In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle argues that the human good is the soul’s activity that expresses virtue. Aristotle concludes this from an invalid argument. On the one hand I do agree that the activity expressing virtue is a requirement for the human good. But on the other hand, I insist that the human good is a state and not an action. By modifying this argument, I believe we can reach a new conclusion that will help us better understand what Aristotle meant by these concepts. 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
Aristotle, on the other hand, had a much more positive outlook on the applicability of his political theory. In many ways, his ideal ideology would look much like Plato’s, although with a more guided and empirical approach. Aristotle, like Plato, argued that the state was not only necessary, but essential to the happiness of its people, because the state was the only means by which the city could achieve happiness. According to Aristotle, “the best good is apparently something complete” and likewise, that “happiness more than anything else seems complete without qualification” (Nicomachean Ethics, 205) and “everyone aims at living well and at happiness” (Politics, 315). Furthermore, he argued that “happiness is an activity of the soul expressing
Mellissa’s argument is that they should pull the plug on Mathew. Mellissa believes that Mathew’s body is what makes up Mathew and feels that since he can no longer function Mathew is gone for good. For example Mellissa states “Since his brain is gone, he is gone. I don't think we can help by keeping his body alive." Mellissa views Mathew’s dilemma in a scientific way.
Throughout the nation today, some of the most divisive disagreements that arise often center around the push for state rights as opposed to an expansion of an already big government. Under the current Trump administration, the debate over how much power each side should have is being seen today. On one hand, California, home to many undocumented immigrants, is pushing for sanctuary laws, which can be seen argued through natural law. While on the other hand, the federal government argues they have all the power to enforce current immigration statutes, which can be better discussed in a positive law point of view. With respect to the views of past philosophers, the thinkers who explored more of a positive law path have a stronger argument for
Does a “Good” Man Exist? The morbid tale of a family’s encounter with a The Misfit makes them question the meaning of good. Aristotle’s teaching on good states that good cannot be defined, which contradicts what the grandmother believes. She thinks that her way is the best.
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,
When it comes to Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, I believe that he has found a common thread in humanity in the fact that humans strive for the moderate in living virtuously. However, I would argue that the thread is varied enough to have no true worth in discerning the aspects of humanity. People have too different moralities and goals. Because Aristotle allows for these “local variations”, as Martha Nussbaum later terms in her defense of Aristotle, he is acknowledging that there cannot be an overarching analysis of humanity.
The important in Aristotle life is the mind and soul is the first intelechy of the body because it is main course ‘cause and principle’ of the body, the realization of the body. So can might put it like this , “The mind is the purposeful functioning of the nervous system. In this topic quiet different strand in the fabric of Aristotle skill thinking, and supplements what we can learn about him from his will. In addition, the good things that what we enjoy is Aristotle like to care wealth and health because have no value if our soul is not good.
Based on an evaluation of Aristotle’s arguments and the objection that stands against it, people are responsible for voluntary actions and involuntary actions whose circumstances or particulars they themselves have caused. In order to evaluate Aristotle’s ethical argument, it is first necessary to explain his definitions of character acquisition, volition, and responsibility. Aristotle defines character acquisition very succinctly:
“One who asks law to rule, therefore, is held to be asking god and intellect alone to rule, while one who asks man adds the beast” (114). In The Politics, Aristotle addresses the issue of how difficult it is to implement good laws. This predicament, however, did not suddenly arise yesterday; rather, humans have always grappled with enacting the best laws conducive to a successful human experience. At the same time though, there are limits, especially because humans are only finite creatures. Therefore, after outlining Aristotle’s critique of Plato’s Republic, I argue that Aristotle hopes for cities and laws to achieve peace and work for the good of its citizens.
The last theory is Aristotle’s virtue ethics which states that we should move from the concern towards good action and to focus on the concern with good character. This paper argues that Aristotle’s virtue ethics is better than the other ethical theories. The divine command theory says that what is morally right and what is morally wrong is determined by God and God alone. People who follow the divine command theory believe that God is the creator of all things, therefore, he must also be the creator of morally right and wrong acts.
The trickery, it laughs face spewing mockery, grinding your teeth you jolt the white sort into an inky black with your weapon, fiercely determined cinders rises up into the air, the eyes of fire at which had burned the smell of ashes. Since then, pen in hand, I face my next opponent the other side of the spectrum, forward more, I want to make them proud, there is no second best. Consisting of, ethics potent classifications within an individual, for this correlates particular affiliations in their motivations. Morals are these motivations, seeing that this is part of feasible implementation in internal development, for say an individual’s virtue of wisdom. By way of example, according to Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, "when one holds oneself in a stable equilibrium of the soul, in order to choose the action knowingly and for its own sake.
In his more specific discourse on the nature of happiness, Aristotle comes to the conclusion that happiness lies in the contemplative life because “contemplation is the highest form of activity” (Aristotle 268). Aristotle views the activities of the mind to be the most sophisticated element of human life, and thus he believes the greatest good must come from the greatest aspect of life. In this view of happiness, Aristotle assumes that “happiness is an activity in accordance with virtue,” and that in order to live the contemplative life, one must also live a morally virtuous life (Aristotle 270). This connection between morality and contemplation coincides with Aristotle’s view of the superiority of contemplation over all other human activities.
Aristotle explains that the mean is extremes of excess and deficiency. Aristotle first explains this by comparing it to health and food. It was explained in medical terms that we ruin our health if we eat too little or too much. For instance, it is ruined by excess and deficiency. The mean is divided into three categories; extreme of deficiency (being a coward), mean (bravery or courage), and extreme of excess (rashness, reckless).
Seems to aim at some good.” Aristotle is assuming here that within everything we do as humans, we are aiming at some sort of good. Whether it is a specific good for our own well-being or doing something good in the world, that is what we are striving for. And within this assumption of Aristotle, one would have to assume that there is an overarching good that one is striving for. To Aristotle, this ultimate good, is happiness or Eudaimonia.
At the end of everyone’s lives, the goal appears to be about attaining happiness. Describing how to obtain happiness has been an issue that was debated in the past but is still talked about now . In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle expands on his view of happiness and he focuses particularly on how reason helps recognize and pursue what will lead to happiness and the good life. I feel that Aristotle’s philosophies on happiness are important works within the field of philosophy and he considered one of the………of it . In this paper, I will explore Aristotle’s beliefs regarding happiness then compare and contrast them to those of Martin Seligman.