Aristotle Vs Kant

987 Words4 Pages
Debate of the Morally Ideal Person Many people have different views on what is the correct moral ideal, the spectrum varies from person to person. Two very important people, in understanding moral value were Aristotle and Immanuel Kant. Kant has a person of moral worth whereas Aristotle believes the moral ideal is someone of Aristotelian virtue. I believe Aristotle’s ideal person of virtue is the correct morally ideal person, in comparison to Kant. I will be elaborating more on the person of Moral Worth and Virtue throughout this essay, while comparing and contrasting the two elements. Aristotle believes a morally ideal person is someone of virtue. Aristotle believes that, “All actions and decisions aim at some good,” [I.1] in which all ends…show more content…
Kant’s principal of morality is a standard of rationality he called the “Categorical Imperative.” He believes that there is one, ‘super rule’ that helps you decide if the maxims you are following are morally sound or not. Kant believes one’s duty means acting in accordance with certain moral laws/imperatives, “so act that you use humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means.” [Section 2. pg 14]. Therefore, Kant is saying that moral worth appears to require not only that one’s actions be motivated by duty, but also that no other motives are a driving factor in getting to that end. He further elaborates on this by stating that reason does not simply find the means to end, it decides on proper ends. This all leads to the conclusion that someone of moral worth in the eyes of Kant is only morally ideal if their actions are done from…show more content…
To point out the main differences one must look at the importance of virtue to each of these philosophers. Aristotle would say that he is interested in the concept of virtue because he wants to articulate what type of character is best for a person to have, and therefore to live a life of happiness/Eudaimonia. Kant tends to be a little more pessimistic than Aristotle as Aristotle proclaims, “All actions and decisions aim at some good,” [I.1] whereas Kant would argue that the possibility of humans living a life without aberrant inclinations is slim to none. The similarity one could point out would be that each the philosophers has a similar ranking system of a morally ideal person. Each agrees that the “continent” person is one to strive for, this means an example of someone who can restrain them self from doing the wrong and irrational things. Through the eyes of Kant, and Aristotle, a continent person is the next best to the, “morally ideal” one can achieve. On top of that each philosopher, agrees that one’s reasoning must be morally right in order to be a rational
Open Document