Lesson 1: Human Flourishing

Introduction:

Eudaimonia, literally “good spirited,” is a term coined by renowned Greek philosopher

Aristotle(385-323 BC) to describe the pinnacle of happiness (happiness or welfare; "human flourishingor
prosperity"and "blessedness“) that is attainable by humans. This has often been translated into
“humanflourishing”inliterature, arguably likening humans to flowers achieving their full bloom.

As discussed in the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle’s human flourishing arises as aresultofdifferent

components such as phronesis, (a type of wisdom or intelligence. It is more specificallyatypeofwisdom relevant
to practical action, implying both good judgement and excellence of character andhabits,sometimes referred to
as "practical virtue“) friendship, wealth, and power. In the Ancient of Greeksociety,they believe that acquiring
these qualities will surely bring the seekers happiness, which ineffect allowsthem to partake in the greater notion
of what we call the Good.

Because of change, people found means to live more comfortably, explore more places, developmoreproducts,
and make more money. And then repeating the process in full circle. Relying on simple machines to make
hunting and gathering easier, people of today made andcontinuestomake grander and sophisticated machines to
aid them in their endeavors that eventually of life after death.

Our concept of human flourishing of today proves to be different fromwhat Aristotleoriginallyperceived

then -- humans of today are expected to become a “man of the world.” He is supposedtosituatehimself in a
global neighborhood to be able to reach a common goal. Competition as a means of survivalhasbecome
passé (no longer fashionable; out of date.); coordination is the new trend.

Interestingly, there exists a discrepancy between eastern and western conception

regardingsocietyandhuman flourishing.

Western civilization tends to be more focused on the individual while fromthe east aremorecommunity-
centric. This is not to discredit our kinsfolk from the east; perhaps in the their view, communityhas a highest
regard that the individual should sacrifice himself for the sake of society.

The Greek Aristotelian view, on the other hand, aims for Eudaimonia as the ultimate good; thereisno
indication whatsoever that Aristotle entailed it instrumental achieve some other goals.

Science, Technology, And Human Flourishing

Every discovery, innovation, and success contributes to our pool of human knowledge. Perhaps,one of the most
prevalent themes is humans perpetual need to locate himself in the world byfindingproofsto trace evolution.
Having a particular role, which is uniquely ours, elicits our idea of self-importance. Thelatter is relevant as a tool
in achieving the former or echoing Heidegger's statement, technologyisahumanactivity that we excel in as a
result of achieving science. Suffice to say that the end goals of bothscienceandtechnology and human flourishing
ae related in that the good is inherently related to the truth.

Science as Method and Results

For the most part, science’s reputation stems from the objectivity brought upon byanarbitrary,rigid
methodology whose very character absolves it from any accusation of prejudice. Suchinfamyeffectively raised
science in a pedestal untouchable by the other institutions -- its sole claimtoreasonandempiricism -- garnering
supporters who want to defend it and its way.
Even though the number of steps varies, its presents a general idea of how to do science.

•Observe and determine if there are unexplained occurrences unfolding.

•Determine the problem and identify factors involved.
•Formulate hypothesis that could explain the said phenomenon. The goal is to reject the null
hypothesisandaccept the alternative hypothesis for the study “to count as significant.” •Conduct experiment
by setting up dependent and independent variables and trying to see hoindependentones affect dependent
ones.
•Gather and analyze results throughout and upon culmination of the experiment. Examine the datagatheredare
significant enough to conclude results.
•Formulate conclusion and provide recommendation in case others would want to broaden the study.

The routine is basic methodology when introducing students to experimentation and empiricism–twodistinct
features that give science edge over other schools of thought. Throughout the courseof history,however, there
exist heavy objections on the scientific producers; the line separating scienceandtheso-called pseudoscience
becomes more muddled.

Verification Theory

The earliest criterion that distinguishes philosophy and science is verification theory. The idea proposesthata
discipline is science if it can be confirmed or interpreted in the event of the alternative hypothesisbeingaccepted.
In that regard, said theory gives premium to empiricism and only takes into account thoseresultswhich are
measurable and experiments which are repeatable.

The movement in the early 20th century called Vienna Circle, a group of scholars who
believeonlythosewhich can be observed should be regarded as meaningful and reject those which cannot be
directlyaccessedas meaningless. Its shortcomings, however, proved to be a somewhat too risky -- several
buddingtheoriesthat lack empirical results might be shot down prematurely, causing lower
innovationandpunishingingenuity of newer, novel thoughts.

Einstein’s theory on the existence of gravitational waves would, following this thought, be
dismissedduetolack of evidence almost a years ago. Quantum mechanics would not have prospered if the
scientificsocietyduring the time of Edwin Schrodinger did not entertain his outrageous thought that the cat
intheboxbothdead and alive, which can only be determined once you look in the box yourself.

Aside from above critique, this theory completely fails to weed out bogus arguments that
explainthingscoincidentally. A classic example is astrology whose followers are able to employ the
verificationmethodinascertaining its reliability.

Huwag Assuming, girl:

A Story Lea has (a-not-so-scientific) theory that her classmate Ian likes her. Good, she thought,
Ilikehim too. But how do I know that he likes me? She began by observing him and his
interactionswithher.Several gestures she noted include his always exchanging pleasantries with her whenever
theybumpintoeach other, his big smile when he sees her, and him going out of his way to greet her
evenwhenridingajeepney. Through these observations, she was then able to conclude that Ian does like her
because,shethought,
Why would anyone do something like that for a person he does not like?

As it turns out, however, Ian is just generally happy to meet people he knew. He had
knownLeasincetheywere in first year and regards her as a generally okay person. It is no surprise then
that uponlearningIanbasically does this to everyone, Lea was crushed. She vowed to herself that she
would never assumeagain.
Based from the story, is it justified for Lea to think that Ian does not like her? May pag-asapabasakanilang
love story?

Falsification Theory

Asserts that as long as an ideology is not proven to be false and can best explain a phenomenonoveralternative
theories, we should accept the said ideology. The shift to this theory allowed emergenceofthetheories
otherwise rejected be verification theory. It does not promote ultimate adoption of onetheorybutinstead
encourages research in order to determine which among the theories can standthetestoffalsification.

Karl Popper is the known proponent of this view. He was notorious for stating that up-and- comingtheoriesof
the time such as Marx’s Theory of Social History and Sigmund Freud’s Psychoanalysis, arenot testableand
thus not falsifiable, and subsequently questioning their status as scientific.

Ang Pagpapatuloy… Ian is generally everybody’s friend. He likes to be around people andgenerallyaspires to
become everybody's friend. However, there is this one girl, Lea, who seemed to not likehimwhenhe is around.
When they are able to talk to each other, he found out that Lea is just really shyandisnotaccustomed to people
greeting her. He then was able to conclude that his initial impression of hernot liking
him (as a person) is wrong and thus said proposition is rejected.

There is no assurance that observable event or “evidences” are indeed manifestations of a

certainconceptor“theories.” Thus, even though, theoretically, falsification method is more accepted, scientists
arestillnotconvinced that it should be regarded as what makes a discipline scientific.

Science as a Social Endeavor

Sciences cease to belong solely to gown- wearing, bespectacled scientist at laboratories.

Thenewviewperpetuates a dimension which generally benefits the society.

Far off places in South America where many of the tribes remain uncontacted, do not regard westernscienceas
their science. Whatever their science is, it can be ascertained that it is no way inferior tothat globalizedpeoples
science.

Thus, it presents an alternative notion that goes beyond the boundaries of cold, hard facts of
scienceandinstead projects it in a different light, such as a manifestation of shared experience
forgingsolidarityovercommunities.

Science and Results

People who do not understand science are won over when the discipline is able to produce results.
Similartowhen Jesus performed miracles and garnered followers, people are sold over the capacity of
sciencetodostuff they cannot fully comprehend.

Some communities without access to science, they can turn to divination and superstition andget
thesameresults.

Science is not entirely foolproof, such that it is correct 100% of the time. Weather reports, for
oneillustratefallibility and limitations of their scope as well as their inability to predict disasters. The best that
canbedone during an upcoming disaster is to reinforce materials to be more calamity proof and
restoretheareaupon impact. It can concluded that science does not monopolize the claim for definite results.
Science as Education

There is no such thing as a singular scientific methods, offering instead a variety of procedures that
scientistcan experiment with to get results and call them science.

If one is really in pursuit of human flourishing, it would make sense for themto pursue it holistically.Simply
mastering science and technology would be inadequate if we are to, say, socialize withpeopleorruminate on our
inner self.

Aristotle's eudamonic person is required to be knowledgeable about science, among other

thingsofequalimportance. They are supposed to possess intellectual virtues that will enable themto
determinetruthfromfalsehood or good reasoning from poor reasoning.

A true eudaimon recognizes that flourishing requires one to excel in various dimensions,
suchaslinguistic,kinetic, and socio-civic. Thus, he understands that he should not focus on one aspect
alone.

How Much is Too Much?

In 2000, world leaders signed the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) that targets eight concerns,
oneofwhich states that they should be able to forge a global partnership for development. Growth presents an
illusory notion of sustainability – the world’s resources can only providesomuch,itcannot be expected to
stretch out for everybody's consumption over a long period of time.

The world is developing day by day, and human inventions in today’s modern time, while it
maybeofconvenience to our kind, our own creations will damage the world in the long run.

The population is growing bigger, and the resources needed to sustain such growth is gettingscarce. Insteadof
increasing these, it would be for the good of everyone if people let nature recover its resources first.

Joseph Hickel suggested that developed countries should not push forth more growth but insteadadopt“de-
development.”

Right now, we are experiencing repercussions of said exploits in the hands of man-made climatechange,which
would snowball and affect majority of flora and fauna, driving half of the latter extinct inlessthanahundred year
from now. If this continues in its currently alarming rate, we might bring about ourownextinction.