What are John Stuart Mill's and Aristotle's different views on happiness? How is John Stuart Mill views different from Aristotle? Aristotle understood happiness (Eudaemonia) as the proper end of human action, above pleasure, wealth or honour. Happiness for Aristotle is the ultimate and also self-sufficient and final, that is, it is desirable in itself and not as a means to something else. Aristotle thought that when we seek pleasure or honour or wealth or fame, etc, we do so believing they will lead us to happiness. He also understood happiness as another word for the good which one sees in Plato. Like the Good, which is attainable by the human being,happiness is the fulfilment of our distinctive function as human beings. Aristotle therefore saw happiness as the working of the human soul in the way of excellence and virtue. Since morality means to act in accordance with right reason, the rational part of the soul controls the irrational or passionate part that is concerned only with love and hate. This helps the human being to deal with issues like what should one desire, under what circumstances, how much should one desire, and so on. This ... How do John Stuart Mill's views on happiness different from Aristotle's? Which of the two sees happiness as pleasure and which as virtue? Who among the two thinks that happiness depends on character and who thinks that what happens to one's loved ones after one is dead shows whether they were happy while alive?