亞里斯多德將幸福定義為靈魂依於德行的實現活動，並且如果有很多德行，則要依於最完美的德行。從亞里斯多德對德行的說法，他又將幸福分成最完滿且自足的玄想生活，以及較玄想生活而言次一等的道德生活。 道德德行是靈魂中非理性部分諸如慾望、情感等能服從理性的品格狀態，道德德行是亞里斯多德認為大多數人所應該透過習慣去獲得的德行；然而作為一個以玄想為目的的哲學家，他是不是能獲得道德德行？事實上，亞里斯多德說理智德行與道德德行經過歲月，在同一些人身上可以看到這樣的品格，但是後來研究此中的學者從字義上去探討這兩種德行是否相容時，產生疑義，本文將由幸福的概念探討起，再分別說明玄想生活與道德生活。 本文的最後藉由海涅曼(Robert Heinaman)的論點探討兩種生活的內在價值，透過對teleion字義的解釋，來看待這兩種德行為何會產生是否相容這樣的問題。然而，這樣的問題，並不影響亞里斯多德所會選擇的生活；本文以羅斯(David Ross)所說亞里斯多德所會選擇的生活作為結論。 Aristotle said if eudaimonia is activity in accordance with virtue, then it is activity in accordance with the best virtue. According to his statement on the virtues, there are two kinds of eudaimonia, contemplation is the perfect and the more self-sufficiency, and moral virtues – is counted as eudaimonia of an inferior kind. Moral virtues mean the irrational parts of the soul, like desire or emotion, which obey the rational parts of the soul. Aristotle thought most people should be used to get through the moral virtues, but there is one question: a philosopher, who lived in contemplation, could he get the moral virtues at the same time? Certainly, Aristotle said we can see someone, who has intellectual virtues and moral virtues in middle-aged. But in researches, there are different views. The essay discusses what is eudaimonia, contemplation, moral action, and to find intrinsic values of those. According to Robert Heinemann’s view the word “teleion” had different means that was why he thought the perfect eudaimonia was contemplation alone. However, the question never concerned with what’s life that Aristotle to choose; and my conclusion is appealing to David Ross’s view to talk about Aristotle’s life.