# data[].attributes.body
Aristotle discusses pleasure within his Book X of Nicomachean ethics. he does not dicuss how pleasure is not good, instead he argues that it is not the goo. much like Plato, he agrees that humans do seek pleasure and avoid pain. However, for Aristotle, what we truly seek in life is fulfilling activity. Pleasure accompanies and reinforces an activity, therefore making it difficult to quantify.

# data[].attributes.body
-Believed in self realisation within society
-Once you have realised your position

# data[].attributes.body
Foot disagrees with Hume as she believes "more evil is a kind of defect". she argues when we call a person "just man" or "Honest woman" we are referring to something else. and these actions can be observed- so maybe there are absolute morals. Like Aristotle she believes these virtues can be recognised and observed by watching how someone acts in consideration of those virtues.

# data[].attributes.body
This points out that

# data[].attributes.body
Aristotle discusses pleasure within his Book X of Nicomachean Ethics. He does not discuss how

# data[].attributes.body
An example of a naturalistic ethical theory is john stuart mill's version of utilitarianism, according to which action is morally right to the extent that it tends to produce happiness (or pleasure, broadly construed) and morally wrong to the extent that it fails to produce happiness or tends to produce unhappiness (or pain, broadly construed).

# data[].attributes.body
Modern hedonists are split into egoistic and altruistic however some combine these two principles. The statement that happiness is the primary focus of conduct at once raises the question : whose happiness? An Egoism answer is happiness is the agent. An altruistic answer happiness of all concerned.

# data[].attributes.body
Naturalists disagree with how they reduce what is good:
-hedonistic naturalists:  reduce to pleasure
-Aristotelian reduce to flourishing or Eudamonia
-Theological naturalists: reduce using God such as NML

# data[].attributes.body
Hedonism stems right back to the ancient Greek. A pupil of socrates, Aristippus of Cyrene developed a philosophy in which the ultimate goal was finding pleasure. Epicurus another greek philosopher believed what truly mattered was to have a happy and contented life, we must seek true pleasures. True pleasures have no ounce of pain. For example food isn't a true pleasure as over indulgence leads to pain. Aristotle also came to view that pleasure is the good. Hedonists such as Aristotle holds that pleasure is one sole good. This qualification is crucial to the hedonist claim.

# data[].attributes.body
Ethical naturalism contrasts with ethical non-naturalism which denies that such definitions are possible because ethical naturalists believe that moral claims are ultimately about features of the natural world, which are generally amenable to scientific study, they tend to embrace moral realism (the view that claims are not merely expressive statements but are literally true or false)

# data[].attributes.body
There are issues with Hedonism for example, humans are quite fickle in our pleasures. We often change our minds or get bored of the things that give us pleasure. New pleasures begin to replace old ones. It's difficult to conceive of something indubitably pleasant for everyone everywhere.

# data[].attributes.body
The view that moral terms, concept or properties are ultimately definable in terms of the facts about the natural world, including facts about human beings, human nature and human societies.

# data[].attributes.body
Pleasure is a naturally occurring phenomenon that is good. Good and pleasant are synonyms. This is sensical as are natural instinct is to avoid pain and seek out pleasure.

# data[].attributes.body
Aristotle presents a non-scientific version of naturalism. Neo-Arisotleian virtue ethics can be regarded as naturalistic (this is based on the human capacity to act in a moral way).
For Aristotle, human goods are based upon human capacities and the condiditons for successful human activity.
Central to the view are notions that there are goods within human nature. These goods are positives of human character that enable the individual to act morally.
The agent with these positive virtues, is able to acknowledge and appreciate the ethical consideration of factual considerations, and act upon them accordingly.