Aristotle And Heidegger 's Theories About Ethics

In Book I of the Ethics, Aristotle understands the end to all human activity to be happiness which is the supreme good. This is because all human activity aims to whatever we consider to be good. The highest ends are ends within themselves, while subordinate ends may only be ends to higher ends. This means that the highest end must be the supreme good. Everyone can agree that that the supreme good is happiness, but many people disagree on what the faulty in which the nature of happiness stems from. For some people they equate happiness with pleasure. This is problematic because that faulty is not indicative to only human beings, for animals also engage in various activity to feel a sensation of pleasure. This can be hunting or obtaining food to satisfy appetite or mating to satisfy the feelings of euphoria from sensual stimulation. Both humans and animals can identify with this but it is not considered the highest end because it is an end to a higher end. Secondly, others consider honor with being the greatest good, but this is also problematic because honor depends on how others perceive you and honor is also conferred as recognition of goodness, so there must be a greater good that honors reward. Another indication that happiness is the ultimate goal of all activities, is Aristotle’s use of the word telos in relation to happiness. Every activity has a telos that can explain the reasoning behind why we partake in certain activities. Happiness is the ultimate telos for there

In order to achieve this final, we need to live a virtuous life according to the Golden mean, which is finding the middle grounds of the virtues we live by. Aristotle explains that we should continuously act in accordance with virtues, which are acquired from our upbringing and experiences. Because Aristotle believed in teleology, he said that by aiming our actions toward an end (happiness), our souls need to work in the way of excellence.

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.

Aristotle’s work, The Nicomachean Ethics, consists of numerous books pertaining to Aristotle’s Ethics—the ethics of the good life. The first book discloses Aristotle’s belief on moral philosophy and the correlation between virtue and happiness.

Aristotle believed that we find the good when we find our purpose we will also find “the good.”

In order to explain the fundamentals of Aristotle's Virtue Ethics, one must acknowledge his primary motive in this study, which is to understand what it means to live well. Unlike

(any definition of happiness should meet these conditions). Aristotle means that every activity one does is for a final goal. For example: one goes to school to get a better paying job, with a better paying job one earns more money, more money means one can buy anything they like, all to be happy would be the final goal. Happiness requires both complete virtue and a complete life.

In our society today, we are mostly challenged by two questions: ‘is it right to do this or that? And ‘how should I be living in society?’(Bessant, 2009). Similar questions were greatly discussed in the history by our ancestors in their philosophical discussions. The most ancient and long-lasting literature on moral principles and ethics were described by Greek philosopher Aristotle. He had an excellent command on various subjects ranging from sciences to mathematics and philosophy. He was also a student of a famous philosopher. His most important study on ethics, personal morality and virtues is ‘The Nicomachean Ethics’, which has been greatly influencing works of literature in ethics and heavily read for centuries, is believed to be

It seems obvious to suggest that the goal we all are aiming at is total happiness; total success and fulfillment. In the Nichomachean ethics, Aristotles' main aim is to provide a description of what this so-called happiness actually is, and how we can go about our day to day lives in order to achieve the best life that we possibly can. He begins book one with what philosophers call a 'Teleological conception of life'. That is, everything we do is aiming at some end: 'every art and every investigation, and similarly every action and pursuit, is considered to aim at some good. Hence the good has been rightly defined as

“For we may be said to desire all things as means to something else except indeed happiness, as happiness is the end or perfect state” (page 230, Mayfield). As Aristotle said that our ultimate goal is happiness but in order to reach happiness you have to succeed. “Relaxation then is not an end. We enjoy it as a means to activity; but it seems that the happy life is a life of virtue, and such a life is serious, it is not one of mere amusement. We speak of serious things too as better than things which are ridiculous and amusing, and of the activity of

This past semester in Western Heritage, we have read an array of works- from works about ancient Gods to more in depth works such as Ethics or The Bible. All of these works show serious teachings about multiple things such as justice, Gods, and philosophy. In my paper, I am going to discuss the concepts of Aristotle 's Ethics and Plato 's The Republic in order to hopefully achieve whether or not the ideas that have stuck out to me, are true or not.

In this paper, I will compare the theories of Aristotle and Kant on the basis of ethics. I will be examining Aristotle’s theory of virtue in which his focus is “What is a Good Life” and Kant’s theory of deontological ethics in which the moral worth of an action lies in the duty upon which moral actions are engendered.

Aristotle was a Greek philosopher whose writings have carried on well past his life, and have held an influence across the world, throughout time periods, and are intensely debated to this day. Following his treatise on Ethics, Aristotle turned his attention to Politics, in which he claimed, “it is evident that the state is a creation of nature, and that man is by nature a political animal;” [1] a bold statement that encompasses the whole of a species. However, Aristotle’s assertion that the state, or the Greek polis, is an inevitable progression for humanity and what all humans strive for to pursue the ‘good life’ is founded upon logic, and with the definitions he provided, leaves little doubt that he succeeded in showing so.[2]

In Aristotle's Nicomachaen Ethics, the principle concern is the nature of human well-being. According to Aristotle, everything we do in life, we do for the sake of some good, or at least something perceived to be good (1094a1-3). When inquiring as to whether there is some good desired for its own sake, Aristotle envisioned a problem that either there is an infinite series of goods desired for the sake of something higher, in which case one's desires can never be satisfied, or there must be some highest good that is desired for its own sake and for which everything else is desired (1094a17-22). Then, according to Aristotle, the highest good must be final, it must be desired for its own sake and not for the

In this essay, I will be examining the ethics of Plato and Aristotle. I will explain the five fundamental concepts of Plato and Aristotle. I will focus on their theories on the good life as a life of justice, censorship, knowledge and the good life. I will first explain Plato’s ethics. Plato was a philosopher, both a rationalist and absolutist. According to Plato, people must be schooled to obtain certain kinds of knowledge for example mathematics, philosophy etc. The training will give them the ability to know the nature of the good life.