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 truly getting into what will
make the soul flourish. In an attempt to understand reality and the external
world, man must sink to understand himself, too. It was Aristotle who give
definitive distinction between the theoretical and practical sciences. Among
theoretical disciplines, Aristotle include logic , biology ,physics, and
metaphysics, among others. 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 .
 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 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 worl of
forms, Aristotle put everything back to the ground in claiming
that this world there is to it and that this world is the only
reality we can all access. For Plato, changed is so perplexing
that it can only make sense if there are two realities : the world
of forms 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, dispite 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 pick 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 recognizes 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 constricting manifestations of change and permanence. For
Plato, this van only be explain by postulating two aspects of
reality , two world if you wide the world of forms and the worlds
of matter . In the world of matter , things are changing
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 inherit in things. We , along with all other entities in the
world, start as potentialities and move toward actuality. The
movement , of course, entails change . Consider a seed that
eventually germinates and grows into a plant. The seed that
turned to become plant underwent change - from the
potential plant that is the seed to eats 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
has. When a boy ask 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 higher 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.
 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 that motivates him.
Hard-expressed to explain why he is motivated by what motivates
him will reveal that happiness is the grand, motivating force in
everything that he does. When Aristotle claims that we want to be
happy, he does not necessarily mean the everyday happiness that
we obtain when we win a competition or we eat our favourite dish
in a restaurant. What Aristotle actually means is human
flourishing, a kind of contentment in knowing that one is getting
the best out of life. A kind feeling that one has maxed out his
potentials in the world, that he has attained the crux of his
humanity.
 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 sceptical 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 ethical. Does
mining benefits rather than hurt the majority? 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 question are in the affirmative,
then the said action, mining, is deemed ethical.
The ethical is, of course, meant to lead us to 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.
METABOLISM
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 the world 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 hedonism, for their part, sees 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 one and him
apathetic. The original term, apathies, 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 heaven. 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 manoeuvre 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 form the shackles of a
God that monitors and controls. For humanists, man is
literally the captain of his own ship. Inspired by the
enlightenment in 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 lessons. Scientists of
today meanwhile are ready to comfort 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 a 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 on of waiting for a
mail to arrive. Seeing each other real time while talking was
virtually impossible. 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.
SUMMARY
Man is constantly in pursuit of the good life. Every person has his
perspective when it comes to what comprises the good life. Throughout
history, man has worked hard in pointing out what amounts to a good, happy
life. Some people like the classical theorist thought that happiness has to do
with the insides of the human person. The soul, as the seat of our humanity,
has been the focus of attention of this end goal. The soul has to attain a
certain balance in order to have a good life, a life of flourishing. It was only
until the seventeenth century that happiness became a centrepiece on the
lives of people, even becoming a full-blown ethical foundation in John Stuart
Mill's utilitarianism. At present , we see multitudes of school of thought that
all promise their own hey to finding happiness. Science and technology has
been, for the most part, at the forefront of man attempts at finding this
happiness. The only question all the end of the day is whether science is
taking the right path toward attaining what it really means to live a good life.
THANK YOU
FOR
LISTENING