Philosophical Ethics: Aristotle's Virtue Ethics

1337 Words6 Pages
The first topic in philosophical ethics I would like to discuss is Aristotle’s virtue ethics. As an objectionist, Aristotle tried to determine what a good person is. To Aristotle, happiness is what made you a good person, and that is what the chief goal in life is. He believed that happiness was achieved when a species determines its’ own telos, or purpose. Along with that, Aristotle determined three facts of humanity. The three facts are that humans are social, they are embodied, and they are rational. What he means when he says humans are embodied is that they have bodies, and when he says they are rational, he means that humans have reason. Aristotle believed that humanity’s ability to be rational is what sets us apart from all other species.…show more content…
Immanuel Kant, the creator of Kantianism, was an absolutist, meaning that he believed rules were not to be broken, no matter what. Also, the Kantian theory differs from utilitarianism and Aristotle’s virtue ethics because it does not believe happiness is the chief good. In Kantianism, the chief good is good will, which can be defined as a human will that a person commits out of respect for moral law. An action has moral worth when it is done out of good will. Kant believed that the actions that are done out of good will are not only moral, but are also our duty (Kant,…show more content…
This class was important because it taught us to be impartial and smart about the way we judged the actions of ourselves and others. Through learning different ethical theories, we learned that people have may different ways of formulating their opinions. In learning that, I now know that I should be more understanding to peoples’ different points of view, even if I disagree with them. There were plenty of arguments that occurred in this class during our discussions, and they were very different from the ones we see in the everyday world. In this class, every different argument that was brought up was given a reaction that was respectful and understanding, where is in the everyday world, arguments are met with fierce opposition and
Open Document