> I've known cowards, adicts and individuals with terrible practical instincts who were all happy people. Aristotle's retort would be that what you are ascribi

> I've known cowards, adicts and individuals with terrible practical instincts who were all happy people. Aristotle's retort would be that what you are ascribing as 'happiness' is not what he is talking about. There's a reason he speaks of an 'ideally happy' person. I recommend you to read the section 'The Human Good and the Function Argument' of this: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-ethics/#HumGooFunArg https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-ethics/#HumGooF...: > Aristotle's search for the good is a search for the highest good, and he assumes that the highest good, whatever it turns out to be, has three characteristics: it is desirable for itself, it is not desirable for the sake of some other good, and all other goods are desirable for its sake. > Aristotle thinks everyone will agree that the terms “eudaimonia” (“happiness”) and “eu zên” (“living well”) designate such an end. [...] These terms play an evaluative role, and are not simply descriptions of someone's state of mind. > No one tries to live well for the sake of some further goal; rather, being eudaimon is the highest end, and all subordinate goals—health, wealth, and other such resources—are sought because they promote well-being, not because they are what well-being consists in. But unless we can determine which good or goods happiness consists in, it is of little use to acknowledge that it is the highest end. To resolve this issue, Aristotle asks what the ergon (“function,” “task,” “work”) of a human being is, and argues that it consists in activity of the rational part of the soul in accordance with virtue.