By experiencing the same emotion of audience is sort of ‘cleansing of the soul’ can through communication of emotion in the work of art. Just the soul is superior to the body, so is the rational part of the soul superior to the irrational part. Philosophy is good in itself because it good for what they can bring us, but others are good in themselves. The fact that it is worthwhile without bringing us anything extra means that it is one of the very highest good in soul not that it is useless.
According to Fredrickson et al. (2013), hedonism can be also defined as “representing an individual’s pleasurable experiences”. Aristotle, in contrast, thought the idea that wellbeing depended on a life of pleasure with no pain was vulgar Aristotle’s view seems fair; after all, some of life’s greatest things come only with a bit of sweat, tears and elbow grease. Then there is the eudaimonic perspective. In the same paper by Fredrickson et al.
In The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, we can see the embodiment of such an amazing trait come full circle in Brutus. Even if great, nobility makes us blind. In the play, Brutus is presented as an admirable and noble character. Brutus establishes his nobility when he claims, “For let the gods so speed me as I love /
Since it is impossible to know everything, maybe it is better to be a fool satisfied so that its possible to experience the “good
Although this argument suggests the absence of equality produces a better friendship and life, I will defend Aristotle’s view by presenting textual evidence from of Nicomachean Ethics proving otherwise. One of the main themes of Book VII in Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s observations related to friendship, since he deemed life meaningless without it. While doing so, he identified and explained three kinds of friendship; friendships of pleasure, friendships of use, and true friendship. Aristotle states the former two are circumstantial and fleeting, particularly with friendships of pleasure.
To live a meaningful life is a very individualistic aspiration, one may say it is to do good in the world while someone else may say that to live a life of meaning and purpose is through personal success. Much like any other person, philosophers and biblical figures would agree that a life of meaning and purpose is dependent to personal experiences. To live the experience of a meaningful life often depends on the circumstances and experiences that people endure. A life of meaning and purpose for Dante is about avoiding sin and doing good. For Perpetua and Felicitas, a life of purpose is achieved through devotion to God, and Plato would say to live a meaningful life is to live a life of reason.
Such as in Plato’s three-part soul where it discusses three parts of a person which relate to particular virtues. The mind is the rationality, which makes the rational decisions, the heart being the spirit, which gives reason to be courageous, while “below the midriff” being the appetite, which gives people pleasure. Altruism and egoism can be compared to the three-part soul by combining reason with spirit brings out a moral, altruistic soul while combining spirit and appetite brings out an immoral, egoistic soul (Palmer 263-264). Relating this back to the point of altruism is a natural, instinctive human behavior, then this concept would support altruism over egoism, because the moral, altruistic souls, the rational lead person are those who are rulers in society, people who take others further for the betterment of everyone. While another philosophical concept, called utilitarianism, addresses an idea relatively close to the definition of altruism.
In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle synthesizes an enthralling dissertation that, “the human good proves to be activity of soul in accord with excellence” (1098a 16-17) which requires, “a rational principle” (1098a 7-8). Even though some critics may contend that the human good lies within something other than excellently acting in accordance with reason, the case set forth in Nicomachean Ethics dismisses such detractors as inordinately obstinate in their parochial ideology. To support his conclusion, Aristotle adroitly employs several cogent premises. This paper will explain how Aristotle reaches his conclusion and examine potential flaws in his argument First, I will state each proposition in Aristotle’s argument.
Aristotle filled Nicomachean Ethics cover to cover with claims pertaining to happiness, virtue, friendship, and similar concepts. One claim states that happiness is choice worthy in its own right and self-sufficient, as “it is the end of the things achievable in action” (I.7, 1097b). Another claims finds that happiness requires external goods (I.8, 1099b). The purpose of this paper is to create a complete comprehension of these claims before responding to them.
In other words, the good life means to me when life looks like a blessing than a burden. This essay aims to provide more than one answers about what it means to live a good life. Human beings, since their apparition is often misled, what it is really mean a good life. We have been seen on the television or magazines that having a good life means being rich or famous when many of them, in reality, are miserable by a problem that wouldn’t affect ordinary people. Personally, I believe that there are many factors that should be considered when it comes to a good life.
In both modern society and the world set forth in the beginning Ayn Rand 's The Fountainhead, altruism and selflessness are praised as accepted ideals while independence and selfishness are abhorred. This twisted idea of morality is challenged by the protagonist of The Fountainhead, Howard Roark. Though selfishness can be broadly defined and can be harmful at times, Howard Roark exhibits a specific type of selfishness that does not seek to harm others, but to simply preserve the person 's ego and personal pursuit of success. The best way to define the nature and effectiveness of Howard Roark 's selfishness is through examining his interactions with other major characters and comparing their egos, integrity, and approaches to achievement. Peter Keating is an interesting character in that he tries to be selfish, but he has no actual sense of self.
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
In Plato’s Republic, Book II, through one of Socrates’ listeners, Glaucon, we discover through reason the meaning of being just. Being just is a temporary act that one puts on such as a social mask, no one can purely be just but if one thinks that they are then that implies that they are exceedingly unjust. In today’s government, during this past election, we elected a government official knowing that they are unjust because it was simply a lesser of two evils. This is comparable to Glaucon’s definition that justice is a compromise between what is injustice with oneself and to others. With the idea of injustices present in different branches of todays government, you are able to see the corruption that falls within.
Within Plato’s Republic the ideal of Justice is greatly Debated, Socrates main conversationalist being Thrasymachus. In simplest terms Thrasymachus view on “justice” is that it is a “tool” for the most powerful. The powerful use “justice” in a way that allows them to keep power or gain power. Within Thrasymachus’ first argument he uses “justice” in the same regard as “laws”. Thrasymachus argues that a ruling group in all circumstances create laws that work with how they are operating as “a democracy sets down democratic laws; a tyranny, tyrannic laws” (Plato 338e).
Few things surpass the difficulties that accompany the overwhelming unknowns, unplanned fighting, and risk of injury on the battle field. To exasperate this pain, many media outlets falsely report on wars and publish stories that glamorize the events instead of telling the truth. As a response to the inaccurate “hype” regarding the war in Iraq, former soldier Jessica Lynch presents a combination of her own stories, emotionally-charged moments in the war, and honest facts to correctly tell her story in her speech “The Truth is Always More Heroic than the Hype;” the mix of these appeals increase the power of her speech. In order deliver a captivating and effective speech, it is necessary to maintain a foundation of trust with an audience.