Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas share similarities in pursuing a happy life but each of them have a different approach to leading this life. Both believe the ultimate end is happiness, however Aquinas differs by taking a more spiritual approach. Aristotle and Aquinas both believe humans have goodness, but they disagree with how it is obtained to some degree. Goodness is linked in many ways to evil and because both men believe that one can have too much or too little of a certain thing it could keep them from the goal of happiness and goodness. Although both of these men felt this way Aquinas also believed that evil didn’t actually exist, but also that if one were to do evil, they would only do so by free will. Aristotle states that happiness is the ultimate end and the purpose of human existence, but it depends on each human being to attain it. Happiness is not pleasure, nor is it virtue, it is the exercise of virtue. Therefore, happiness depends on the acquiring of moral character and where one must display the virtues of courage, generosity, justice, friendship, and citizenship in their lives. These virtues involve finding a balance or “mean” between an overindulgence and …show more content…
This is known as a moral evil which is when a person intentionally does something or fails to do something that prevents them from realizing their human potential. However, he also states that the world is a better with evil in it because evil serves as a grander good. He says that God sometimes inflicts evil upon humans as a punishment in order to sustain the just of the universe and this is looked as a natural evil. Aquinas does not believe we can rationally desire evil because we can only desire what exists, in this sense we can look to Aristotle when he speaks of rationality and see that Aquinas follows his take on