In Ancient Greece, long before the word "science" has been coined, the need to understand the world

and reality was bound with the need to understand the self and the good life. For Plato, the task of
understanding the things in the world runs parallel with the job of truly getting into what will make the
soul flourish, In an attempt to understand reality and the external world, man must seek to understand
himself, too. It was Aristotle who gave a definitive distinction between the theoretical and practical
sciences. Among the theoretical disciplines, Aristotle included logic, biology, physics, and metaphysics,
among others. Among the practical ones, Aristotle counted ethics and politics. Whereas "truth" is the
aim of the theoretical sciences, the "good" is the end goal of the practical ones. Every attempt to know is
connected in some way in an attempt to find the "good" or as said in the previous lesson, the attainment
of human flourishing. Rightly so, one must find the truth about what the good is before one can even try
to locate that which is good.

In the previous lesson, we have seen how a misplaced or an erroneous idea of human flourishing can
turn tables for all of us, make the sciences work against us rather than for us, and draw a chasm
between the search for truth and for the good. In this lesson, we endeavor to go back a little and answer
these questions: What does it really mean to live a good life? What qualifies as a good existence?
Granting this understanding, we are assumed to be in a better position to reconcile our deepest
existential needs as human beings and science as tool to maneuver around the world.

Aristotle and How We All Aspire for a Good Life

It is interesting to note that the first philosopher who approached the problem of reality from a
"scientific" lens as we know now, is also the first thinker who dabbled into the complex problematization
of the end goal of life: happiness. This man is none other than Aristotle.

Compared to his teacher and predecessor, Plato, Aristotle embarked on a different approach in figuring
out reality. In contrast to Plato who thought that things in this world are not real and are only copies of
the real in the world of forms, Aristotle puts everything back to the ground in claiming that this world is
all there is to it and that this world is the only reality we can all access. For Plato, change is so perplexing
that it can only make sense if there are two realities: the world of ferms and the world of matter.
Consider the human person. When you try to see yourself in front of the mirror, you normally say and
think that you are looking at yourself that is, you are the person who slept last night and you are the
same person looking at yourself now, despite the occasional changes like a new pimple that grows on
your nose. The same is true for a seed that you threw out of the garden last month. When you peek into
the same patch of land where the seed ingrained itself into, you may be surprised to see a little plant
showing itself to you and to the sun. Plato recognized change as a process and as a phenomenon that
happens in the world, that in fact, it is constant. However, Plato also claims that despite the reality of
change, things remain and they retain their ultimate "whatness"; that you remain to be you despite the
pimple that now sits atop your nose. Plato was convinced that reality is full of these seemingly
contrasting

manifestations of change and permanence. For Plato, this can only be. explained by postulating two
aspects of reality, two worlds if you wish: the world of forms and the world of matter. In the world of
matter, things are changing and impermanent. In the world of forms, the entities are only copies of the
ideal and the models, and the forms are the only real entities. Things are red in this world because they
participate in what it means to be red in the world of forms.

Aristotle, for his part, disagreed with his teacher's position and forwarded the idea that there is no
reality over and above what the senses can perceive. As such, it is only by observation of the external
world that one can truly understand what reality is all about. Change is a process that is inherent in
things. We, along with all other entities in the world, start as potentialities and move toward actualities.
The movement, of course, entails change. Consider a seed that eventually germinates and grows into a
plant. The seed that turned to become the plant underwent change- from the potential plant that is the
seed to its full actuality, the plant.

Aristotle extends this analysis from the external world into the province of the human person and
declares that even human beings are potentialities who aspire for their actuality. Every human being
moves according to some end. Every action that emanates from a human person is a function of the
purpose (telos) that the person hac. When a boy asks for a burger from a Filipino burger joint, the action
that he takes is motivated primarily by the purpose that he has, inferably to get full or to taste the
burger that he only sees on TV. When a girl tries to finish her degree in the university, despite the initial
failures she may have had, she definitely is being propelled by a higner purpose than to just graduate.
She wants something more, maybe to have a license and land a promising job in the future. Every
human person, according to Aristotle, aspires for an end. This end, we have learned from the previous
chapters, is happiness or human flourishing.

No individual-young or old, fat or skinny, male or female-resists happiness. We all want to be happy.
Aristotle claims that happiness is the be all and end all of everything that we do. We may not realize it
but the end goal of everything that we do is happiness. If you ask one person why he is doing what he is
doing, he may not readily say that it is happiness

Happiness as the Goal of a Good Life

In the eighteenth century, John Stuart Mill declared the Greatest Happiness Principle by saying that an
action is right as far as it maximizes the attainment of happiness for the greatest number of people. At a
time when people were skeptical about claims on the metaphysical, people could not make sense of the
human flourishing that Aristotle talked about in the days of old. Mill said that individual happiness of
each individual should be prioritized and collectively dictates the kind of action that should be endorsed.
Consider the pronouncements against mining. When an action benefits the greatest number of people,
said action is deemed ethica!. Does mining benefit rather than hurt the majerity? Does it offer more
benefits rather than disadvantages" Does mining result in more people getting happy rather than sad? If
the answers to the said questions are in the affirmative, then the said action, mining, is deemed ethical.

The ethical is, of course, meant to lead us to the good and happy life. Through the ages, as has been
expounded in the previous chapters, man has constantly struggled with the external world in order to
reach human flourishing. History has given birth to different schools of thought, all of which aim for the
good and happy life.

Materialism

The first materialists were the atomists in Ancient Greece, Democritus and Leucippus led a school whose
primary belief is that the world is made up of and is controlled by the tiny indivisible units in theworld
called atomos or seeds. For Democritus and his disciples, the world, including human beings, is made up
of matter. There is no need to posit immaterial entities as sources of purpose. Atomos simply comes
together randomly to form the things in the world. As such, only material entities matter. In terms of
human flourishing, matter is what makes us attain happiness. We see this at work with most people who
are clinging on to material wealth as the primary source of the meaning of their existence.

Hedonism

The hedonists, for their part, see the end goal of life in acquiring pleasure. Pleasure has always been the
priority of hedonists. For them, life is about obtaining and indulging in pleasure because life is limited.
The mantra of this school of thought is the famous, "Eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die." Led
by Epicurus, this school of thought also does not buy any notion of afterlife just like the materialists.

Stoicism
Another school of thought led by Epicurus, the stoics espoused the idea that to generate happiness, one
must learn to distance oneself and be apathetic. The original term, apatheia, precisely means to be
indifferent. For the stoics, happiness can only be attained by a careful practice of apathy. We should, in
this worldview, adopt the fact that some things are not within our control. The sooner we realize this,
the happier we can become.

Theism

Most people find the meaning of their lives using God as a fulcrum of their existence. The Philippines, as
a predominantly Catholic country, is witness to how people base their life goals on beliefs that hinged on
some form of supernatural reality called heaver. The ultimate basis of happiness for theists is the
communion with God. The world where we are in is only just a temporary reality where we have to
maneuver around while waiting for the ultimate return to the hands of God.

Humanism

Humanism as another school of thought espouses the freedom of man to carve his own destiny and to
legislate his own laws, free from the shackles of a God that monitors and controls. For humanists, man is
literally the captain of his own ship. Inspired by the enlightenment ia seventeenth century, humanists
see themselves not merely as stewards of the creation but as individuals who are in control of
themselves and the world outside them. This is the spirit of most scientists who thought that the world
is a place and space for freely unearthing the world in seeking for ways on how to improve the lives of
its inhabitants.

As a result of the motivation of the humanist current, scientists eventually turned to technology in order
to ease the difficulty of life as illustrated in the previous iessons. Scientists of today meanwhile are ready
to confront more sophisticated attempts at altering the world for the benefit of humanity. Some people
now are willing to tamper with time and space in the name of technology. Social media, as an example,
has been so far a very effective way of employing technology in purging time and space. Not very long
ago, communication between two people from two continents in the planet will involve months of
waiting for a

mail to arrive. Seeing each other real time while talking was virtually impossib!". Now, communication
between two people wherever they are, is not just possible but easy. The Internet and smart phones
made real- time communication possible not just between two people, but even with multiple people
simultaneously.

Technology allowed us to tinker with our sexuality. Biologically male individuals can now undergo
medical operation if they so wish for sexual reassignment. Breast implants are now available and can be
done

with relative convenience if anyone wishes to have one. Hormones may also be injected in order to alter
the sexual chemicals in the body. Whether or not we agree with these technological advancements,
these are all undertaken in the hopes of attaining the good life. The balance, however, between the
good life, ethics, and technology has to be attained.

REFERENCES

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (n.d.). John Stuart Mill. Accessed February 3, 2017.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/mill-eth. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (n.d.). Renaissance Humanism.

Accessed February 2, 2017. http://www.iep.utm.edu/humanism/.

Macat Thinking News. (2016). Aristotle's Secret to Happiness: What will Make Us Happy Now? Accessed
February 3, 2017. https://www macat.com/blog/aristotles-secret-happiness/.

Psychology Today. (2013). Aristotle on Happiness. Accessed February

3, 2017. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hide-and-seek/ 201301/aristotle-happiness.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2001). Aristotle's Ethics.

Accessed February 3, 2017. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/

aristotle-ethics.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2005). Ancient Atomism. Accessed February 3, 2017.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ atomism-ancient.

The Basics of Philosophy. (2008). Theism. Accessed February 3, 2017.

http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_theism.html.