Difference Between Aristotle And Machiachean Ethics

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.

The philosopher Ayn Rand believed that an individual’s life is of the utmost importance, as is her well-being. She knew that altruistic ethics require individuals to sacrifice their own wellbeing and lives for the sake of others. With ethical egoism, and will value their own wellbeing above all others. So, she was for ethical egoism. Ayn Rand also had an argument against ethical egoism believing it is a mistake to treat the interest of some individuals as being less important than the interest of others.

Virtue is a quality, an action that enables each individual to do things well and correctly. It is considered the most appropriate action of each human being’s nature. It is about being the right kind of person and knowing what to do and how to act. Aristotle defines virtue as an excellence of human beings. However, there are some special virtues that are essential and play a very important part in society, specifically, political virtues.

Philosophical thinking uses three acts of the mind: understanding, judgement, and reason. In order to have a sound argument all of the concepts must be applied. Socrates didn’t want to please the people by saying or doing what they wanted him to say or do. Socrates thought it was not important to seek wealth or fame; he was concerned with truth and virtue. He wanted to create an impact on humanity by relying on the truth and shining a light in people’s lives, even if they put him on trial.

When we are young education and cultivation by our parents are pivotal in setting up human’s ability in making virtuous acts habitual. Aristotle feels like human’s beings should commit numerous virtuous actions for to take a step in becoming virtuous. He thinks that we should do this as much as possible. He also stated that moral virtues have to be attended by desire. Aristotle believes that when humans commit virtuous actions, they cannot be pained for those virtuous actions.

He believed that the real world exist around us here down on Earth. He also felt that we cannot eliminate human selfishness, that’s our nature. We need to acknowledge it, as it is part of who we are. It persuades us to do better in life, also to advance and progress in life. He wanted people to work in a well-balanced environment to make world an exceptional place to live.

Duty as in that we are morally obligated to act in accordance with a certain set of principles and rules regardless of outcome. This theory asserts that an action is considered 'morally good ' because of some characteristic of the action itself, not because the result of the action is good. Expressions such as "virtue is its own reward" and Duty for duty 's sake" are used to attest to the believe that in deontological ethics, some acts are morally obligatory regardless of their consequences for human welfare. Since utilitarian 's believe that all actions must seek to produce the greatest good for the greatest number of people, this would still apply even if that act harms an innocent person. A simple example would be that if a surgeon could save three lives by harvesting the organs of one healthy person, then this is entirely acceptable as it 's helping the greater number.

How does virtue ethics differ from Kantian and utilitarian ethics? Analysis of virtue ethics reveals three types of virtue, intellectual, moral, and theological. He also believes that God confused virtue and Scone modernized virtue ethics and wanted an ethical system based on people. Desiring an ethical system, she that took into account community flourishing; right and wrong are subjective ethics. In Kantian and utilitarianism philosophies have lost sight of morality, and people’s feelings on actions based on a motive.

He analyzes the moral obligations that exist and states that if someone performs a moral duty but also acts on one of the four natural inclinations then the meaning behind their actions are weaker and therefore less important. An action performed for moral duty without any tendency towards natural inclination hold the truest form of moral duty that we should all strive to perform for others in order to become a better society that is more understanding and respectful of the people around us. With Immanuel Kant’s ideas on moral duty and inclination we can continue to further analyze our actions and the actions of others that we see to gain the best perspective possible. Teaching moral duties without reason may be simple but I believe it to be detrimental in the long run as these types of actions are the glue that holds us all together with our social interactions, pursuit of knowledge and desire to

Idealism helps to examine and understand different features of education in a more specific way and also influences the theory and practice of education. Socrates, a European philosopher changed the nature of philosophy from basic metaphysical to mainly humanistic. He always thought that teaching of just pure religion does not helps in improving the society, values based on knowledge is essential. In his opinion beauty, truthfulness and integrity dominates the human nature.