I expect to see your original thought. I only want you to use the sources listed above and your own ideas (I don’t want you to search for other sources).

  1. According to Aristotle, happiness consists of living a life of virtue and contemplation, and it is achieved by engaging in activities that are in line with one’s nature and pursuing the highest good. Aristotle distinguishes between primary and second-hand goods. Primary goods are those that are pursued solely for themselves and are not used as means to other ends. Secondary goods, on the other hand, are items for which others are pursuing. Some examples of primary goods are wisdom, friendship and pleasure. Wealth and fame, however, can be considered secondary goods. Aristotle argues that primary goods are necessary for happiness because they are intrinsically valuable and can bring pleasure and fulfillment to a person’s life.

Aristotle was correct regarding primary goods. They provide more meaning and satisfaction than secondary goods. Although wealth and fame might bring you temporary pleasure, they are not sustainable sources of happiness. However, it is possible to live a happier and more meaningful life by building strong and lasting relationships with your loved ones as well as pursuing wisdom and personal development.

Plato’s Myth of the Gyges suggests that even if one could do what they wanted without consequences, they might not behave virtuously. This implication is inconsistent with Aristotle’s thoughts on happiness because Aristotle believes that virtuous actions are necessary for happiness. A person who acts immorally would be not living a life full of virtue, and therefore would not achieve happiness. Therefore, I believe that Aristotle’s view on happiness is more convincing because it emphasizes the importance of living a virtuous life and pursuing things that have intrinsic value.

  1. John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty argues that freedom of expression is necessary for a flourishing society because it allows individuals to share their opinions and ideas freely, which in turn leads to the exchange of ideas and the progress of knowledge. Mill argues that suppressing someone’s opinion is wrong even if that opinion is false because it is only through the free exchange of ideas that the truth can be discovered. Plato’s Ship of Fools implies that freedom of expression can lead to chaos and that some people are not fit to participate in public discourse. The Ship of Fools allegory depicts a society that allows everyone to express their opinions, regardless of their expertise or knowledge. It crashes into the sea and drowns everyone.

Although I think we all should be free to express our opinions, it is also important to remember that others are responsible for the words we use. There is always the risk of people abusing their rights to free speech. However, I think the advantages of an open and free society are greater than the dangers. Education and encouraging others to reflect on their opinions is the best way to make sure that freedom of speech is being used responsibly.

  1. A person has to choose whether they want to save many people or cause harm one person. A consequentialist view would suggest that saving the majority would do the most good, as it will result in the greatest benefit to the largest number of people. A deontological view would say that it’s wrong to cause injury to one person, even if this would help many. This would go against the principle of using other people as means to an end.
This is a snippet preview, get a complete custom solution
Access a Complete Custom-Written Paper from Our Writers, Now!!