Aristotle believed that reason is the telos, or function of being a human being. He feels that way because humans are a more superior species that can function at a much higher level than any other species on the earth. He then reaches the argument because of how humans mainly act upon reason to make their decisions. I however disagree! By looking at examples of how some humans do not use reason, but are still considered humans. Aristotle would more than likely argue that items don’t always achieve their telos all the time and are sometimes “broken”. He also might suggest that people use reasoning to come to some of these decisions. However, I will argue that the goals should be reachable for all people all the time. He would also point …show more content…
Aristotle ultimately describes that humans are superior creatures and can reason like no other creature. Therefore, he concluded that a great telos of humans is the ability to reason. He bases his definition of reason on the conclusion that humans are more superior to all other species. This superior species conclusion is based on three different principles of humans;they have the ability to determine what is right and what is wrong, the ability to think rationally, and finally acting upon what we feel is the best solution. He builds upon this idea of reason by discussing how an individual should try to find the “middle grounds” of every scenario by taking traits and looking at one extreme and comparing with the other and finding the trait that would be in the average of both of those two ideas (like the mathematical idea of adding all the integers up and dividing them by the number of variables). For example, he would look at traits like giving away everything and giving away absolutely nothing and come up with the trait that we should try to strive for, charitable. However, when it comes to this idea of reason being the telos of humans, I disagree to a point because I feel that this theory has some flaws in it. I feel this way because there are too many exceptions in his theory that should be considered but
To do this I must first explain several concepts of Aristotle which are: (1) how he concludes that the human function is reason, (2) what he means by happiness and how it is the human good, and (3) why he believes that the activity of the soul must be virtuous to become
In Book I of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle brings up the idea that in order to discover the human good we must first develop a certain understanding and identify the function of a human being. Aristotle’s function argument is brought up through his belief that the human function is rational activity, meaning that our good as human beings is rational activity performed fine because this is what leads to living well. The good Aristotle tries to get across can be seen in many different forms depending on how it is viewed, because of the idea that the main function of anything is to reach a final end, the final end is considered the good. “The end of medicine is health, that of shipbuilding, a ship, that of military science, victory…” (Nicomachean,
We see in chapter one of Aikin and Talisse’s book that they state that there is reasoning behind humans and their arguments. They have based their conception off of Aristotle’s book called Politics; more specifically they based it from two of his more popular views of mankind, “Humans by nature are political creatures” and “Humans by nature desire to know”. They go on to elaborate on arguing and why it is such a vital necessity in everyone’s life. As the book progresses we get more into the importance of reasoning. When it comes to Aristotle’s theory on humans and the amount of interaction and dependability with others it sounds amazing and to an extent it is true.
A quote from document 2 states “...human reason is the most godlike part of human nature…” This is still relevant in the world today because it teaches people to think before they act. Also, Aristotle stressed the
Form and matter are interrelated, form depends of matter, and matter depends of form. Although we can not get the perfection of the forms, matter can be used to get their meaning. As he said, reason is the only thing that will take us closer to reality if we just ask the accurate questions. These questions, also known as Aristotle’s Four Causes, are: “What is it?” “What is it made of?”
Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen of the jury. I am the defense attorney for Oedipus in this case. The evidence that the prosecutor presented today showed Oedipus’ actions of incest and patricide; however, he had no choice in committing these sins. At the time of these actions, he did not know the identities of his real father or mother. We demand his innocence in the verdict.
Socrates and Thrasymachus agree that justice is virtue and wisdom but, it is argued that this conclusion is a weak argument. The discussion between Socrates and Thrasymachus can be separated into understanding why Thrasymachus believes injustice is wiser, than what the nature of both a just person and an unjust person is, and then knowing what the nature of those who are knowledgeable is. By applying the division fallacy and the no-sequitur fallacy it will be proven that Socrates conclusion is weak. Socrates argument, and thus his conclusion, is weak by applying formal logical.
Humans are unlike any other creature on this planet, as we are able to think and reason. These two abilities have created the most powerful minds ever known such as, Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, and Plato. These abilities have also lead to some powerful arguments one of such being our beliefs. Some philosophers believe that all beliefs must be justified, while others believe that only some of our beliefs must be justified. W.K. Clifford argues that it is morally wrong to act or believe without sufficient evidence.
The tragic hero must have a flaw or error of judgment which can come in the from of justice or vengeance. As seen in Creon and Oedipus' story that the justice they serve is immortal and wicked. The hero must also experience a setback of fortune brought forth because of the hero's inaccuracy in discernment. The realization or recognition that the setback was brought by the hero's own actions. Excessive Pride is the most common of tragic hero's flaws which bring forward the remaining of the part the predicaments.
Therefore, if one wishes to be healthy, he can choose to eat healthy and practice sports, but his choice of being healthy just by its own will not predict the outcome of actually being healthy. Conclusively, “choice relates to the means and wish relates rather to the end”. Additionally, Aristotle also expatiates on anger and appetite. These characteristics, for Aristotle are related to pleasure and feelings which are themselves relate to all animals. However, choice is not for that choice is only related to rational beings.
Why does Aristotle believe that “man is by nature and animal intended to live in a polis”? Aristotle first asserts that a city or political community, is established in order to attain some good. He adds that the political association or community is the highest form of association since it incorporates all other forms of association and aims at the highest good. He continues to claim that the city belongs among things that only exist by nature and that man is by nature a political animal and in everyone there is an impulse, by nature, toward community(4). He explains that because man, by nature was given speech unlike other animals; his voice that allows him to indicate and express when he is experiencing pain or pleasure.
Aristotle: Aquinas let me ask you question.. what do you want more for people to have a side from having faith in god. Aquinas: Well.. I want them to have happiness, of course.
For example, Zeus was the king of the Greek gods. To appease Zeus was thus to maintain favor, fortune and prominence: To oppose him or otherwise displease him was, essentially, unthinkable…or illogical. Therefore, an appeasement of the gods was as necessary as the air to breath. However, Aristotle would present logical arguments which would demonstrate a need for those within Greece (and the ancient world) to rely more upon logic than myth, as logos was the more prominent ‘trait’ to abide by when all the layers were stripped away.
I will argue that even with the evidence provided, Aristotle’s theory on