What is the good life Aristotle acknowledges that luck has a role to play in the good life, but to what extent does luck effect the good life If the good life is dependent on external factors, then it would appear that it could not be considered self-sufficient. However, Aristotle argues that the good life is self-sufficient, but communally self-sufficient. Why does Aristotle argue for what appears to be a contradiction in terms (46)It is contended that luck’s effect on the good life was much greater than Aristotle was prepared to acknowledge and that as a result of the good life being dependent on luck, the good life cannot be considered self sufficient.
Aristotle believed that the good for humans would be the maximum realization of the function that was unique to humans. Since reason was understood by Aristotle to be the unique quality that humans possessed, it followed that the good for humans was to reason well. (47)Since part of the task of reason was to teach human beings how to act virtuously, the good for humans was the exercise of their faculties in accordance with virtue. The good life, then, was defined by Aristotle as the activity of the soul in accordance with virtue.
(48)The circumstances that make it likely or unlikely that a person will lead the good life are external and not of one’s own choosing, and are, therefore, dependent on luck. Why not, it might be postulated, limit luck’s effects, specifically narrowing the scope of what constitutes the elements of the good life so as to limit, while not eliminating luck’s role
(49) Aristotle held that even if one could be viewed as leading the good life, should one experience any adverse circumstances such as illness, bereavement or isolation, then one could no longer be considered to be leading the good life. "For many reversals and all sorts of luck come about in the course of a life; and it is possible for the person who was most especially doing well to encounter great calamities in old age, as in the stories told about Priam in the Trojan war. But when a person has such misfortunes and ends in a wretched condition, nobody says that he is living well. "
Aristotle had argued that limiting the scope of luck’s effect on the good life would render life meaningless, yet is this not what is happening here (50)Knowing that as one ages the probability of experiencing misfortune is heightened, and still maintaining that this is a yardstick by which to measure whether one can be considered to be leading the good life, severely limits the chances of anyone attaining the good life. Limiting the scope of the external factors that affected the good life would render the good life too limiting, according to Aristotle; yet Aristotle has placed such severe limitations on the criteria that needs to be met in order to lead the good life that the probability of anyone ever leading the good life are practically non-existent.