Aristotle 's Views On Morality

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.

To discover the nature of human happiness it is necessary to determine what the function of a human being is. A person's happiness consists of fulfilling the natural function toward which they are being directed. This natural function is something that is specific to only human beings. This function is something that sets human beings apart from everything else in the world. Generally speaking, a person is primarily his intellect. Where the spirit and desire are also important, it is the rational part of the soul that should be considered the person's identity. Aristotle emphasized that eudaimonia was constituted by rational activities that were associated with human virtue rather than human power, or honor. According to Aristotle, the rational activity has to be indicated as pride, bravery, or friendships that are mutually beneficial, pride and honesty among others.

In Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant seeks to develop a clear understanding of moral principles. Qualities of character and fortune can be exercised for either good or bad purposes, and only the good will is naturally and inherently good. Humans are at once rational and natural beings; our reason and natural characteristics are distinct from each other. Kant suggests that we must choose either to follow our rational or natural capacities. Although man’s highest purpose may seem to be self-preservation and happiness, as rational beings our highest purpose is to develop this good will. Our instinct leads us to the pursuit happiness and self-preservation, but the will developed by our reason would be good in itself and

Immanuel Kant states that the only thing in this world that is “good without qualification” is the good will. He states the attributes of character such as intelligence, wit, and judgment are considered good but can be used for the wrong reasons. Kant also states that the attributes of good fortune such as health, power, riches, honor, that provide one happiness can also be used in the wrong way (7). In order to understand Kant’s view of moral rightness, one must understand that only a good will is unambiguously good without qualification, it is “good in itself”. To clarify, Kant states that “a good will is good not because of what it effects or

Aristotle provides the teleological approach of how to live well in his collection of lectures, Nicomachean Ethics. In Book II of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle presents his definition of virtue in which it is "a kind of mean" (N.E. 129). According to Aristotle, moral virtue is a means to an end, happiness. By using Sophocles's Antigone, I will support Aristotle's theory of virtue in which he reasons it to be a state of character between two extremes. A virtue that remains relevant today as it did during Aristotle's era is that of courage. By using Aristotle's account on what represents the virtue of courage, I will demonstrate how it could be applied to the dilemma the characters of Antigone encounter. Even his definition of justice is

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.

Mankind has been searching for existential reasoning since our earliest beginnings. One of the biggest questions, the one that keeps me up at night, “How ought we to live?” will be explained from the viewpoints of Epictetus in his Enchiridion and Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics. In this paper, I will discuss both philosophies in principle and practice, while giving insight to how to they may function in a modern world situation. Although both theories have useful guidance for navigating the human condition, Aristotle’s theory of virtue encompasses more of a real world schematic of how to interpret oneself in relation to our surroundings through compassion rather than apathy.

In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle discussed his theory of happiness and attempted to answer the many questions related to what makes people happy. Questions asked were “What is the purpose of human existence?” “What is the end goal we are trying to achieve so that we know how we should conduct ourselves?” With so many people seeking pleasure through a variety of means such a wealth, reputation, personal belongings and friends, they may be missing the mark when it comes to happiness. While these each have a value attached to them, none of them contains what is truly needed to be described as the “good” we should be aiming toward. According to Aristotle, to be an ultimate end, an act must be self-sufficient and final, “that which is always desirable in itself and never for the sake of something else” (Nicomachean Ethics, 1097a30-34)

1. In light of Aristotle’s analysis of virtue and/or Plato’s analysis of virtue, what would be, in your view, four core Canadian moral virtues? Give a short explanation for your choices

In Book I of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle states that the ultimate human goal or end is happiness. Aristotle then describes steps required for humans to obtain the ultimate happiness. He also states that activity is an important requirement of happiness. A virtuous person takes pleasure in doing virtuous things. He then goes on to say that living a life of virtue is something pleasurable in itself. The role of virtue to Aristotle is an important one, with out it, it seems humans cannot obtain happiness. Virtue is the connection one has to happiness and how they should obtain it. My goal in this paper is to connect Aristotle’s book of Nicomachean Ethics to my own reasoning of self-ethics. I

Aristotle believes that there are two kinds of virtue, one being intellectual and the other being moral virtue. He states that Intellectual virtue comes from being taught meaning we’re not born with it. Moral virtue on the other hand we develop as we grow and gain an understanding of life. “The stone which by nature moves downwards cannot be habituated to move upwards, not even if one tries to train it by throwing it up ten thousand times” (N.E. II.1) Right there he is talking about how if you are designed to do one thing, it is impossible to do the opposite no matter how hard you force it. He talks about how we gain our virtues by practicing them and using them on a regular basis. That is how we learn

Despite these differences in Kant and Hume’s theories of moral philosophy, adherents of the two philosophers, nevertheless, for the most part agree on the contents of morality. However, though the moral rules that

Through the use of rationale, the philosopher Socrates concluded that there is only one standard by which all things are holy or unholy. Socrates conclusion is logical, it is logical because morality is a way of existing and has no distinguishable construct, therefore it is a mysterious order that has always existed in an unchanging form. We cannot define this form, we sense that it is present and we know that a person or thing is either good or bad. For this reason, the logical outcome is that holiness is its own standard, you are holy or you are unholy.

In the Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals Kant explains that there are many goods including happiness, food and desires, but there is only one highest good. This highest good is a good without qualification. The implication being that this highest good is inherently good in itself. Kant further explains that there is only one highest good or one good without qualification which is good will. Good without qualification is a bit vague so Kant has several criteria involved in determining what it is and why good will satisfies them.

In Book II of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle discusses the idea of moral virtue. Aristotle emphasized the importance of developing moral virtue as the way to achieve what is finally more important, human flourishing (eudaimonia). Aristotle makes the argument in Book II that moral virtue arises from habit—equating ethical character to a skill that is acquired through practice, such as learning a musical instrument. However in Book III, Aristotle argues that a person 's moral virtue is voluntary, as it results from many individual actions which are under his own control. Thus, Aristotle confronts us with an inherently problematic account of moral virtue.