Book 1 / Chapter 4
Paragraph 1 - The Aim of Political Science and the Highest Good
Explanation - Part By Part
"Let us resume our inquiry and state, in view of the fact that all knowledge and every pursuit aims at some good, what it is that we say political science aims at and what is the highest of all goods achievable by action."
Aristotle is shifting focus to a central question: If all forms of knowledge and activities aim at achieving some kind of good, then what is the ultimate goal of political science? Political science here refers to the study and practice of managing and organizing human communities, especially through governance and ethics. Aristotle is essentially asking: What is the greatest good that political science strives for—i.e., the best outcome that human actions and decisions can achieve? This question serves as the foundation for the broader discussion of what constitutes true happiness or living a fulfilled life.
"Verbally there is very general agreement; for both the general run of men and people of superior refinement say that it is happiness, and identify living well and doing well with being happy; but with regard to what happiness is they differ, and the many do not give the same account as the wise."
Aristotle is pointing out that nearly everyone—whether they are ordinary people or those considered refined and educated—agrees that the ultimate goal of life is happiness. Both groups associate happiness with "living well" and "doing well," meaning they believe happiness is tied to leading a good life and achieving success or fulfillment.
However, the disagreement comes when you ask what happiness actually means. Different people define it differently. Ordinary people might have one idea, while the wise or more reflective individuals often have a deeper or more nuanced understanding. So, while everyone agrees happiness is the goal, the debate lies in understanding or explaining what it truly consists of.
"For the former think it is some plain and obvious thing, like pleasure, wealth, or honour; they differ, however, from one another- and often even the same man identifies it with different things, with health when he is ill, with wealth when he is poor; but, conscious of their ignorance, they admire those who proclaim some great ideal that is above their comprehension."
Aristotle is pointing out that most people have a tendency to define happiness or the idea of living well in very simple and immediate terms, such as pleasure, wealth, or social honor. However, he observes that these definitions vary widely among individuals based on their circumstances or life situations. For example, someone who is sick might equate happiness with simply being healthy, while someone struggling financially might see happiness as having wealth.
He also notes that people often switch their views of happiness depending on their needs at the moment, which reveals a kind of inconsistency in their thinking. At the same time, these individuals often recognize their own lack of deeper understanding and are drawn to others—usually philosophers or thinkers—who present more profound or complex ideals of happiness, even if these ideals are difficult for them to fully grasp or relate to. Aristotle suggests that this behavior reflects both a sense of humility regarding their ignorance and an admiration for something greater than their day-to-day desires.
"Now some thought that apart from these many goods there is another which is self-subsistent and causes the goodness of all these as well."
Aristotle is pointing out that some people believe there is a single, ultimate good that exists independently on its own (it is self-subsistent), and that this ultimate good is what gives value or "goodness" to all the other things we consider good — like pleasure, wealth, or honor. In other words, they're saying there's a deeper, foundational source of what makes anything good in the first place. This ultimate good would be the highest standard or cause behind all the other forms of "good" we pursue in life. It's a way of shifting the focus from the individual, immediate goods (like money or health) to a bigger, overarching concept of goodness.
"To examine all the opinions that have been held were perhaps somewhat fruitless; enough to examine those that are most prevalent or that seem to be arguable."
Aristotle is essentially saying that it isn't necessary or useful to analyze every single opinion people have ever had about what "happiness" or the highest good is. Instead, it's more practical and productive to focus on the opinions that are most common or that seem reasonable and able to be discussed logically. By narrowing the focus in this way, the inquiry can avoid becoming overwhelming or unhelpful and instead concentrate on ideas that are significant and worthy of examination.