Aristotelian Perspectives on Social Ethics Essay

The Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle 's key study of morality and the final goal of human life, has for many years been a popular and persuasive book. It offers the modern reader many useful insights into human desires and behavior despite being thousands of years old. The overarching theme behind this book is Aristotle 's assertion that there are no recognized unconditional moral standards and that every ethical theory must take into consideration an understanding of psychology and knowing that behavior comes from the realities of human nature and how it affects daily life. Additionally, the book echoes Aristotle 's accomplishments in other areas of philosophy and is a good display of his methodological thought process, which is widely considered to be the root of all modern science examination.

One of the most frequently debated topics in bioethics is the morality of abortion, or the ending of a pregnancy without physically giving birth to an infant. Often times abortions are categorized into either spontaneous, a natural miscarriage; induced or intentional, which is premeditated and for any reason; or therapeutic, which albeit intentional, its sole purpose is to save the mother’s life. It seems however that moral conflicts on issue mainly arise when discussing induced abortions. In general, people universally agree it is morally wrong to kill an innocent person and in some people’s eyes induced abortions are the intentional killings of innocent persons, thus making them immoral. However not all individuals view fetuses as persons and consequentially argue it is not morally wrong to kill them.

In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle establishes that “every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim at some good and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim” and explains this through the dialectic of disposition, particularly between vice and virtue. In chapter four, Aristotle affirms that since “all knowledge and every pursuit aims at some good”, we inherently seek the highest form which is known to both the masses and the educated as happiness through both living and acting well . Thus regardless of whether man is inherently evil or good, we aspire for the highest form of happiness. Through the implications and discourse of vice and virtue, this paper explores the relevance of Aristotle’s moral philosophy in modern day and will be applied to the contemporary ethical issue surrounding physician assisted suicide. By exploring Aristotle’s work through primary and secondary sources, this paper will discuss the greater good and happiness as it relates to not only the patient or physician, but as a member of a greater social circle and that of society because to Aristotle the role of the individual is less important than their social obligations and role. This paper aims to use the rationale of natural law and of Aristotle to explore the prospects of physician assisted suicide as for the greater good and as a modern ethical obligation.

A married couple, both addicted to drugs, is unable to care for their infant daughter. She is taken from them by court order and placed in a foster home. The years passed. She comes to regard her foster parents as her real parents. They love her as they would their own daughter. When the child is 9 years old, the natural parents, rehabilitated from drugs, begin court action to regain custody. The case is decided in their favor. The child is returned to them, against her will. Do ethics support the law in this case? Discuss.

In 1989, Don Marquis, an American philosopher, published his paper “Why Abortions are Immoral” in The Journal of Philosophy, and his argument became widely cited and significant amongst the debate between the views of anti-abortion and pro-choice parties. This essay aims to analyze and evaluate Marquis’ paper, and also discuss how the views of immorality should translate into the laws of our society. One of the reasons why Don Marquis’ argument in “Why Abortions are Immoral” is particularly compelling is because the philosopher adopts a deductive reasoning approach and avoids traditional debate over “what constitutes as personhood”.

In the article “Why Abortion is Immoral,” Don Marquis starts by appealing to the general principle about the wrongness of killing; thus, assuming that the killing of any being is morally unethical in any situation. He then proposes that the killing of a fetus is depriving a being of their future and explains why abortion is morally wrong. His main argument in the article is that it is not morally acceptable to kill the average human being unless given severe conditions due to the fact that it is unethical to impede on the value of the unborn fetus. Marquis shows the most knowledgeable and itemized line of reasoning against abortion. As a result of Marquis’ beliefs, I will argue that his contention comes up short in light because the choice to have an abortion is an individual decision of the woman and it does not cause the loss of a valuable future.

Therefore, according to Marquis, a new strategy should be adopted to develop the argument o abortion. In this case, the author starts by illustrating why killing an ordinary adult is morally wrong, and tries to apply same reasons to the case of abortion. Therefore, if similar reasons can be applied to the context of abortion, then decision of it being immoral will be made. The wrong aspect in killing relates to depriving the victim life which is inherently valuable. In this case, killing deprives of the victim the very valuable things that he or she could have achieved in future if life was not terminated prematurely (Vaughn, 2012). Among these valuables are aesthetic experiences, relationships, accomplished projects, achievements and goals. Therefore, killing is regarded as wrong because it denies the victim the value of the future. Marquis, therefore, notes that there are various reasons to explain why killing is wrong. Firstly, it accounts for the idea that murder is the worst crime because of the extent of its deprivation. It also matches with the attitude that the terminally ill develop concerning the future death. In addition, the act of killing has no special importance that supports moral reasons to justify abortion. Furthermore, the author reveals that this idea is plausible in the verdict of various ethical activities. For instance, it is used to explain why euthanasia victims are a time allowed to be killed as well as a reason behind infanticide.

Aristotle’s thoughts on ethics conclude that all humans must have a purpose in life in order to be happy. I believe that some of the basics of his ideas still hold true today. This essay points out some of those ideas.

Abortion in our country is supported by many and refuted by many for various reasons. These reasons may include religious, ethnic, political, and personal reasons. Although people today have their own opinions of abortion due to these reasons, what would someone like Aristotle think of abortion? To figure this out, we have to look at this viewpoint through Aristotle’s eyes: Does having an abortion hurt one’s “teleos,” does it support his idea of justice, and does it help create a better “polis?” These are all questions we have to answer in order to understand what Aristotle would have to say about abortion.

In his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle explores virtues as necessary conditions for being happy. A virtuous person is a person with a disposition toward virtuous actions and who derives pleasure from behaving virtuously. Aristotle distinguishes between two types of human virtue: virtues of thought and virtues of character. Virtues of thought are acquired through learning and include virtues like wisdom and prudence; virtues of character include bravery and charity, which are acquired by habituation and require external goods to develop. As a consequence, not all people can acquire virtues of character because not all people have the external goods and resources required to develop that disposition.

The philosophy of virtue ethics, which primarily deals with the ways in which a person should live, has puzzled philosophers from the beginning of time. There are many contrasting interpretations regarding how one should live his or her life in the best way possible. It is in my opinion that the Greeks, especially Aristotle, have exhibited the most logical explanation of how to live the "good life". The following paper will attempt to offer a detailed understanding of Aristotle's reasoning relating to his theory of virtue ethics.

In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle explains the misconception of amusement and leisure being considered the same thing. He distinguishes the difference between the two. In this paper I will argue that Aristotle is correct amusement and leisure are not the same thing.

The following analysis offers a critical discussion on how Aristotelian virtue ethics might shape a set of values underpinning early childhood education and care settings (ECEC). The provided discussion is based on specific reference to Aristotle’s virtue of justice. Aristotle was recognised as one of the greatest philosophers and his influence can be seen in the values that underpin ECEC settings. Although written in the 4th BC and in different social and cultural times, Aristotle’s theory on virtue ethics still influences many contemporary virtue ethicists including Hursthouse and Hume (Driver, 2006). Aristotle used the concepts of patient, careful, and the descriptive approach in examining the concepts of ethics (Feeney 2010). The main concept

A fetus moreover holds a valuable future like ours therefore abort a fetus would as well as impound them from their future. Then, we can presume killing a fetus is morally wrong. In addition, abortion is an attendantly perform of killing a human being, who have a right to live as well as might be taking away its great future. Thence, Marquis has come to conclude that abortion is immoral.

This essay will be examining the ethics of Plato (428-347 BCE) and Aristotle (384-322 B.C). I will firstly attempt to summarise the five fundamental concepts of Plato and Aristotle before providing my own opinion and view on their ethics. I will concentrate on their theories on the good life as a life of justice, censorship, knowledge and the good life.