Why We Are Good By Nature And That By Being Good And Having Virtue We Can Achieve Happiness

Naturally, there is good and evil in every person. However, it is often difficult to see the

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.

It is a very arguable subject on whether or not people are born with good intentions, and therefore taught by others the ‘evil’ side of their personality. Whether it is the absence of ethical conduct in human nature, or just the way one perceives a situation, evil seems to be prominent in our everyday lives. Humans seem to have a moral code that follows them with every decision they make, yet despite the laws of morality and society, people of this world still seem to behave inhumanely because of the act of self-preservation, human interest, and who exactly the authority figure is at the time.

Many people have their own views on humanity. They can either be that humans are essentially good but can become corrupt or that people are just essentially evil. They have their own opinions, some people can tell their perspective on humans in other fashions. If people are essentially good, they how do they become corrupt? Or if are truly evil, then why do some people seem like they are kind people and they can never do such things? To take both of these into account, a person may saw that people are good but deep down have evil within them. People may ask how does the evil within a person come out, the answer to that is that it is thanks to their environment. The environment around a person can undoubtedly draw out the evil within them

For most of us, achieving some state of Happiness is a core objective. Indeed, in a great many of the philosophical musings on the very purpose of our lives here on Earth will tend to focus on the importance of achieving happiness, of sharing happiness and of bringing happiness to others. It is therefore reasonable to propose the knee-jerk response that happiness is the end in and of itself. However, as Kant asserts, this is an incomplete understanding of our supposed purpose here. As the 18th Century German philosopher asserts, happiness lived without the principle of good will, can have the capacity to be a rather unsavory force. According to Kant, in fact, this concept of good will is a core determinant as to whether the characteristics by which we can be defined may be considered virtues or vices. Kant argues that this truth "holds with gifts of fortune; power, riches, honor, even health, and that complete well-being and contentment with one's condition which is called happiness make for pride and often hereby even arrogance, unless there is a good will to correct their influence on the mind and herewith also to rectify the whole principle of action and make it universally comfortable to its end." (Kant, p. 7) This principle underlies the initial rejection of the assumption that Happiness, however formulated, is the

In the end it is you how chooses if you do the evil thing or a good thing., People are generally born good, but there are many factors that can leave a person to act watchful. The way someone is raised has an impact as well as society and human

There has always been a sense in people's hearts for what is right and what is wrong. The sense that tells you to turn that lost wallet or purse into the lost and found. The sense that makes you feel good when you open the door for a stranger, and the sense that helps you make good choices when faced with tough decisions. While this is how most of our minds work, there have always been bad people in this world. They think completely different. Some think its okay to keep a man's watch he forgets in the train station bathroom, while trying to hurry to catch his next ride. Others think its okay to rob a bank. These people had their goodness corrupted by situations they were put in throughout life, turning them into bad people. Everyone is built

I believe that human beings are basically good. When they are first born and grow up as babies and toddlers, humans are innocent. However, with the effects of outside experiences and social expectations, human beings can be prone to evil. Humans want to be recognized within society and this can be seen in the movie, “The Talented Mr. Ripley”. Due to the social environment that Tom Ripley lives in, he feels the need to fit in and be wealthy like the people around him. This causes him to seek for ways, whether the action is moral or immoral, to attain a higher social status.

No one is born good or evil; it is one's environment and the people they encounter in life which makes them good or evil. A lot of time it is not the individual's fault of the way they are, they might have seen so many bad doings that, they are use to it and might think that it is right. One is not born with a vision of knowing what is wrong and what is right in life, but learns when something happens to

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.

There are certain things that are in the control of the humans, at the same time there are several things, which are not under the human’s control. Thus, to persist a happy life, the humans are required to put an end their desire such that the satisfaction of

“Happiness is in the enjoyment of man’s chief good. Two conditions of the chief good: 1st, Nothing is better than it; 2nd, it cannot be lost against the will” (Augustine 264-267). As human

 Evil doesn 't necessarily have to be an action by a human; it can also be a result of a natural disaster such as: hurricanes, earthquakes, illness, etc. A hurricane can take away everything from thousands of humans. This causes the people to have no home, clothes, or food. This is also a form of evil, due to the suffering it causes. This is called natural evil. People can bring about moral evil upon themselves, although, they rarely can bring natural evil upon themselves. There is a distinct difference between the two, and one evil does not cause the other. The reason I point the

Being good or doing good things leads to many things, but in order to give a clearer definition, one must understand what it is that these good actions created. Once one understands this, then the individual can clearly see the logic behind what some would consider an evil action. Over time, humankind has strived to become what they believed to be holy pure or good. This attempt at being what is virtuous has given birth to a set code of conduct or thoughts that are now commonly seen as the right thing. This code of conduct was based upon morals, which are any given individuals thoughts and believes on what is acceptable as good and evil. Due to the fact that mankind also strives to be accepted by there peers, a common set of morals was established and agreed upon by any specific generation of people to be the good thing. Understanding and knowing these the morals of these given times in history will be necessary to understanding how to define evil.

Morality has been a term of debate for several years by intellectuals who have not come to the final conclusion of its definition. According to Damon (5), morality is an existing, multifaceted construct that may not be pinned down by any single definitional criteria which is flexible. The moral character has long been associated with happiness which is that state of having achieved one's desires although there are some disconnections. Several theories have been forwarded in connection to morality and happiness as far as the society is concerned. In this argumentative paper we shall give detailed analysis of morality and happiness and whether or not moral character is a requirement to happiness.