.
With regard to what happiness is, men differ. The many do not give the same account as the wise. For the former think it is some plain and obvious thing, like pleasure, wealth, or honor. They differ, however, from one another and often even the same man identifies it with different things, with health when he is ill, with wealth when he is poor. Thus is Happiness is relative to a persons situation at that point in time. Can virtues and pleasures change man's definition of Happiness? If you are sick from a disease, then what would make you happy would be to be healthy. Thus how can you ever truly be happy, for you can be sick today and health will bring you happiness, and be poor the next day in which wealth would bring you happiness? By happiness being the end result, is it ever truly attainable for someone to be happy and stay happy?.
It can be agreed upon that virtues, and pleasures bring happiness because happiness is an end result of these things. But situations can change your definitions of what virtues and pleasures bring you happiness. Thus stating that happiness can not only be attained by having some virtues and pleasures, you must have possessions of all virtues and pleasure to be truly happy and stay that way. However does that imply that is you lack some virtues and pleasure, you can never be truly happy. For example: a poor man can never be truly happy, a sickly man can never be happy. Can anyone ever be happy? According to Aristotle the can be happy and lead a happy life. If a man adheres to virtues ad pleasures there is no reason for him not to attain happiness. Aristotle also makes a point about "moral virtues": not lying, not taking a persons life, and other morally right things. Being morally virtuous is a way of leading a happy life. By not stealing, or killing, or lying; one can be content in knowing he is good thus bringing happiness. But can this possible to its absolute definition, can some lead his life without lie.