There are a great many people who have all the material conditions of happiness； ； and who； nevertheless； are profoundly unhappy。 In such cases it would seem as if the fault must lie with a wrong theory as to how to live。 In one sense； we may say that any theory as to how to live is wrong。 We imagine ourselves more different from the animals than we are。 Animals live on impulse； and are happy as long as external conditions are favorable。 If you have a cat it will enjoy life if it has food and warmth and opportunities for an occasional night on the tiles。 Your needs are more plex than those of your cat； but they still have their basis in instinct。 In civilized societies； especially in English…speaking societies； this is too apt to be forgotten。 People propose to themselves some one paramount objective； and restrain all impulses that do not minister to it。 A businessman may be so anxious to grow rich that to this end he sacrifices health and private affections。 When at last he has bee rich； no pleasure remains to him except harrying other people by exhortations to imitate his noble example。 Many rich ladies； although nature has not endowed them with any spontaneous pleasure in literature or art； decide to be thought cultured； and spend boring hours learning the right thing to say about fashionable new books that are written to give delight； not to afford opportunities for dusty snobbismn。
If you look around at the men and women whom you can call happy； you will see that they all have certain things in mon。 The most important of these things is an activity which at most gradually builds up something that you are glad to see ing into existence。 Women who take an instinctive pleasure in their children can get this kind of satisfaction out of bringing up a family。 Artists and authors and men of science get happiness in this way if their own work seems good to them。 But there are many humbler forms of the same kind of pleasure。 Many men who spend their working life in the city devote their weekends to voluntary and unremunerated toil in their gardens； and when the spring es； they experience all the joys of having created beauty。 。。
幸福之路（3）
The whole subject of happiness has； in my opinion； been treated too solemnly。 It had been thought that man cannot be happy without a theory of life or a religion。 Perhaps those who have been rendered unhappy by a bad theory may need a better theory to help them to recovery； just as you may need a tonic when you have been ill。 But when things are normal a man should be healthy without a tonic and happy without a theory。 It is the simple things that really matter。 If a man delights in his wife and children； has success in work； and finds pleasure in the alternation of day and night； spring and autumn； he will be happy whatever his philosophy may be。 If； on the other hand； he finds his wife fateful； his children’s noise unendurable； and the office a nightmare； if in the daytime he longs for night； and at night sighs for the light of day； then what he needs is not a new philosophy but a new regimen—a different diet； or more exercise； or what not。
Man is an animal； and his happiness depends on his physiology more than he likes to think。 This is a humble conclusion； but I cannot make myself disbelieve it。 Unhappy businessmen； I am convinced； would increase their happiness more by walking six miles every day than by any conceivable change of philosophy。
亚里士多德论友谊（1）
＇古希腊＇亚里士多德
古人将友谊视为最好的美德。友谊是幸福或生命旺盛的基本要素。亚里士多德说：“因为没有朋友，人不会选择生存，即使他拥有其他所有的好东西。”在当今道德败坏的世界，这些话值得我们去牢记。
根据亚里士多德所说，友谊是或涉及到一种品格、一种德行的状态。友谊可分为三种：以与他人为伴的快乐为基础的友谊（快乐的友谊）；以与他人结交的裨益为基础的友谊（裨益的友谊）；以相互的倾慕之情为基础的友谊（有德行的友谊）。这三种友谊都是幸福生活的基本条件，所有这些对于健康的生活均是必不可少的。最好的朋友不仅仅是倾慕彼此的优点，而且要在彼此的交往中寻找快乐，寻找共同的裨益。下面是亚里士多德的一段经典演说。
由于友谊建立的动机各不相同，所以人们各自的情感和友谊也不尽相同。那么，友谊有三种类型，其主体对象也有三种，因为在每一种友谊中，彼此可能都有与之相一致的“相互明了的共同感情”。
就建立友谊的动机来看，那些以友谊而互相对待的人，需要从对方那里获得利益。相应地，那些以获益为目的的人，除非能从对方那里得到一定的利益，否则彼此间是不会存在真正的友谊的。
而以快乐为动机的人同样如此。我指的是，他们与诙谐幽默之人结交，并不是因为对方本身的性格，而是因为他们能给自己带来欢乐。所以，他们建立友谊的动机就在于，利用关爱朋友来使自己快乐，也就是说，他们不是爱其朋友本身，而是因为他们有用或能带来欢乐。这些友谊只会得出一种结果：由于友谊中爱的并不是对方本身，而是因为在一定情形下，它能提供益处或带来欢乐。
当然，如果友谊双方不再有类似之处，这样的友谊便很容易解体。我的意思是说，如果友谊中的一方不能再带来快乐，或提供益处，另一方便会停止他们的友谊。功利的本性并不是永恒的，而是持续变化的，所以，当他们建立友谊时的动机消失时，友谊当然也要解体，因为它只能在相应的环境中存在……
那些在品德高尚的人，且有相似德行的人之间存在的友谊才是完美的。因为这些人要求对方有类似的德行。在他们之间，有好的德行（自身的德行）。而那些因为希望朋友有德行而建立友谊的人，尤其可称得上朋友，因为他们觉得这样正是发自于他们自身内心，而并非仅仅为了一种结果。所以他们之间的友谊会恒久。而我们知道，德行具有恒久性……
这种友谊很少有，因为这样的人很少有。另外，除了要具备这些素质以外，还需要时间和密切的来往。因为正如常言所说的那样，只有一起吃过很多盐的人才能彼此熟知。而且，只有彼此相互肯定，互相欣赏，他们才能亲密接触，才能成为朋友。那些很快准备友好交往的人，或许我们就可以说他们希望成为朋友了。但是，如果他们不是合适的对象，也不能得到对方的承认的话，他们就不是朋友。也就是说，对交友的渴望也许能够很快引发交友，而不是友谊。
■
友谊不仅仅是相识，也不仅仅是感情。友谊往往源于彼此的兴趣和共同目标，它们因或早或迟产生的善意冲动而得到加强。友谊所需要的是坦率，揭示自己内心的思想感情，认真地对待朋友的批评，一如对待他们的倾慕与赞美。
Aristotle on Friendship
Aristotle
The ancients listed friendship among the highest of virtues。 It was an essential element in the happy or fully flourishing life。 “For without friends；” Aristotle says； “no one would choose to live； though he had all other goods。” Words worth remembering in a world of perishable “goods。”
亚里士多德论友谊（2）
According to Aristotle； friendship either is； or it involves； a state of character； a virtue。 There are three kinds of friendship。 These are based on pleasure in another’s pany （friendship of pleasure）； or on usefulness in association （friendships of utility）； or on mutual admiration （friendships in virtue）。 All are essential to the good life； and the best sorts of friends will not only admire each other’s excellence； but take pleasure in each other’s pany and find their association of mutual advantage。 Here is a portion of Aristotle’s classic discussion。
As the motives to Friendship differ in kind； so do the respective feelings and Friendships。 The species then of Friendship are three； in number equal to the objects of it； since in the line of each there may be “mutual affection mutually known。”
Now they who have Friendship for one another desire one another’s good according to the motive of their Friendship； accordingly they whose motive is utility have no Friendship for one another really； but only insofar as some good arises to them from one another。
And they whose motive is pleasure are in like case： I mean，they have Friendship for men of easy pleasantry； not because they are of a given character but because they are pleasant to themselves。 So then they whose motive to Friendship is utility love their friends for what is good to themselves； they whose motive is pleasure do so for what is pleasurable to themselves； that is to say； not insofar as the friend beloved is but insofar as he is useful or pleasurable。 These Friendships then are a matter of result： since the object is not beloved in that he is the man he is but in that he furnishes advantage or pleasure as the case may be。
Such Friendships are of course very liable to dissolution if the parties do not continue alike： I mean； that the others cease to have any Friendship for them when they ar