David Hume Virtues

Two objections from David Hume [STRONG]: Hume's first objection: Reason doesn't discover moral rules. Morality is feeling, affect, or sentiment.

As you can see, there are many reason why the table of Aristotelian virtues does not work for all the human “virtues.” Sometimes, vices can be virtues. When you are figuring out the means, you have to consider someone’s religion, culture, or

Mankind must by this time have acquired positive beliefs as to the effects of some actions on their happiness; and the beliefs which have thus come down are the rules of morality for the multitude, and for the philosopher until he has succeeded in finding better. That philosophers might easily do this, even now, on many subjects; that the received code of ethics is by no means of divine right; and that mankind have still much to learn as to the effects of actions on general happiness, I admit or rather earnestly maintain.

Each individual justifies their actions and wishes by appealing to various moral principles based on the local or individual conception of the good. In the argument of morality and where are those moral judgments come from, brings us to the central question of ethics, that is “What is the good for human beings?” More than two thousand years ago, Aristotle gives his answer in Nicomachen Ethics suggesting that the purpose of morality is to enable us to lead good lives, and it is necessary to acquire virtues to achieve the good. However, this view of ethics based on virtues led to a relativism toward the notion that believes the criteria of ethics is tied up with virtues which the local and individual approves to be good. In other words, the conception of goodness is based on the tradition or custom of the local society/groups or the individual. Therefore, many suggest that the high degree of individualism that was shown in Aristotle’s virtues ethics theory proves that he supports cultural relativism. In this paper, I will defend Aristotelian ethical approach based on virtues and refute relativists argument by showing the objections that against the local ethical objectivity.

Morality is a complicated matter, one which requires rationality, but is often driven by emotions. A person’s behavior is almost completely driven by emotions and often times emotions are what tell us when something might be wrong or right. Motivation also comes from emotions, so without feelings of anger, depression, frustration and the like we would hardly ever do anything in order to change things in our lives (Shafer-Landau, 2015, p. 258). Virtue ethics then is concerned with what makes a person virtuous versus vicious when it comes to making moral decisions, with emotions playing an important role. In this paper, I support Aristotle’s emphasis on emotions as a key to being virtuous, especially since emotions tell us what is important and motivate us to act (Shafer-Landau, 2015, p. 257-258).

Mankind must by this time have acquired positive beliefs as to the effects of some actions on their happiness; and the beliefs which have thus come down are the rules of morality for the multitude, and for the philosopher until he has succeeded in finding better. That philosophers might easily do this, even now, on many subjects; that the received code of ethics is by no means of divine right;

Hume alternates between Morality stemming from our rational nature, or our reason and our passional nature or our Sentiment.

Humes focuses on Portland Oregon’s vaunted ecological approach to life. He points out the flagship effort Portland has put forth for decades to limit the negative footprint left by the population that live there. It is pointed out that while the citizens of Portland excel in so many eco-friendly categories they do fall short when it comes to the amount of trash they produce on an individual basis. Humes relates how the city’s leaders are now looking to new approaches in disposing of waste by using electricity to dissolve the trash to a molecular level.

Quality deep Hume was not an all-inclusive idea, but a person develops into ground and human care compiled. The way people discuss whether an activity is good or bad and uses the same type of exchange to achieve a conclusion strong evidence that the quality is too low right. However, people have feelings of support or opposition to these activities, which confirms that the hypothesis is also part of human nature. Hume holds some contradictory hypotheses, for example, pride and modesty, or love and hate, and how these emotions work with us strongly in our behavior, not as a synthesis of deliberations. Assumptions lead us and we are regularly in a position where we have to make a judgment which is usually done by coordinating the reason and the

Immanuel Kant refers to happiness as contentment (Kant, ) whereas John Stuart Mill refers to it as the pursuit of pleasure and the absence of pain (Mill, p.7). Kant does not base his ethics on happiness. Instead, he argues that morality is based on our duty as a human (Kant, ). To do what is right for Kant is to do what is instinctually moral without giving thought to the overall happiness. On the other hand, Mill does in fact use happiness as the bases for his ethics. He proposes that actions are right if they promote overall happiness and wrong if they promote the opposite of happiness (Mill, ). In this paper, it will be argued that Mill 's views on happiness are more reasonable than those of Kant 's because happiness should be the base for ethics.

Why did Humes choose kindness as the virtue to reduce all morality to (pg. 135)?

	David Hume, a Scottish philosopher and historian who lived from 1711-76, carried the empiricism of John Locke and George Berkeley to the logical extreme of radical skepticism. Although his family wanted him to become a lawyer, he felt an "insurmountable resistance to everything but philosophy and learning". Mr. Hume attended Edinburgh University where he studied but did not graduate, and in 1734 he moved to a French town called La Fleche to pursue philosophy. He later returned to Britain and began his literary career. As Hume built up his reputation, he gained more and more political power. He discarded the possibility of certain knowledge, finding in the mind nothing but a series of sensations, and held that cause-and-effect in the

Many philosophers through history have dealt with happiness, pleasure, justice, and virtues. In this essay there will given facts on virtues between two philosophers who have different views on the topic. Aristotle and Kant have two totally different views on virtue, one being based on the soul and how you character depicts you virtue and the other which is based of the fact that anyone has a chance of being morally good, even bad people. There is a lot of disagreement between Aristotle and Kant, which has examples to back the disagreements. Aristotle takes virtue as an excellence, while Kant takes it more to being a person doing something morally good in the society and for them as a person. One similarity between these two philosophers though, is that these two descriptions of virtue lead back to happiness in the individual. At the end of this essay, the reader should be capable of understanding that Aristotle’s theory is more supported than Kant’s theory. Of course, explanations for both sides will be given thoroughly throughout this comparison.

Every one of those of us who would prefer not to kill their children, their inner voice, their neighbors, need to depend on morals that will manage them to a cheerful life, as kept up by Aristotle, "justice with a balance among reason, spirit or anger, and the desires collectively known as epithumiai. This controlled balance is the happiest state available for human souls as well as the most moral; so if imitation undoes the soul's justice, it brings both vice and misery".5 It is an existence of control, mental, otherworldly and enthusiastic balance, that perhaps will not give them the most extreme benefit, however will guarantee them a fruitful blend of gainfulness with peace of psyche.

Hume begins by telling the difference between impressions and ideas. Impressions are sensory impressions, emotions, and other brilliant mental experiences, while ideas are thoughts or beliefs or memories related to these impressions. People build up all their ideas from simple impressions through three laws of association: resemblance, contiguity, and cause and effect. Next, Hume distinguishes between relations of ideas and matters of fact. For the most part, we understand matters of fact according to cause and effect, where a direct impression will lead us to infer some unobserved cause. There is no contradiction in denying a causal connection, so we cannot do so through relations of ideas. Hume suggests habit, and not reason, enforces a perception