worth living if the soul is ruined by
wrongdoing.[6] In summary, Socrates seems to think that virtue is both necessary
and sufficient for eudaimonia. A person who is not virtuous cannot be happy, and a
person with virtue cannot fail to be happy. We shall see later on that Stoic ethics
takes its cue from this Socratic insight.
Plato
[edit]
Plato’s great work of the middle period, the Republic, is devoted to answering a
challenge made by a sophist Thrasymachus, that conventional morality, particularly
the ‘virtue’ of justice, actually prevents the strong man from achieving eudaimonia.
Thrasymachus’s views are restatements of a position which Plato discusses earlier
on in his writings, in the Gorgias, through the mouthpiece of Callicles. The basic
argument presented by Thrasymachus and Callicles is that justice (being just)
hinders or prevents the achievement of eudaimonia because conventional morality
requires that we control ourselves and hence live with un-satiated desires. This
idea is vividly illustrated in book 2 of the Republic when Glaucon, taking up
Thrasymachus’ challenge, recounts a myth of the magical ring of Gyges. According
to the myth, Gyges becomes king of Lydia when he stumbles upon a magical ring,
which, when he turns it a particular way, makes him invisible, so that he can satisfy
3 of 14
10/11/2012
Loren without fear of punishment. When
any desire heKarl
wishes
he discovers the power of
the ring he kills the king, marries his wife and takes over the throne. The thrust of
Glaucon’s challenge is that no one would be just if he could escape the retribution
he would normally encounter for fulfilling his desires at whim. But if eudaimonia is to
be achieved through the satisfaction of desire, whereas being just or acting justly
requires suppression of desire, then it is not in the interests of the strong man to
act according to the dictates of conventional morality. (This general line of argument
reoccurs much later in the philosophy of Nietzsche.) Throughout the rest of
the Republic, Plato aims to refute this claim by showing that the virtue of justice is
necessary for eudaimonia.
The argument of the Republic is
lengthy, complex, and profound, and
the present context does not allow
that we give it proper consideration. In
a thumbnail sketch, Plato argues that
virtues are states of the soul, and that
the just person is someone whose
soul is ordered and harmonious, with
all its parts functioning properly to the
person’s benefit. In contrast, Plato
argues that the unjust man’s soul,
without the virtues, is chaotic and at
war with itself, so that even if he were
able to satisfy most of his desires, his
lack of inner harmony and unity thwart
any chance he has of achieving
eudaimonia. Plato’s ethical theory is
The School of Athens by Raffaello Sanzio,
eudaimonist because it maintains that
1509, showing Plato (left) and Aristotle (right)
eudaimonia depends on virtue. (Virtue
is necessary for eudaimonia.) On
Plato’s version of the relationship, virtue is depicted as the most crucial and the
dominant constituent of eudaimonia.
Aristotle
[edit]
Aristotle’s account is articulated in the Nicomachean Ethics and the Eudemian
Ethics.In outline, for Aristotle, eudaimonia involves activity, exhibiting virtue
(aretē sometimes translated as excellence) in accordance with reason. This
conception of eudaimonia derives from Aristotle’s essentialist understanding
of human nature, the view thatreason (logos sometimes translated as rationality) is
unique to human beings and that the ideal function or work (ergon) of a human
being is the fullest or most perfect exercise of reason. Basically, well being
(eudaimonia) is gained by proper development of one's highest and most human
capabilities and human beings are "the rational animal". It follows that eudaimonia
for a human being is the attainment of excellence (areté) in reason.
According to Aristotle, eudaimonia actually requires activity, action, so that it is not
sufficient for a person to possess a squandered ability or disposition. Eudaimonia
requires not only good character but rational activity. Aristotle clearly maintains that
to live in accordance with reason means achieving excellence thereby. Moreover,
he claims this excellence cannot be isolated and so competencies are also required
appropriate to related functions. For example, if being a truly outstanding scientist
4 of 14
10/11/2012
Karl Loren
requires impressive
math skills, so that one might say
"doing mathematics well is
necessary to be a first rate scientist". From this it follows that eudaimonia, living
well, consists in activities exercising the rational part of the psyche in accordance
with the virtues or excellency of reason [1097b22–1098a20]. Which is to say, to be
fully engaged in the intellectually stimulating and fulling work at which one achieves
well-earned success. The rest of the Nicomachean Ethics is devoted to filling out
the claim that best life for a human being is the life of excellence in accordance
with reason. Since reason for Aristotle is not only theoretical but practical also, he
spends quite a bit of time discussing excellence of character which enable a person
to exercise his practical reason (i.e., reason relating to action) successfully.
Aristotle’s ethical theory is eudaimonist because it maintains that eudaimonia
depends on virtue. However, it is Aristotle’s explicit view that virtue is necessary but
not sufficient for eudaimonia. While emphasizing the importance of the rational
aspect of the psyche, he does not ignore the importance of other ‘goods’ such as
friends, wealth, and power in a life that is eudaimonic. He doubts the likelihood of
being eudaimonic if one lacks certain external goods such as ‘good birth, good
children, and beauty’. So, a person who is hideously ugly or has “lost children or
good friends through death” (1099b5–6), or who is isolated, is unlikely to be
eudaimon. In this way, "dumb luck" (chance) can preempt one's attainment of
eudaimonia.
Epicurus
[edit]
Epicurus’ ethical theory is hedonistic. (His
view proved very influential on the
founders and best proponents of
utilitarianism,Jeremy Bentham and John
Stuart Mill. See the article
on utilitarianism.) Hedonism is the view
that pleasure is the only intrinsic good
and that pain is the only intrinsic bad. An
object, experience or state of affairs is
intrinsically valuable if it is good simply
because of what it is. Intrinsic value is to
be contrasted with instrumental value. An
object, experience or state of affairs is
instrumentally valuable if it serves as a
means to what is intrinsically valuable. To
see this, consider the following example.
Suppose you spend your days and nights
in an office, working at not entirely
pleasant activities, such as entering data
into a computer, and this, all for money.
Someone asks, “why do you want the
money?” and you answer, “So, I can buy
Epicurus identified eudaimonia with the
life of pleasure.
an apartment overlooking the
Mediterranean, and a red Ferrari.” This
answer expresses the point that money is instrumentally valuable because it is a
means to getting your apartment and red Ferrari. The value of making money is
dependent on the value of commodities. It is instrumentally valuable: valuable only
because of what one obtains by means of it [citation needed] .
5 of 14
10/11/2012
Karl Loren
Epicurus identifies
the eudaimon life with the life of http://www.academyanabiology.com
pleasure. He understands
eudaimonia as a more or less continuous experience of pleasure, and also,
freedom from pain and distress. But it is important to notice that Epicurus does not
advocate that one pursue any and every pleasure. Rather, he recommends a policy
whereby pleasures are maximized “in the long run.” In other words, Epicuric claims
that some pleasures are not worth having because they lead to greater pains, and
some pains are worthwhile when they lead to greater pleasures. The best strategy
for attaining a maximal amount of pleasure overall is not to seek instant gratification
but to work out a sensible long term policy.
Ancient Greek ethics is eudaimonist because it links virtue and eudaimonia, where
eudaimonia refers to an individual’s (objective) well being. Epicurus' doctrine can be
considered eudaimonist since Epicurus argues that a life of pleasure will coincide
with a life of virtue. He believes that we do and ought to seek virtue because virtue
brings pleasure. Epicurus’ basic doctrine is that a life of virtue is the life which
generates the most amount of pleasure, and it is for this reason that we ought to be
virtuous. This thesis—the eudaimon life is the pleasurable life—is not
a tautology as “eudaimonia is the good life” would be: rather, it is the substantive
and controversial claim that a life of pleasure and absence of pain is what
eudaimonia consists in.
One important difference between Epicurus’ eudaimonism and that of Plato and
Aristotle is that for the latter virtue is a constituent of eudaimonia, whereas Epicurus
makes virtue a means to happiness. To this difference, consider Aristotle’s theory.
Aristotle maintains that eudaimonia is what everyone wants (and Epicurus would
agree). He also thinks that eudaimonia is best achieved by a life of virtuous activity
in accordance with reason. The virtuous person takes pleasure in doing the right
thing as a result of a proper training of moral and intellectual character (See
e.g., Nicomachean Ethics 1099a5). However, Aristotle does not think that virtuous
activity is pursued for the sake of pleasure. Pleasure is a byproduct of virtuous
action: it does not enter at all into the reasons why virtuous action is virtuous.
Aristotle does not think that we literally aim for eudaimonia. Rather, eudaimonia is
what we achieve (assuming that we aren’t particularly unfortunate in the possession
of external goods) when we live according to the requirements of reason. Virtue is
the largest constituent in a eudaimon life. By contrast, Epicurus holds that virtue is
the means to achieve happiness. His theory is eudaimonist in that he holds that
virtue is indispensable to happiness; but virtue is not a constituent of a eudaimon
life, and being virtuous is not (external goods aside) identical with being eudaimon.
Rather, according to Epicurus, virtue is only instrumentally related to happiness. So
whereas Aristotle would not say that one ought to aim for virtue in order to attain
pleasure, Epicurus would endorse this claim.
The Stoics
[edit]
Stoic philosophy begins with Zeno of
Citiumc.300 BCE, and was developed
byCleanthes (331–232 BCE)
and Chrysippus(c.280–c.206 BCE) into a
formidable systematic unity. [7] Zeno
believed happiness was a "good flow of
life"; Cleanthes suggested it was "living in
agreement with nature", and Chrysippus
believed it was "living in accordance with
6 of 14
10/11/2012
Karl Loren
experience of what happens by
nature." [7] Stoic ethics is a particularly
strong version of eudaimonism. According
to the Stoics, virtue is necessary and
sufficient for eudaimonia. (This thesis is
generally regarded as stemming from the
Zeno, thought happiness was a "good
Socrates of Plato’s earlier dialogues.) We
flow of life."
saw earlier that the conventional Greek
concept of arete is not quite the same as
that denoted by virtue, which has Christian connotations of charity, patience, and
uprightness, since arete includes many non-moral virtues such as physical strength
and beauty. However, the Stoic concept of arete is much nearer to the Christian
conception of virtue, which refers to the moral virtues. However, unlike Christian
understandings of virtue, righteousness or piety, the Stoic conception does not
place as great an emphasis on mercy, forgiveness, self-abasement (i.e. the ritual
process of declaring complete powerlessness and humility before God), charity and
self-sacrificial love, though these behaviors/mentalities are not necessarily spurned
by the Stoics (they are spurned by other philosophers of Antiquity). Rather Stoicism
emphasizes states such as justice, honesty, moderation, simplicity, self-discipline,
resolve, fortitude, and courage (states which Christianity also encourages).
The Stoics make a radical claim that the eudaimon life is the morally virtuous life.
Moral virtue is good, and moral vice is bad, and everything else, such as health,
honour and riches, are merely ‘neutral’. [7] The Stoics therefore are committed to
saying that external goods such as wealth and physical beauty are not really good
at all. Moral virtue is both necessary and sufficient for eudaimonia. In this, they are
akin to Cynic philosophers such as Antisthenes and Diogenes in denying the
importance to eudaimonia of external goods and circumstances, such as were
recognized by Aristotle, who thought that severe misfortune (such as the death of
one’s family and friends) could rob even the most virtuous person of eudaimonia.
This Stoic doctrine re-emerges later in the history of ethical philosophy in the
writings of Immanuel Kant, who argues that the possession of a "good will" is the
only unconditional good. One difference is that whereas the Stoics regard external
goods as neutral, as neither good nor bad, Kant’s position seems to be that
external goods are good, but only so far as they are a condition to achieving
happiness.
Eudaimonia and modern moral philosophy
[edit]
Interest in the concept of eudaimonia and ancient ethical theory more generally
enjoyed a revival in the twentieth century. Elizabeth Anscombe in her article
"Modern Moral Philosophy" (1958) argued that duty based conceptions of morality
are conceptually incoherent for they are based on the idea of a "law without a
[8]
7 of 14
10/11/2012
lawgiver".
Karl Loren
She
claims a system of morality conceived
along the lines of the Ten
Commandments depends on someone having made these rules.[9] Anscombe
recommends a return to the eudaimonistic ethical theories of the ancients,
particularly Aristotle, which ground morality in the interests and well being of human
moral agents, and can do so without appealing to any such lawgiver.
Julia Driver in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy explains:
Anscombe's article Modern Moral Philosophy stimulated the
development of virtue ethics as an alternative to Utilitarianism, Kantian
Ethics, and Social Contract theories. Her primary charge in the article
is that, as secular approaches to moral theory, they are without
foundation. They use concepts such as ‘morally ought,’ ‘morally
obligated,’ ‘morally right,’ and so forth that are legalistic and require a
legislator as the source ofmoral authority. In the past God occupied
that role, but systems that dispense with God as part of the theory
are lacking the proper foundation for meaningful employment of those
concepts.[10]
Eudaimonia and modern Psychology
[edit]
Models of eudaimonia in psychology emerged out of early work on selfactualisation and the means of its accomplishment by researchers such
as Erikson, Allport, andMaslow.[11] The psychologist C. D. Ryff highlighted the
distinction between eudaimonia wellbeing, which she identified as psychological
wellbeing, and hedonic wellbeing or pleasure. Building on Aristotelian ideals of
belonging and benefiting others, flourishing, thriving and exercising excellence, she
conceptualised eudaimonia as a six-factor structure :
1. Autonomy
2. Personal growth
3. Self-acceptance
4. Purpose in life
5. Environmental mastery
6. Positive relations with others.
Importantly, she also produced scales for assessing Mental health. [11]
This factor structure has been debated [12] ,[13] but has generated much research in
wellbeing, health and successful aging.
Genetics
[edit]
Individual differences in both overall Eudaimonia, identified loosely with selfcontrol and in the facets of eudaimonia are heritable. Evidence from one study
supports 5 independent genetic mechanisms underlying the Ryff facets of this trait,
leading to a genetic construct of eudaimonia in terms of general self-control, and
four subsidiary biological mechanisms enabling the psychological capabilities of
purpose, agency, growth, and positive social relations [14]
Etymology and translation
[edit]
In terms of its etymology, eudaimonia is an abstract noun derived from eu meaning
“well” and daimon (daemon), which refers to a minor deity or a guardian spirit. [3]
Eudaimonia implies a positive and divine state of being that man is able to strive
8 of 14
10/11/2012
Karl Lorenreach. A literal view of eudaimonia
toward and possibly
means achieving a state of
being similar to benevolent deity, or being protected and looked after by a
benevolent deity. As this would be considered the most positive state to be in, the
word is often translated as 'happiness' although incorporating the divine nature of
the word extends the meaning to also include the concepts of being fortunate, or
blessed. Despite this etymology, however, discussions of eudaimonia in ancient
Greek ethics are often conducted independently of any super-natural significance.
In his Nicomachean Ethics, (1095a15–22) Aristotle says that eudaimonia means
’doing and living well’. It is significant that synonyms for eudaimonia are living well
and doing well. On the standard English translation, this would be to say that
‘happiness is doing well and living well’. The word ‘happiness’ does not entirely
capture the meaning of the Greek word. One important difference is that happiness
often connotes being or tending to be in a certain pleasant state of consciousness.
For example, when we say of someone that “he is a very happy man,” we usually
mean that he seems subjectively contented with the way things are going in his life.
We mean to imply that he feels good about the way things are going for him. In
contrast, eudaimonia is a more encompassing notion than feeling happy since
events that do not contribute to one’s experience of feeling happy may affect one’s
eudaimonia.
Eudaimonia depends on all the things that would make us happy if we knew of their
existence, but quite independently of whether we do know about them. Ascribing
eudaimonia to a person, then, may include ascribing such things as being virtuous,
being loved and having good friends. But these are all objective judgments about
someone’s life: they concern a person’s really being virtuous, really being loved,
and really having fine friends. This implies that a person who has evil sons and
daughters will not be judged to be eudaimonic even if he or she does not know that
they are evil and feels pleased and contented with the way they have turned out
(happy). Conversely, being loved by your children would not count towards your
happiness if you did not know that they loved you (and perhaps thought that they
did not), but it would count towards your eudaimonia. So eudaimonia corresponds
to the idea of having an objectively good or desirable life, to some extent
independently of whether one knows that certain things exist or not. It includes
conscious experiences of well being, success, and failure, but also a whole lot
more. (See Aristotle’s discussion: Nicomachean Ethics, book 1.10–1.11.)
Because of this discrepancy between the meaning of eudaimonia and happiness,
some alternative translations have been proposed. W.D. Ross suggests "well-being"
and John Cooper proposes "flourishing". These translations may avoid some of the
misleading associations carried by "happiness" although each tends to raise some
problems of its own. In some modern texts therefore, the other alternative is to
leave the term in an English form of the original Greek, as "eudaimonia".
See also
[edit]
Eudaemon (mythology)
Eupraxsophy
Fellowship of Reason
Humanism
Nicomachean Ethics
Phronesis
Summum bonum
9 of 14
10/11/2012
Karl Loren
Virtue ethics
References
[edit]
1. ^ Daniel N. Robinson. (1999). Aristotle's Psychology. Published by Daniel N.
Robinson.ISBN 0-9672066-0-X ISBN 978-0967206608
2. ^ Rosalind Hursthouse (July 18, 2007). "Virtue Ethics" . Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Retrieved 2010-06-05. "But although modern virtue ethics does not have
to take the form known as "neo-Aristotelian", almost any modern version still shows
that its roots are in ancient Greek philosophy by the employment of three concepts
derived from it. These are areté (excellence or virtue) phronesis (practical or moral
wisdom) and eudaimonia (usually translated as happiness or flourishing.) As modern
virtue ethics has grown and more people have become familiar with its literature, the
understanding of these terms has increased, but it is still the case that readers
familiar only with modern philosophy tend to misinterpret them."
3. ^ a b Verena von Pfetten (09-4-08). "5 Things Happy People Do" . Huffington Post.
Retrieved 2010-06-05. "But researchers now believe that eudaimonic well-being may
be more important. Cobbled from the Greek eu ("good") and daimon ("spirit" or
"deity"), eudaimonia means striving toward excellence based on one's unique talents
and potential—Aristotle considered it to be the noblest goal in life. In his time, the
Greeks believed that each child was blessed at birth with a personal daimon
embodying the highest possible expression of his or her nature. One way they
envisioned the daimon was as a golden figurine that would be revealed by cracking
away an outer layer of cheap pottery (the person's baser exterior). The effort to know
and realize one's most golden self—"personal growth," in today's vernacular—is now
the central concept of eudaimonia, which has also come to include continually taking
on new challenges and fulfilling one's sense of purpose in life."
4. ^ Aristotle, also David Ross, Lesley Brown (1980). "The Nicomachean Ethics" .
Oxford University Press. Retrieved 2010-06-05. "Verbally there is very general
agreement, for both the general run of men and people of superior refinement..."
5. ^ Uncertain (19 September 2008). "How "God" functioned in Socrates' life" .
DD:Religion. Retrieved 2010-06-05. "Men of Athens, I am grateful and I am your
friend, but I will obey the god rather than you, and as long as I draw breath and am
able, I shall not cease to practice philosophy, to exhort you and in my usual way to
point out to any of you whom I happen to meet: "Good Sir, you are an Athenian, a
citizen of the greatest city with the greatest reputation for both wisdom and power;
are you not ashamed of your eagerness to possess as much wealth, reputation and
honors as possible, while you do not care for nor give thought to wisdom or truth, or
the best possible state of your soul?""
6. ^ Richard Parry (Aug 7, 2009). "Ancient Ethical Theory" . Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Retrieved 2010-06-05. "Socrates says that a man worth anything at all
does not reckon whether his course of action endangers his life or threatens death.
He looks only at one thing — whether what he does is just or not, the work of a good
or of a bad man (28b–c)."
7. ^ a b c Dirk Baltzly (Feb 7, 2008). "Stoicism" . Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Retrieved 2010-06-05. "But what is happiness? The Epicureans' answer was
deceptively straightforward: the happy life is the one which is most pleasant. (But
their account of what the highest pleasure consists in was not at all straightforward.)
Zeno's answer was "a good flow of life" (Arius Didymus, 63A) or "living in
agreement", and Cleanthes clarified that with the formulation that the end was "living
in agreement with nature" (Arius Didymus, 63B). Chrysippus amplified this to (among
other formulations) "living in accordance with experience of what happens by nature";
later Stoics inadvisably, in response to Academic attacks, substituted such
formulations as "the rational selection of the primary things according to nature." The
Stoics' specification of what happiness consists in cannot be adequately understood
apart from their views about value and human psychology."
10 of 14
10/11/2012
Loren
8. ^ "The Karl
ethics
of virtue: The Ethics of Virtue and the
Ethics of Right Action" .
wutsamada.com. 2010-06-05. Retrieved 2010-06-05. "legalistic ethics rest on the
incoherent notion of a "law" without a lawgiver: DCT unacceptable; and the
alternative sources of moral "legislation" are inadequate substitutes"
9. ^ G. E. M. Anscombe (January 1958). "Modern Moral Philosophy" . Philosophy 33,
No. 124. Retrieved 2010-06-05. "Originally published in Philosophy 33, No. 124
(January 1958). ... The first is that it is not profitable for us at present to do moral
philosophy; that should be laid aside at any rate until we have an adequate
philosophy of psychology, in which we are conspicuously lacking. The second is that
the concepts of obligation, and duty—moral obligation and moral duty, that is to say
—and of what is morally right and wrong, and of the moral sense of "ought", ought to
be jettisoned if this is psychologically possible; because they are survivals, or
derivatives from survivals, from an earlier conception of ethics which no longer
generally survives, and are only harmful without it. My third thesis is that the
differences between the well known English writers on moral philosophy from
Sidgwick to the present day are of little importance."
10. ^ Julia Driver (Jul 21, 2009). "Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret Anscombe: 5.1 Virtue
Ethics" . Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 2010-06-05. "In the past
God occupied that role, but systems that dispense with God as part of the theory are
lacking the proper foundation for meaningful employment of those concepts."
11. ^ a b C. D. Ryff. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the
meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 57, 1069-1081.
12. ^ K. W. Springer, R. M. Hauser and J. Freese. (2006). Bad news indeed for Ryff's
six-factor model of well-being. Social Science Research, 35, 1120-1131.
13. ^ C. D. Ryff and B. H. Singer. (2006). Best news yet on the six-factor model of wellbeing. Social Science Research, 35, 1103-1119.
14. ^ D. Archontaki, G. J. Lewis and T. C. Bates. (2012). Genetic influences on
psychological well-being: A nationally representative twin study. Journal of
Personality10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00787.x
11 of 14
10/11/2012
Karl Loren
Anhedonia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see Anhedonia (disambiguation).
Anhedonia
Classification and external resources
MeSH
D059445
In psychology and psychiatry, anhedonia( /ˌænhiˈdoʊniə/ AN-hee- DOH-neeə;Greek: ἀν- an-, "without" + ἡδονήhēdonē, "pleasure") is defined as the inability to
experience pleasure from activities usually found enjoyable, e.g. exercise, hobbies,
sexual activities or social interactions. While earlier definitions of anhedonia
emphasized pleasurable experience, more recent models have highlighted the need
to consider different aspects of enjoyable behavior, such as motivation or desire to
engage in an activity ("motivational anhedonia"), as compared to the level of
enjoyment of the activity itself ("consummatory anhedonia"). [1]
According to William James the term was coined by Théodule-Armand Ribot.
"One can distinguish many kinds of pathological depression.
Sometimes it is mere passive joylessness and dreariness,
discouragement, dejection, lack of taste and zest and spring.
Professor Ribot has proposed the name anhedonia to designate this
condition. "The state of anhedonia, if I may coin a new word to pair
off with analgesia," he writes, "has been very little studied, but it
exists."" Varieties of Religious Experience Lecture VI, The Sick Soul,
William James 1902
Anhedonia can be a characteristic of mental disorders including mood
disorders,schizoaffective disorder, schizoid personality disorder and schizophrenia.
For example, clients affected with schizophrenia often describe themselves as
feeling emotionally empty. [2]
Mood disturbances are commonly observed in many psychiatric disorders.
Disturbing mood changes may occur resultant to stressful life events and they are
not uncommon during times of physical illness.[3] While anhedonia can be a feature
of such mood changes, they are not mutually inclusive.
Contents [show] Causes
[edit]
Researchers theorize that anhedonia may result from the breakdown in the brain's
reward system, involving the neurotransmitter dopamine. Studies by Paul Keedwell,
MD, then of King's College, found that the brains of participants who were clinically
depressed had to work harder to process rewarding experiences.[4][5] While earlier
research believed dopamine to be primarily involved in the subjective experience of
pleasure, the last 20 years has seen a conceptual shift, such that dopamine is now
believed to underlie various aspects of reward anticipation, learning, and
motivation [6][7][8]
Anhedonia is also a relatively common side effect of antidopaminergic neuroleptics
orantipsychotic drugs.
12 of 14
10/11/2012
Karl Loren
Significance
in depression
[edit]
As a clinical symptom in depression, anhedonia rates highly in making a diagnosis
of this disorder. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)
describes a "lack of interest or pleasure", but these can be difficult to discern given
that people tend to become less interested in things which do not give them
pleasure. The DSM criterion of weight loss is probably related, and many individuals
with this symptom describe a lack of enjoyment of food. People suffering from
anhedonia in association with depression generally feel good in the morning and
unhappy in the evenings and can portray any of the non-psychotic symptoms and
signs of depression. [9]
Sexual anhedonia
[edit]
Main article: Pleasure Dissociative Orgasmic Disorder
Sexual anhedonia in males is also known as 'ejaculatory anhedonia'. This condition
means that the person will ejaculate with no accompanying sense of pleasure.
The condition is most frequently [citation needed] found in males, but women can
suffer from lack of pleasure when the body goes through the orgasm process as
well.
Sexual anhedonia may be caused by:
Hyperprolactinaemia [citation needed]
Hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD), also called inhibited sexual
desire [citation needed]
Low levels of the hormone testosterone [citation needed]
Spinal cord injury [citation needed]
Multiple Sclerosis[citation needed]
Use (or previous use) of SSRI antidepressants[10]
Use (or previous use) of antidopaminergic neuroleptics (anti-psychotics) [11][12]
Fatigue [citation needed]
Physical illness [citation needed]
It is very uncommon that a neurological examination and blood tests can determine
the cause of a specific case of sexual anhedonia.
Patients may be prescribed sustained-release bupropion to aid in treatment, which
has been shown to relieve sexual dysfunction even in patients without
depression. [13]
See also
[edit]
Dysthymia
Clinical depression
Schizophrenia
References
1. ^ Treadway MT, Zald DH (2011)
Reconsidering anhedonia in
depression: lessons from translational
neuroscience. Neurosci Biobehav
Rev 35:537-555.
13 of 14
[edit]
2007).Psychiatry . Lippincott
Williams & Wilkins. p. 44. ISBN 9780-7817-7452-9. Retrieved 18
December 2010.
10. ^ Csoka, Antonei; Bahrick, Audrey;
10/11/2012
2. ^ HalesKarl
R.,Loren
Yudofsky S., Talbott J.
1999. Textbook of Psychiatry 3rd ed.
Washington DC: The American
Psychiatric Press. [page needed]
3. ^ Gelder, Michael G.; Mayou,
Richard; Geddes, John; Geddes,
John (2005).Psychiatry (3rd ed.).
Oxford University Press. pp. 2,
99. ISBN 978-0-19-852863-0.
4. ^ "No Pleasure, No Reward -- Plenty
of Depression" by John
McManamy; URL accessed 2009-0217 [self-published source?]
5. ^ Surguladze, S. (2003). "Neural
systems underlying affective
disorders". Advances in Psychiatric
Treatment 9 (6): 446–
55.doi:10.1192/apt.9.6.446 .
6. ^ Berridge KC (2007) The debate
over dopamine's role in reward: the
case for incentive salience.
Psychopharmacology (Berl) 191:391431.
7. ^ Salamone JD, Correa M, Farrar A,
Mingote SM (2007) Effort-related
functions of nucleus accumbens
dopamine and associated forebrain
circuits. Psychopharmacology (Berl)
191:461-482
8. ^ Schultz W (2007) Multiple
dopamine functions at different time
courses. Annu Rev Neurosci 30:259288.
9. ^ Tomb, David A. (1 August
14 of 14
Mehtonen,
Olli-Pekka (2007).
"Persistent Sexual Dysfunction after
Discontinuation of Selective
Serotonin Reuptake
Inhibitors". Journal of Sexual
Medicine 5 (1): 227–
233.doi:10.1111/j.17436109.2007.00630.x .PMID 1817376
8 .
11. ^ Tupala, E; Haapalinna, A;
Viitamaa, T; Männistö, PT; Saano, V
(1999). "Effects of repeated low dose
administration and withdrawal of
haloperidol on sexual behaviour of
male rats". Pharmacology &
toxicology84 (6): 292–
5. PMID 10401732 .
12. ^ Martin-Du Pan, R (1978).
"Neuroleptics and sexual dysfunction
in man. Neuroendocrine
aspects".Schweizer Archiv fur
Neurologie, Neurochirurgie und
Psychiatrie = Archives suisses de
neurologie, neurochirurgie et de
psychiatrie 122(2): 285–
313. PMID 29337 .
13. ^ Crenshaw, Theresa L.; Goldberg,
James P.; Stern, Warren C. (1987).
"Pharmacologic modification of
psychosexual dysfunction". Journal of
Sex & Marital Therapy 13 (4): 239–
52.doi:10.1080/0092623870840389
6 .PMID 3121861
10/11/2012

Eudaimonia

Transcription

Similar documents

PDF

Ethical Theories compared

Eudaimonism: A Brief Conceptual History

Powerstar Virtue Brochure

november 2015 issue48.

File - The Light of Reason

Weaving a Moral Ecology

Ethics and Compliance Training from A to Z

Cundi Dharani - Guan Yin Citta 心靈法門