PHI-208 WEEK 4 DISCUSSION 2.1.docxQuestions & Answers / PHI 208

PHI-208 WEEK 4 DISCUSSION 2 Question: Is it possible for individuals to flourish if others with whom they are connected are not also flourishing? Consider this with respect to Aristotle’s account of Eudaimonia and MacIntyre’s account of practices, as well as the other readings and media. Identify a community or practice in which you are involved in which the flourishing of the individual is tied to the flourishing of others. Does this require that we limit certain rights pertaining to the individual (for instance, the right to free speech or to pursue monetary gain), in order to promote the flourishing of the group within that context? Be specific, and use examples when appropriate. Classmates, I am going to answer this question from a different point of view. I Do Believe that one can flourish if the people they are connecting with are not flourishing. First, Aristotle’s Theory on virtue is not static; if there is a possibility for a change of context, it opens gaps. Aristotle uses the term Eudaimonia slightly differently in the text the definition as written in our text states that Eudaimonia is “The Greek term for the ultimate end or chief good of human life, and usually translates as happiness, well-being, or flourishing” (Thames, 2018, glossary). The continuing reading shows the ultimate end from the text also affects perfect moral virtue with opposing negativity. I added this to give a possible flaw somewhere in Aristotle’s theory, so I may be wrong. My second reason for saying yes to the question is the results on a third-party and the residual effects by myself maintaining the best moral choice, every single time. The actions are not positive to my withdrawn intrapersonal coworker, isolating and consumed by anxiety