Book I

This book sets up a discussion on the purpose of life. Parellels between the purpose of other instruments are drawn, defining the idea that some goals/goods being objectively superior and worth aiming for

In book 1 - chapter 7, Aristotle sets out to find the "chief good". This chief good is final and better then all the others. "If there is only one final end, this will be what we are seeking, and if there are more than one, the most final of these will be what we are seeking". The most final is the idea that I take issue with. It has been previously established that some goods are better than others. The reason for this, is that some goods depend on others. The good of money is only good because of the ability to get other good services and items. This is a long way of saying that money is not a final good, it is only a means for something better. And yet, when Aristotle says there can be multiple final goods, this should not be waved away. What final good is better than another? What makes that final good more final than another? Hedonism has its downsides, but it is final. A person who wants pleasure does not do so in order to experience Eudaimonia, they experience pleasure for the sake of experiencing pleasure. This is a final good. I do not understand why Aristotle so confidently asserts that Eudaimonia must be better.