This goes so far as to pinpoint the own weaknesses of the number of proposals indicated within the text itself. But what it contains and what it reflects speak highly of the way we live. He purposely sought to eliminate highly imbued ideals which are rather unfeasible to one that is attainable. This reverberates through the ages which stills makes through what Aristotle said centuries ago to the way we live in this day and age.
“What then is the good of each? Surely that for whose sake everything else is done. In Medicine this is health, in strategy victory, in architecture a house, in any other sphere something else, and in every action and pursuit the end; for it is for the sake of this that all men do whatever else they do. Therefore, if there is an end for all that we do, this will be the good achievable by action, and if there are more than one, this will be the goods achievable by action” (Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, I-1). This he expounds further upon by giving the two kinds of virtue, being intellectual and moral or simply ethics and habit including the modes by which they are acquired. This is the movement from potentiality to habit. Arguably, this discourse gives the hold of truth for which it was based upon logical value formation. It may not always be something that is easily perceived upon as a digested quality of human action but it is upon contemplation the very essence of the fundamentals of our existence.
Thus, the understanding of every action is set down as for the creation of happiness which is in contemplation with virtue formed by habit. Many conflicts arise from this as case to case scenarios would yield it true to it fullest extent. Let’s say for example that there is a boy, let’s call him John for consistency, who was raised to a family with close ties. That while growing up and to the present point he had