People without moral always had a hard time to make others trust them. Sometimes, their lack of morality makes them suffer during their entire life. Moreover, people without moral do not care about others. They are more likely to be selfish and participate any type of corruption. They do not have time to enjoy their life because of they always on self-defend for things they do wrong.
This is particularly so since it seems that, according to Aristotle’s philosophy, the good life is reserved for a select few who were fortunate enough to grow up in an environment conducive to their success. This disillusionment probably arises through the differing concepts of ‘good’ between Aristotle’s time and ours. We usually use the term ‘good’ in order to express a moral judgement; for example, ‘respecting your colleagues is good.’ But understood in a more comparative sense Aristotle’s use of the word ‘good’ merely outlines usually accepted facts. Most would agree that it is better to have friends than to be lonely, or to be financially secured than to be
In the article “Nicomachean Ethics” Aristotle talks about how virtue is needed for a person to have happiness in their life. A virtuous person is a person that is living with high morally standards and that is living by the great of goodness. Aristotle talks about two different types of virtue. One being Virtue of thoughts and the other being virtue of characters. Virtue of thought is believed to be a good characteristic.
Saying this, Loeb states that what motivates people to be kind is the desire to respect themselves, which all ties back to living a rich life. So, is it possible to be kind to others and still not be qualified as a good citizen, or does a person simply have to be active in social standings? What exactly is a good citizen? When it comes to the topic of what it means to be a good person or a good citizen, most of us will agree that it means to be kind, thoughtful, or helpful to others. Where this argument usually ends, however, is with the question of the person, if they are truly being kind or just having a face.
The doctrines of happiness: There are different perspectives on happiness, two of which are the hedonic and the eudaimonic views. Both views have roots in philosophy, such as Aristotle and Aristippus. Despite their ancient origins, these views on human well-being are relevant even today. The hedonic view encompasses the idea those people are happiest when their life is filled with positive experiences and emotions, without negative ones. According to Fredrickson et al.
A fool can be satisfied but he will not see all the aspects that Socrates will see. Thus making him ignorant to the reasons for Socrates dissatisfaction. Although Socrates claims to be ignorant himself, he is one of most respected and studied philosophers in history. This shows that he was clearly onto something with his ideals. Socrates might say that the fool’s satisfaction is not the kind that he would want, he would want a much more fulfilling satisfaction than one who seeks common wants such as wealth, fame etc… Would Socrates be satisfied if he knew the answer to every question he or someone else asked?
One of the thing that makes Brutus fits the definition of a tragic hero more than Caesar is that he has a noble personality. Brutus is always afraids that Caesar will become a tyrant, and at that time, everyone will become slaves, who live in misery. So that he kills Caesar for the good of Rome, not to deceive Caesar, and everything he does is for the benefit of someone else, not for personal gain. “Not because I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more”(3.2.23-24). About Caesar, he always acts like he is nice, but he is not.
According to Aristotle, everything we do in life, we do for the sake of some good, or at least something we perceive to be good. We call an act good if it satisfies a certain need. The satisfaction of this need is then considered good if it is a means for satisfying some further need, and this in turn is good if it will satisfy still another need. Sooner or later this process reaches a point where it is no longer a means for some further end but is an end in itself. This final end is what Aristotle means by the chief good.
It is critical to recognize Mill’s argument that a degree of contentment can exist in periods of less happiness. However, Aristotle’s view of perceiving wellbeing or goodness as ultimate is more pronounced. Worth emphasizing, Aristotle deeply explores his arguments basing them on functions of a rational man and virtues out of habits. Today, a virtuous citizen is one whose actions are inward, in response to conscience and moral obligations as a member of society. Such a person, not waivered with intensities of pleasures, honor, and wealth but seeks to have a satisfactory level of happiness with friends, co-workers, and family among other
Introduction People don’t understand that they can control their own destiny and life well-being just by positive thinking. This positive psychology subject is important because it can improve one 's life in almost every field, physical and psychological. The definition of Positive psychology: "the branch of psychology that uses scientific understanding and effective intervention to aid in the achievement of a satisfactory life, rather than merely treating mental illness.” (Wikipedia). There 's various research about positive psychology, the few we will mention focus on positive thinking and positive emotions, what causes it and what effects it create. First, positive emotion improves the broaden people 's thought-action repertoires, undo