One of the core pre-occupations and an item of argument as found in ancient philosophy and ethics is happiness and character virtue. Human happiness is occasioned by a good life and its flow. According to Plato, it is evident that living at par with nature and in harmony with it is actually what forms the basis of human happiness. Living in accordance with a direct experience of what takes place naturally, what brings this fulfillment of human happiness. The ethics as put forward by Plato is in particular a very robust version of human happiness. Based on these foundation, virtue is sufficient and a very important aspect for human happiness. This also confirms with ancient dialogues as presented by Stoic. For instance, the conventional arte Greek concept is not really similar as defined by virtue with connotations of Christianity of patience, charity and uprightness. This is because ar?te takes into account a number of excellences in non-moral aspects like beauty and physical strength as usually described by poem writing assistance

Eudaimonia in this edition could be made into Greek translation to refer to happiness or doing well and living well, and the reason for which other things can be done. It is regarded as the complete, self-sufficient and ultimate thing. Unlike what is defined by other philosophers, like Aristotle, as good, the definition here is that which can cause harmonious existence. Moreover, it is never universal. There are particular activities of a human being and their capacities define them. This apparently looks like human beings have certain use like any other tool. While Plato could be making sound assertions, I see a challenge posed where true happiness takes into account all human functions together with the decisions made, an irrational choice. The idea here is that if humans leave out anything that made them or anything needed for enjoyment or basic for our use, there would not be happiness, and that something crucial would have been left out and that something important would be missing in the lives of human beings.

Aristotle states that happiness is something that puts humans apart. Happiness is acting as a function of the human soul. Humans share particular functions like breathing, growth, hunger with all kinds of life and they also share some other functions with animals such as sensation and movement. All the same, I find other unique human activities that make them human or in a way reflect on humanity. Therefore, we could realize that proper human function comprises a soul activity in accordance to a rational rule or at least with it. Eudaimonia is a soul activity based on the kind of virtue or diligence. Simply, there can be a sort of agreement that a human being will live well and excel if there is incorporation of making decisions and acting in accordance with the core of human reasoning. Consequently, the idea of human happiness resulting from good reasoning, careful choice, comprehension and consequences can be taken up as a logical one.

Plato’s argument of happiness can surpass those of people like Aristotle, who overlook that in different societies, there are various behavioral expectations and norms for different populations. Humans are rational animals and that which stands out as unique is the soul activity based on rational principles. Practicability and embracing nature is the only way that humans can see what is good in them at personal levels and consider what is of benefit to them generally. The point on virtue would be that excellence takes into account making choices and acting on something correctly in every condition where choices are involved. The emphasis is that a number of people will not be in a position to measure up to this initially. Many will not actually know when choice is indeed possible or will not conceptualize the choices in their capacity. This makes life too complicated for them. It will, thus, be hard to base happiness on terms different from those proposed by Plato.

If humans will go with other explanations of material goods for their happiness, only a few will survive the process. Therefore, Plato’s approach in determining human happiness is a robust assertion. Only the people with practical wisdom will be in a position to establish what is good and, thus, will be in a position to acquire happiness. Virtues are meant to be the methods we need to use and reflect if humans are to achieve what is important to them. Developing the kind of life we need is not the main core of happiness. Going against the natural forms in our environment is what causes humans a lot of discomfort. A life of happiness cannot entirely be composed of family and friends, affection and love or even amusements and pleasures.

The focus on many seems to major on external goods and beauty. These are claims which have been refuted by Plato and even Stoic. Despite the fact that there will be times when situations make it rational for humans to opt for doing something contrary to nature (for instance, chopping off a finger to prevent an oppressor), they will be rare circumstances and the wise will avoid oppression through additional false myths to replace the reality on ground. The truth cannot be exchanged for anything too appealing. Such things only suppress the real thing, the true happiness. Therefore, Plato has an upper hand as far as defining human happiness is concerned. There is more to material wealth, health and physique that human beings would need in order to have true happiness. Plato’s view that, “a life flowing naturally is what humans need to be happy’ can be efficaciously adopted as a good approach to defining happiness.