While Classical Philosophy tangles with many questions, one could surmise from the readings that the universal goal of most (classical) philosophers was to answer the question "what is the best life?" A logical presumption would be that nearly all human beings aspire to live the best possible life, and undoubtedly that life would be measured in happiness. The quest to "live the good life " is unique to the human experience in that, unlike beasts or plants, we do not simply yearn for mere survival, but instead strive for the best possible life. For the purpose of this paper, we will look at Aristotle's interpretation of how to achieve the "best life,"" or "comprehensive good." Similarities and differences between Aristotle's beliefs (pertaining to the best life) and those of Socrates and Saint Thomas Aquinas will also be examined.
Socrates contends in Book II of the Republic that there are three kinds of "good and that the finest of the three, the one in which justice belongs, is that which is desired for both its consequences and for its own sake" (Republic 93). To a certain extent Socrates is in agreement with Glaucon's notion that the majority [errantly] view justice otherwise, as they see it as a burden only practiced for it's consequences (Republic 94). Socrates, however, considers justice as not only a virtue, but as the most important virtue as it is the one that ultimately will ensure a happy life which is, as previously stated, the "best life.".
To illustrate this, Socrates turns to his "city in speech." Believing that it would be easier to discern justice on a larger scale before trying to study it on an individual basis, Socrates revealed his conception of justice in regard to the city state. In order for the city to be at its best, Socrates believed that it needed to be ruled by a well educated guardian class whose ultimate goal would be to provide a life of happiness to its subjects.
