If you choose the right one, the person is happy, but not all choices are right, so the will can not always act right. Moreover, the purpose is not entirely intrinsic to behavior because it is partly a principle and partly a goal of behavior. Thus, happiness as the ultimate end of human moral life not only serves as the destination, but also as the principle, the source of the human
For Hegel, Spirit is essentially the driving force for humans to seek greater awareness. Spirit is also what drives humans to be free and able to rationalize. He uses the term ‘world spirit’ as the sum of all human utterances as only man has a spirit. By this, he refers to the human life, thought, and culture. He held that reality must be rational, so that its ultimate structure is revealed in the structure of our thought.
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 are likely to preserve our environment.
In the book, Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant argues that the general concept of morality is divided into two rules of reason. The first rule of reason for morality is the hypothetical imperative. These imperatives include characteristics such as customs, fashion, happiness, prudence, taste, art, i.e. As Kant reasons in his work, “The hypothetical imperative that represents practical necessity of the action as a means to furthering happiness is assertotic. One may expound it as necessary not merely to an uncertain, merely possible aim, but to an aim, that one can presuppose safely and a priori with every human being, because it belongs to his essence.
Globalization must be understood as an effort cretio continua from human beings on God's mandate in the maintenance of the universe. So the this paradigm will stem the opinions of some people who tried to blame globalization. Identity of human as creations must be open with all forms of renewal, even should be doers of renewal. Should blend with any form of change, but he should not be immerse them selves into it. In this case people also must understand that he is a creature that has the founding and identity.
He goes on to explain the ways in which people are connected to each other regardless of their own abilities. It is this connectedness that he is using to make his case for what makes up the humanness in human beings. In his exploration of our own humanness, Jean Vanier argues against the popular belief that intellect and reason are the most central elements that make us human. Instead, he presents our ability to form relationships with one another as a more open minded replacement. In Vanier’s search for what may define being human, he looks to reality to show him the answer.
This ethics is phenomenological and descriptive. Levinas describes how humanity encounters the Other. He describes the sense of responsibility it gives us (which is asymmetrical, because we are always responsible in the Face of the Other). Aristotle, on the other hand, talks about virtue as of an axiom or disposition that man has to
Ethical virtues arise at the interferences of these two parts. Where and when the rational part of the soul controls the irrational part is an area of mortality. It is important to address that these ethical virtues reflect the actual human nature of man-- God does not affect the human nature and animals do not have a mind according to Aristotle. When the rational part of the soul controls desires the result is moral virtue. This is only possible or confined to cases where a choice is possible.
At the same time, love, both imagined and experienced, is based on reasons that are valuable in the entire history of thought. Aristotle 's model of love is driven by the idea of perfecting oneself, while philosophical realism sees bases of love in selfish desires and biological drives. In the experience model, reasons for love are the integration of the self, and the recognition of something other than me. Thus, this text offered
If violence will impeded the man in fulfilling his purpose, then violence is contrary to natural law. Since peace assists this fulfillment, man should honour promises, since to dishonour a promise can lead to disharmony or even violence. This should be the constant value that is embodied within the principle of natural law. It is a characteristic of natural law that the truths it embodies are not made known to man by some Great Architect beyond the skies. We do not find the heavens open and a hand comes through clouds, passing down to mankind a tablet of stone on which the truths of natural law are inscribed: the truth of natural law are not revealed truths.