Analysis Of Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics

Aristotle has a firm belief that human being’s actions need to be aimed at and end with some sort of good. With this is mind, he further explains that happiness is the end result of our actions. Thomas Hill, although similar in view, advocates for the importance to not only preserve our environment but connects how the preservation of nature directly relates to human virtue. In this essay, I will argue that Thomas Hill’s beliefs on human virtue along side with the preservation of our environment goes hand in hand with Aristotle’s views of the development of human virtue. Both Aristotle and Thomas Hill believe that human virtue not only has the power to control our actions positively or negatively but can also influence whether human beings

According to the article “Created Equal”, Milton and Rose Friedman discusse three different ways that are considered to be equal. It includes equality before God, equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. They also believe that the “freedom preserves the opportunity for today’s disadvantaged to become tomorrow’s privileged in the process, enable almost everyone, from top to bottom, to enjoy a fuller and richer life.” Finally, Friedmans conclude that a society that puts equality before freedom will get neither, and those that put freedom before equality will get a high degree of both. From my point of view, I do agree with Friedmans that equality of outcome is in clear conflict with liberty which government gets more power and getting bigger. Also, I agree that authors bring up the idea “life is not fair” which usually depends on the choices we made. However, I find out there are several points that I do not agree with the author, and here’s why.

The main topic of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is eudaimonia, i.e. happiness in the “living well” or “flourishing” sense (terms I will be using interchangeably). In this paper, I will present Aristotle’s view on the role of external goods and fortune for the achievement of happiness. I will argue that he considers them a prerequisite for virtue. Their contribution to happiness is indirect, via the way they affect how we can engage in rational activity according to the relevant virtues. I will then object that this view threatens to make his overall account of happiness incoherent. Fortunately, there is a way to reconcile the apparent tensions, in book III.

Aristotle defined a virtue as a good habit formed by rationally shaping one’s desires in order to reach a mean between overreaction and under reaction (Prof. Skerker). Virtues are only acquired through the habituation of doing the right things voluntarily. Aristotle also believed that a person doing the right thing and reaching the mean of a virtue should be brought pleasure by their actions. In a class discussion we defined character as the sum of all of our virtues, combined with how we use those virtues to influence our decisions and actions. The virtues I found most applicable in this case study are: integrity, humility, and loyalty. Integrity is a very influential virtue in this case, as

In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, the concept of happiness is introduced as the ultimate good one can achieve in life as well as the ultimate goal of human existence. As Aristotle goes on to further define happiness, one can see that his concept is much different from the 21st-century view. Aristotelian happiness can be achieved through choosing to live the contemplative life, which would naturally encompass moralistic virtue. This differs significantly from the modern view of happiness, which is heavily reliant on material goods. To a person in the 21st-century, happiness is simply an emotional byproduct one experiences as a result of acquiring material goods. Understanding Aristotelian happiness is important for the 21st century because

In the Politics, Aristotle describes three basic sorts of people, known as the beast, the citizen, and the god. Gods and beasts are both barbaric to Aristotle, because their ends are needs, not virtue. This is illustrated on page 109 when he says, “He who is without a polis, by reason of his own nature and not of some accident, is either a poor sort of being, or a being higher than man” (Aristotle, 1996, pg. 109.) This means that man is either a beast or a god if he chooses to be apart from the polis. Aristotle also says, “Not being self-sufficient when they are isolated, all individuals are so many parts all equally depending on the whole. The man who is isolated—who is unable to share in the benefits of political association,

In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he outlines the different scenarios in which one is responsible for her actions.  There is, however, a possible objection which raises the possibility that nobody is responsible for their actions.  Are we responsible for some of our actions after all?  If so, under what circumstances?  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.

The Nicomachean Ethics begin with a simple concept-- everyone wants happiness. In Book 1 of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle explores what happiness is and how to achieve ultimate happiness and good life. In the passage, 1097b22-1098a18, also known as the “function argument”, he further explores the happiness as the chief good concept by examining human function and the good that comes along. In this passage, Aristotle’s thesis is that the good of humans resides in human function of activity with reason (rational activity). From this thesis, we can imply that the good performance of function can lead to ultimate happiness. To reach this conclusion, I will be splitting this passage into 3 parts. The first section is Aristotle’s introduction to

Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Book ll, is about his idea of how people should live a virtuous life. Throughout this book, he explains that humans learn virtue from instructions and we learn virtue from practice too. Virtue is something that is very important because it is a moral habit that results in keeping our moral values. Aristotle believed that nobody is born with virtue, everyone has to work at it daily. After reading Nicomachean ethics, Book ll, my main conclusion of it is that us as humans are better off being virtuous than simply doing what we feel like doing at any moment in time.

Virtues, according to Aristotle are formed by habits. As a result, virtues are the result of habits. Furthermore, Aristotle makes the argument that virtue is the disposition to act in a right manner. Furthermore, the habits to be acquired need to be repeated and corrected to live an ethical life.

In another aspect, for the conclusion based on empiricism above—we cannot know what right is and what wrong is, Aristotle provides his own idea about what right is. In his book The Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle (1947) claims that we act rightly if we perform in accordance with the “proper excellence”

“Every skill and every inquiry, and similarly every action and rational choice, is thought to aim at some good; and so the good has been aptly described as that which everything aims. But it is clear that there is some difference between ends: some ends are activities, while others are products which are additional to the activities. In cases where there are ends additional to the actions, the products are by their nature better than activities.” (Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics, as translated by Crisp, 2000, p. #3)

According to Aristotle, an individual can achieve happiness only by realizing all the works and activities in accordance with reason throughout his lifetime. He claimed that happiness consists in cultivating and exercising virtue and it is the ultimate purpose of human existence, as stated in his work Nicomachean Ethics “He is happy who lives in accordance with complete virtue and is sufficiently equipped with external goods, not for some chance period but throughout a complete life”. However, such Aristotelian concept of happiness inevitably contradicts the understanding of history as development which maintains that fulfilling the work of human exceeds the limits of an individual and thus can only be achieved in the course of history. Three

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.

Aristotle advanced the philosophy of ethics, where he demonstrated that it is a means of achieving an end to happiness. However, happiness means many things to different people. To Aristotle, the most adequate way to pursue happiness is through the virtue of excellence. In his writings, Aristotle connected his therory of virtue to economics, and leadership as well. It is a matter of connecting ones personal ethics to that of ones business ethics., simply because Aristotle made no disticntion between ethics and politics. Aristotle illustrated the purpose of ethics in leadership in that he believed that virtue is ingrained in character (Ciulla, 2003).