Aristotle's Nature of Ethics can be defined as individuals with prior experience and knowledge can only make proper decisions of ethical manner as they cannot be swayed with emotion and passion. This statement is a matter of theory because Aristotle feels as if younger individuals cannot make rational decisions or moral choice because they lack the knowledge and experience to make these decisions. I believe that this theory has its truths due to the way that Aristotle feels it relates to certain situations, like someone being a judge and making rulings of matters in which they have had previously made decisions upon. He believes that this knowledge judge will make a more ethical decision because he has been in this situation before while a young judge who is making a ruling on the same case for the first time believes that he would be incapable of making a morally ethical decision because he has no prior knowledge of this matter.
Aristotle defines happiness as actions that are pleasant to a virtuous man. Which he believes that anyone can create happiness if they are serving their purpose in life every day and making decisions that are good for the specific job in this world. To give an example of this would be if a judge was making good ethical decisions on every ruling that he/she rules upon. To Aristotle the end of this judge's life would create happiness as long as they are continuing to make moral decisions every time they rule. As long as this judge functions to their highest ability then happiness should be felt by this individual. I believe that this statement leads to the thought that every person will always make morally ethical decisions which is not the case for everyone on a daily basis. So for someone who doesn't have the ability to always act in the good does not mean that happiness cannot be achieved, I believe that this individual can still feel happiness, it just won't be within the guidelines of Aristotle's distinction of happiness.