The Relationship Between Leisure and Happiness: A Forgotten Virtue Ethical Issue
Lai Xiaowei1,2, Liu Huimei1,3
1.Department of Philosophy, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China 2.Hangzhou International Urbanology Research Center & Zhejiang Urban Governance Studies Center, Hangzhou 311121, China 3.Academy of Tourism and Leisure, Zhejiang University,Hangzhou 310058, China
Abstract：Aristotle presented and explored the relationship between leisure and happiness as a virtue ethical issue. He believes that leisure is both a means to achieve happiness and happiness per se, and the two are unified through virtue. Leisure as a means makes it possible for people to escape from the busy life of making a living and provides opportunities for the cultivation and practice of intellectual virtue and ethical virtue, which is a prerequisite for the realization of happiness; leisure as an end exists in the form of critical thinking, which is the practice of intellectual virtue and is happiness itself.However, the relationship between leisure and happiness as an issue of virtue ethics is now forgotten and neither leisure studies nor ethical studies have been able to place it in the context of virtue ethics. The modern leisure research focuses on the relationship between individual leisure behavior, leisure experience and subjective well-being in social situations from psychological perspectives. As a social psychology term, “leisure” and “happiness” are not the same as those in Aristotle’. It emphasizes the subjective feelings and experiences rather than the concept of virtue. Also some scholars have attempted to restore the relationship between “leisure” and “happiness” in Aristotle, but their aim is to provide theoretical support for the study of specific leisure issues rather than to advocate the revival of Aristotle’s virtue ethics.Although some contemporary virtue ethicists advocate the recovery of the Aristotelian concepts of virtue and happiness, they do not reflect sufficient attention to the concept of leisure. On the one hand, leisure in Aristotle’s view belonged only to male city-state citizens, while slaves, women and barbarians were excluded from citizenship. This classical elitist argument, however, does not apply to modern society, which is built on the basis of equality among human beings. On the other hand, leisure has lost its necessity for achieving happiness in the development of contemporary virtue ethics. We need to return to the relationship between leisure and happiness in the framework of the Aristotelian virtue ethics. Theoretically, it can help clarify the relationship between leisure and happiness and lay a solid theoretical foundation for the development of modern leisure studies. It can also help achieve a stronger revival of Aristotle’s virtue ethics in the contemporary world. Practically, it can provide a reference for people to arrange leisure time appropriately, and encourage people to explore concrete ways to achieve a good life by treating leisure as a purpose.
来晓维, 刘慧梅. 闲暇与幸福的关系：一个被遗忘的德性伦理问题[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2021, 51(4): 144-153.
Lai Xiaowei, Liu Huimei. The Relationship Between Leisure and Happiness: A Forgotten Virtue Ethical Issue. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2021, 51(4): 144-153.
1 古希腊］亚里士多德： 《尼各马可伦理学》，苗力田译，见苗力田编： 《亚里士多德全集》第八卷，北京：中国人民大学出版社，1994年。 2 古希腊］亚里士多德： 《政治学》，颜一、秦典华译，见苗力田编： 《亚里士多德全集》第九卷，北京：中国人民大学出版社，1994年。 3 古希腊］亚里士多德： 《形而上学》，苗力田译，见苗力田编： 《亚里士多德全集》第七卷，北京：中国人民大学出 版社，1993年。 4 曹刚： 《美好生活与至善论》，《伦理学研究》2019年第2期，第1-7页。 5 Carr A.， Positive Psychology： The Science of Happiness and Human Strengths （2nd ed.）， New York： Routledge， 2011. 6 张海仁： 《善的求索——亚里士多德德性幸福论浅析》，《江西师范大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》1998年第3期，第30-35页。 7 Jackson E. L.， Constraints to Leisure， Andover： Venture Publishing， 2005. 8 美］道格拉斯·克雷伯、［加］戈登·沃克、［加］罗杰·曼内尔： 《休闲社会心理学》，陈美爱译，杭州：浙江大学出版社，2014年。 9 Liu Huimei & Da Shuyang， “The relationships between leisure and happiness： a graphic elicitation method，” Leisure Studies， Vol. 39， No. 1 （2020）， pp. 111-130. 10 Beard J. G. & Ragheb M. G.， “Measuring leisure satisfaction，” Journal of Leisure Research， Vol. 12， No. 1 （1980）， pp. 20-33. 11 Riddick C. C.， “Leisure satisfaction precursors，” Journal of Leisure Research， Vol. 18， No. 4 （1986）， pp. 259-265. 12 Campbell A.， Converse P. E. & Rodgers W. L.， The Quality of American Life： Perceptions， Evaluations， and Satisfactions， New York： Russell Sage Foundation， 1976. 13 蒋奖、秦明、克燕南等： 《休闲活动与主观幸福感》，《旅游学刊》2011年第9期，第74-79页。 14 徐延辉、史敏： 《休闲方式、精神健康与幸福感》，《吉林大学社会科学学报》2016年第5期，第82-89，189页。 15 Diener E.， Emmons R. A. & Larsen R. J. et al.， “The satisfaction with life scale，” Journal of Personality Assessment， Vol. 49， No. 1 （1985）， pp. 71-75. 16 周海荣、李宏： 《论亚里士多德的休闲观》，《武汉理工大学学报（社会科学版）》2007年第6期，第121-125页。 17 Owens J.， “Aristotle on leisure，” Canadian Journal of Philosophy， Vol. 11， No. 4 （1981）， pp. 713-723. 18 Hemingway J. L.， “Leisure and civility：reflections on a Greek ideal，” Leisure Sciences： An Interdisciplinary Journal， Vol. 10， No. 3 （1988）， pp. 179-191. 19 黎海燕： 《“闲”与“德”之关系研究及其现代启示——兼论亚里士多德闲暇德育思想》，《学术论坛》2012年第7期，第61-64，150页。 20 Sylvester C.， “Fiftieth anniversary of time， work and leisure，” Journal of Leisure Research， Vol. 45 （2013）， pp. 253-258. 21 Bouwer J. & van Leeuwen M.， Philosophy of Leisure： Foundations of the Good Life， London and New York： Routledge， 2017. 22 美］ A.麦金太尔： 《德性之后》，龚群、戴扬毅等译，北京：中国社会科学出版社，1995年。 23 Bar B. （ed.）， Engendering Origins： Critical Feminist Readings in Plato and Aristotle， New York： State University of New York Press， 1994. 24 Sanford J.， Before Virtue： Assessing Contemporary Virtue Ethics， Washington， D. C.： The Catholic University Press of America， 2015. 25 Salkever S. G.， “Women， soldiers， citizens： Plato & Aristotle on the politics of virility，” Polity， Vol. 19， No. 2 （1986）， pp. 232-253. 26 美］约翰·罗尔斯： 《道德哲学史讲义》，张国清译，上海：上海三联书店，2003年。 27 英］亨利·西季威克： 《伦理学方法》，廖申白译，北京：中国社会科学出版社，1993年。 28 Simpson P.， “Contemporary virtue ethics and Aristotle，” The Review of Metaphysics， Vol. 45， No. 3 （1992）， pp. 503-524. 29 Broadie S.， Aristotle and Beyond： Essays on Metaphysics and Ethics， London： Cambridge University Press， 2009. 30 Blackshaw T.， Leisure， New York： Routledge， 2010.
2021, Vol. 51 
