Let's Discuss Aristotle's Views

In order to obtain a successful argument speaker must be rhetorical. According to Aristotle the secret to being a persuasive public speaker you need to understand ethos, pathos, logos, and kairos. They are considering the essential qualities of a speech or presentation which will help the audience accept the message you are trying to deliver. In order for a speaker can convince an audience they must understand ethos. Ethos is that a speaker must accept anything he says in order to get the audience attention and credibility. The speaker must be respected, trustworthy, and authority to have credibility to perceive your audience. The next step is pathos which is the quality the speaker can persuade their presentation and emotion to the audience.

trange; that was the only word to describe it. Aristotle’s eyes widened as he quickly leaped off his bike, making his way towards the abnormality. The peculiar flower caught his interest; he had never seen anything like it. He wandered off into this field not too far from his house, on a quest for flowers. However, this was not what he expected. This flower was such a beauty, it did not belong on Earth. Excitement flickered in his eyes. Aristotle was still in the early stages of becoming a botanist, but he knew almost too much about plants. A gleeful laugh escaped his lips, and he wasted no time in uprooting the flower from its spot. His hands shook with delight as he placed the flower in the basket of his bike, that previously occupied the ground. His legs burned when he raced home, his smile shined brightly in the afternoon sunlight.

In terms of understanding both sides of the argument I agree completely with Aristotle. I think knowing everything there is to know about a subject you are trying to persuade people to believe makes your argument more believable and a better person.

Aristotle’s argument is a by-product of a similar one proposed by Plato near the beginning of the Republic (R 352d–354b). Here Socrates wanted to persuade his intended audience that a just life is best for it will bring the individual the most happiness. Whereas both arguments seem dependent on a connection between being a decent individual, having a good life, and correlating both of these to rationality, Aristotle’s version of the argument differs in what the best good is.

An ethical issue that is debated in our society is the concern of driving while intoxicated. Although this was naturally not the case during Aristotle’s time, many of his ethical beliefs can be applied to refute this dilemma. I will prove the standing issue to be unethical through Aristotle’s discussion of virtue and his concept of voluntary/involuntary actions in the Nicomachean Ethics.

Aristotle was one of the most important western philosophers. He was a student of Plato and the teacher of Alexander the Great. He wrote on many subjects, including physics, metaphysics, poetry, theater, music, logic, rhetoric, politics, government, ethics, biology, and zoology. I found that his biggest impacts on modern society were in the subject areas of ethics, and zoology.

Aristotle points out that men look at the apparent good but may not have control over their appearance. I disagree with this argument because we are all responsible for our actions and the end results of them. All men are aiming for happiness in the end and when they do good motives, in the end what will appear to him is something good. The appearance ultimately depends on the person’s character. For example, if someone forgets their wallet in a store, someone who has a kind heart will try and find the person or report it, while someone who is not kind will either take the money out the wallet, not return it to the person or report it. The apparent good will appear different for these two people because of their different characters.

Aristotle, in Nicomachean Ethics I.7, defined happiness as the central good that motivates all of man’s endeavors (function), in that happiness “is in itself worthy of pursuit more final than that which is worthy of pursuit for the sake of something else… is always desirable in itself and never for the sake of something else.” (NE 1.7, 1097a 32-34) What is interesting to note here, is that in this sense, happiness, rather than a mental state of the mind, is perceived as a good; happiness is something that serves an end – in other words, the goal of a function. If happiness is the ultimate purpose, then what is the human function that achieves it? More problematically, this assumes that humans must have a function in the first place! In my essay, I will examine Aristotle’s argument for the function of man, and attempt to provide commentary that serves to support his position.

Aristotle gave two ways virtue can be obtained, the ways in which humans acquire virtue. “Virtue of thought and character.” Mostly virtue is obtained from habit, “virtue of character” which is ethical. It can be through moral principles, knowledge, or socially, which completes us as humans. It becomes a habit, when see the habit every day or been taught about it, from a young age. We work towards this behavior and act upon that virtue as a lifestyle. “Virtue by contrast, we acquire, just as we acquire crafts, by having first activated them” (285). Just like the phrase “practice makes perfect,” it is a virtue if we keep on to it, doing the same thing over again and believing in that which brings happiness.

The word “entertain” in this context means to be open minded and ask questions. Aristotle is conveying that when someone discusses a topic, others should listen with an open mind and try to understand the speaker’s perspective. One might not accept the speaker’s argument, but they should still listen and understand. An educated person, who is knowledgeable about various topics and could relate or understand the correlation between the topics is more likely to “entertain” than someone who is not that educated and as such has limited knowledge. Such less educated people, might become very divisive and not even “listen” or entertain other people’s views. Whereas an educated mind will “entertain” a point of view and will either accept it or

Aristotle contemplates that happiness can only be achieved if human actions are in accordance with their ability to reason. For this he concedes that human beings who are capable of reasoning are the only ones who can be happy. Aristotle considers happiness as the highest form of good because it is decided for its own particular purpose as opposed to an obligation. It is an intrinsic good in which it is those for the soul that are the most vital. Aristotle classifies human actions to fall into this category. There has been a debate about what happiness is really comprised of, whether it be honor, wealth, knowledge, pleasure or something more meaningful in relation to one’s soul. On the other hand, he acknowledges that happiness is unattainable in living for pleasure because a life filled with pleasures could be submissive. Together with honor he argues that respect is only attainable depending on what others consider (to

Aristotle segregates virtues into two categories and they are moral and intellectual. Aristotle believes that moral virtues is a product of habits, while intellectual virtues come from learning or life experience. He stated that since “nothing…can form a habit contrary to its nature” (Book II, 1), virtues are only possible to form by habits. For intellectual virtues, it can only be perfected over a period of a time, as well with experience. A more concrete point that will solidify this conclusion is that virtues are first learnt, then it will be presented, and the everyday life experience of the virtue is in diversified position and situations will lead a way for development. Aristotle as well goes in detail not just defining virtues theoretically,

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.

“Aristotle and the Ethics of Virtue and Character” explains the “theories” that make up a moral situation. First, we have expectations for the outcome of a moral situation to be utilitarian or sometimes produce another desirable result. We also have restraints that govern the actions we make to produce those outcomes. Last, certain character traits define who is prepared to perform the necessary actions and be content with the results. Aristotle’s “The Moral Virtues” explains how the mean of an excess and a deficit is the virtue. It is nearly impossible to act perfectly within the mean, which is why Aristotle recommends that one keep away from the extreme that is more opposed to the mean, be wary of pleasant things, and notice the direction (toward excess or deficit) toward which one, personally, will tend. Finally, in “Habit and Virtue,” Aristotle defines virtue as a result of habituation. Character is developed through the repetition of activities, and therefore the aim of the

Aristotle begins book one of 'The politics ' by stating "Every state is as we see a sort of partnership, and every partnership is formed with a view to some good (since all the actions of all mankind are done with a view to what they think to be good)." (Rackman.H, 1885, p3). He emphasises the idea that man is projected into intersubjective bonds which as a result makes him sociable, and naturally apart of the communitarian dimension whereby there is not only 'myself ' but 'ourselves '. Community and citizenship are factors in which Aristotle emphasizes as being natural to humans and thus by being part of a community and being a citizen, naturally everyone aims for the highest good and the most supreme of all is the polis. "It is therefore the state evident that, while all partnerships aim at some good, the partnership that is the most supreme of all and from the includes all the