Thomas Aquinas: Summa Contra Gentiles

question 21

Essay

Thomas Aquinas: Summa Contra Gentiles
Aquinas is notable for combining the metaphysics of Aristotle with the theology of Christianity. He begins with the Aristotelian idea that all human action aims at some end, and that this end is the good of action. In the case of human beings, the good at which our action aims is happiness. Our ultimate happiness must be something that we seek for its own sake, that is complete in itself, and that pertains to our intellectual nature. Aquinas argues that these constraints rule out many popular conceptions of happiness. For example, happiness cannot be pleasure, because pleasure exists for the sake of the operations of the body, and happiness is not an operation of the body. Happiness cannot be honor, glory, or wealth, for all of these things depend on external factors, and happiness is complete in itself. Moreover, happiness cannot consist of acts of the moral virtues, for such acts are directed toward external goals-courage, for example is directed toward victory in battle-but happiness is not directed toward any further end.
Aquinas endorses Aristotle's view that happiness consists in a contemplation, and contemplation of the highest object. Here Aquinas diverges from Aristotle by insisting that the highest object of contemplation is God. Aquinas concludes that the ultimate end of human action, and man's highest happiness, consists in contemplation of God, and that all human occupations should be regarded as existing for the sake of this end.
-What does man's ultimate happiness consist in, in Aquinas's view? How does he defend this view? Do you think he is correct? Why or why not?