Similarities Between Confucius And Confucius

Both St. Augustine’s Confessions and Confucius’s Analects are significant teachings that have influenced people around the world not only in ancient times but in current history as well. Both doctrines provide discussion on the ethical values of society back in the ancient time they were written and lead us to discover similarities between the two beliefs. Although we find these connections, there are significant differences between St. Augustine and Confucius’s views on life and beliefs since they were living in different time periods and environments. Their experiences are the influencers that have impacted to the way that philosophies and traditions have grown today between the West and the East. I agree that Confucius celebrated social

Aristotle once said, “Friendship is a single soul dwelling in two bodies.” There are many things that go into the process of friendship. Some people deal with friendship one way while others deal with it in another way. Cicero had a lot to say about the different aspects of friendship in his time, but how would he view modern friendship? Some friendships Cicero may not be proud of; like the common relationships that are forced on in a classroom or work place and the lack of allowing nature to take control and make the friendships that are meant to happen. However, Cicero would be happy with the way the higher level friendships have developed in virtue

Friendship, according to Aristotle there are 3 definitions of friendship. Friendship of Utility, “thus friends whose affection is based on utility do not love each other in themselves, but in so far as some benefit accrues to them from each other.” Friendship of Pleasure, “And similarly with those whose friendship is based on pleasure: for instance, we enjoy the society of witty people not because of what they are in themselves, but because they are agreeable to us.” Friendship of the Good. “The perfect form of friendship is that between the good, and those who resemble each other in virtue. For these friends wish each alike the other’s good in respect of their goodness, and they are good in themselves; but it is those who wish the good of their friends for their friends’ sake who are friends in the fullest sense, since they love each other for themselves and not accidentally. Hence the

In The Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle claims that there are three types of friendships. The three friendships being that of utility, pleasure, and virtue. First, in Sections 1-3, I will explain Aristotle’s claims of the three types of friendship. After that, in Section 4, I will examine Aristotle’s argument that there are two friendships that are not as lasting as the other friendship. Then, in Section 5, I will analyze whether or not the friendship of virtue can occur between only virtuous people. Next, in Section 6, I will evaluate whether or not true friendship is the friendship of virtue like Aristotle claims. Lastly, in Section 7, I will object to Aristotle’s claims.

Aristotle’s Book 9 of Nicomachean Ethics discusses the importance of friendship in an individual's life. Throughout the book, he hints at this idea of friendship. In Book 8.1, he writes, “In poverty as well as in other misfortunes, people suppose that friends are their only refuge. And friendship is a help to the young, in saving them from error, just as it is also to the old, with a view to the care they require and their diminished capacity for action stemming from their weakness; it is a help also to those in their prime in performing noble actions, for 'two going together' are better able to think and to act.” (N. Ethics 8.1). In other words, Aristotle emphasizes this idea that life is easier when there is a friend to support you; it is difficult

I believe Cicero position in the discussion about friendship is stronger than Aristotle’s position because Cicero believes friendship exists between two people, he also went deep in talking about friendship, the limits of friendship, how loyalty is important in friendship, the way friendships get stronger and older, which is also talked about the golden rule of friendship which he stated in section nineteen “put yourself on a level with your friends”. He also talked about the cause of friendship which he stated in section eleven that a belief in a man’s virtue is the original cause of friendship that friendship can hardly remain if virtue be abandon. By this , he made me understand virtue

Thesis: Chinese Confucianism and Roman Christianity are similar in both set key principles adopted by governments and both were created by leaders who taught by lesson yet different in that Confucianism was promoted by the government whereas political leaders in Rome strongly opposed Christianity.

We are social creatures. We surround ourselves with other human beings, our friends. It is in our nature. We are constantly trying to broaden the circumference of our circle of friends. Aristotle understood the importance of friendship, books VIII and IX of the Nicomachean Ethics deal solely with this topic. A modern day definition of a friend can be defined as “one joined to another in intimacy and mutual benevolence independently of sexual or family love”. (Oxford English Dictionary). Aristotle’s view on friendship is much broader than this. His arguments are certainly not flawless. In this essay I will outline what Aristotle said about friendship in the Nichomachaen Ethics and highlight possible

As the Korean old proverb goes, “Read the Analects of Confucius when you are young and read the Tao Te Ching when you get older.” Personally, the Analects of Confucius appeared to me because its ideas are very down to earth. Many people believed that two texts are complementary and do not replace one another. The reason why is that two texts have different ideas. The Analects of Confucius is dealing with more practical things but Tao Te Ching pursue ideal things. Therefore, I strongly believe that we have to read both of texts in life so that we can have a better life.

In the writings of Aristotle, seen in Nicomachean Ethics, it is evident that Aristotle believes that friendship is necessary for a virtuous and therefore happy life. I believe that this is accurate due to the similar conditions necessary for a complete friendship and a happy life. It is also evident that friendship is useful in achieving a happy life because friendship can make performing virtuous actions easier. His interpretation can be misunderstood and mistakes in practice can be made, so we will need to discuss these follies as well, in order to understand all the effects of friendship on achieving a happy life.

Within book 8 and 9 of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he concludes that an excellent friendship is the most choice-worthy good an individual can externally attain (Aristotle 149, 1170a, section 7). However, in chapter 3 of book 8, Aristotle asserts the finest friendships are enduring insofar the individuals are good, and the virtues remain similar. However, his proposal about the similarities of virtues doesn't seem entirely correct since people gradually change over time, but the relationship can continue to be good and the individuals remain close friends. Aristotle would assert that if the virtuous character of the friend were to change, the friendship could potentially dissolve; unless the agent can return their friend to their original state of similarity. This is because his assertion about an enduring friendship requires that the individuals are both good and similar in virtuous behaviour. Nevertheless, this essay aims to argue that friendships are enduring through the means of gaining/building a state of mutual confidence in our friend, rather individuals being similar in virtue.

Based on these virtues, the two philosophers differed in what they believed to the most important virtue. Aristotle believed that friendship or friendliness was the most important virtue. It allowed people to be kind to one another and even facilitated people to have other virtues such truthfulness and generosity. On the contrary, Confuciusbelieved that propriety, which is obedience to the set laws and regulations, was the greatest virtue. It allowed people to exist peacefully. He indicated that

In the book Aristotle and the Philosophy of Friendship, (based off the Nicomachean Ethics) the author, Pangle, informed the audience that Aristotle believe in three different types of friendships based off three different types of motives: Friendships of Utility, Friendships of Pleasure, and Perfect Friendship. He identifies these types of friendships as different types of sources of affection that are lovable as the good, the pleasant, and the useful. Before analyzing Aristotle three types of friendships we must first understand what he meant by friendship. During Aristotle’s rein friendship was commonly known as the love one person had for another. Philia, brotherly love, was essential

“No one would choose a friendless existence on condition of having all the other things in the world (Aristotle).” Humans are social beings, social beyond any other creature in the world. Human interaction is a must for survival. It is in our nature. Aristotle understood this, he even had his own analysis of friendship. In the Nicomachean Ethics written by Aristotle, books VIII and IX are based off of friendship. Today, the definition of a friend is, “A person with whom one has a bond of mutual affection, typically one exclusive of sexual or family relations (Oxford Dictionary).” To Aristotle, friendship is much more than this. In this research paper, I will evaluate whether or not Aristotle’s analysis of friendship is applicable to the modern world.

Aristotle highlighted the importance of friendship through various practices and concepts, such as utility and virtue. Virtuous practices were believed to enhance the friendship and encourage happiness among the participants (Kraut 64). Unfortunately, a friend whose behavior and practices are malevolent causes a rift in the practice of Aristotle’s principles. Therefore, to preserve the friendship and to protect one’s friend, one must do all that is possible to cease his or her friend’s actions.