Book 7 / Chapter 13
Paragraph 2 - The Relation between Pleasure and Happiness
Explanation - Part By Part
"And (F) if certain pleasures are bad, that does not prevent the chief good from being some pleasure, just as the chief good may be some form of knowledge though certain kinds of knowledge are bad."
Aristotle is saying that just because some pleasures are bad, it doesn’t mean that pleasure as a whole can’t be the ultimate good (the "chief good"). He draws a comparison to knowledge: even though certain kinds of knowledge can be harmful or undesirable, we can still consider knowledge as a whole to be something highly valuable or central to human flourishing. Essentially, the existence of "bad" examples within a category doesn’t disqualify the entire category from being fundamentally good.
"Perhaps it is even necessary, if each disposition has unimpeded activities, that, whether the activity (if unimpeded) of all our dispositions or that of some one of them is happiness, this should be the thing most worthy of our choice; and this activity is pleasure."
Aristotle is arguing that if every aspect of our character or nature (what he calls "disposition") is functioning freely and without obstacles, then the resulting activity from this freedom is what we call happiness. If this kind of unimpeded activity naturally brings about pleasure, then pleasure itself becomes something highly desirable and worth pursuing. Essentially, unimpeded activity that fulfills our nature leads to happiness, and pleasure accompanies this state, making it deeply connected to what we find worthwhile in life.
"Thus the chief good would be some pleasure, though most pleasures might perhaps be bad without qualification. And for this reason all men think that the happy life is pleasant and weave pleasure into their ideal of happiness-and reasonably too; for no activity is perfect when it is impeded, and happiness is a perfect thing; this is why the happy man needs the goods of the body and external goods, i.e. those of fortune, viz. in order that he may not be impeded in these ways."
Aristotle is making the point that, even though many pleasures might be harmful or undesirable under certain circumstances, there is still a type of pleasure that can be considered the ultimate good—the kind of pleasure closely connected to living a truly happy life. People naturally associate happiness with pleasure because happiness involves living in a complete and uninterrupted state of flourishing. If someone is experiencing serious obstacles or struggles—physical discomfort, a lack of basic necessities, or misfortunes in life—it becomes much harder, if not impossible, to engage in meaningful activities or fully realize their potential.
In this way, Aristotle argues that a truly happy person requires not only the right internal virtues and mindset but also some measure of external support, such as physical health ("goods of the body") and favorable life circumstances ("goods of fortune"). These external factors allow someone to live without constant hindrances, supporting their capacity to live out their best and most fulfilling life.
"Those who say that the victim on the rack or the man who falls into great misfortunes is happy if he is good, are, whether they mean to or not, talking nonsense."
Aristotle is making a strong point here: the idea that someone who is experiencing extreme suffering or hardship—like being tortured or facing immense misfortune—could still be considered "happy" simply because they are virtuous or good is, in his view, absurd. He’s criticizing this perspective as unrealistic and disconnected from the realities of human life.
Happiness (eudaimonia), as Aristotle sees it, is not just about inner moral character or virtue. It also requires certain external conditions to support and sustain a good life. If someone is undergoing extreme suffering or deprivation, they are impeded from fully engaging in the kinds of activities that lead to happiness. For Aristotle, happiness is an active, flourishing state, and pain or misfortune directly disrupts a person's ability to live that way.
In simpler terms, he's rejecting the idea that being a good person is enough for happiness if someone's life is wrecked by terrible circumstances. Happiness is about more than just character—it’s also about having the conditions that allow you to live well.
"Now because we need fortune as well as other things, some people think good fortune the same thing as happiness; but it is not that, for even good fortune itself when in excess is an impediment, and perhaps should then be no longer called good fortune; for its limit is fixed by reference to happiness."
Aristotle is addressing the misconception that good fortune (luck or favorable external circumstances) is the same as happiness. He argues that while some good fortune is necessary to avoid obstacles in life and support happiness, it is not equivalent to happiness itself. In fact, if someone has too much good fortune—if external blessings are excessive—they can actually become a burden or hindrance, rather than a benefit. Therefore, good fortune has its value, but only within certain limits, and those limits are determined by how well it contributes to true happiness, which is more about the quality of one’s internal life and virtuous activity than mere external luck.