Societal familial roles in existence now are imposed from birth and, because of this, make it hard to imagine family bonds formed in any other way. In today’s society, there’s little to no difference in how children ‘turn out’ based on if they were raised by an adoptive or biological family. This proves that family is not necessarily a genetic matter; building from this, it is possible that Plato was ahead of his times with his ideas of family. Nonetheless, this does not account for the abolition of the family as a whole or the extensive repercussions that stem from it. An important issue that must be examined in accordance with the abolition of family is the space for friendship.
In this essay, I will be discussing Aristotle’s conception of the “good life” which he outlined in the Nicomachean Ethics. As we will see, the “good life” for man according to Aristotle is one where we perform the particular activity which is distinctly ours and guides us towards eudaimonia – sometimes translated as ‘happiness’ or ‘well-being’. He shows us how the other conflicting depictions of the ‘good life’ are misguided, and how we should aim for a life of reason. First, however, I will discuss briefly what Aristotle meant by the term ‘good’ and then move on to how he arrived at the conclusion on human happiness. Aristotle believes that the ‘good life’ for a particular organism depends on what that organism is and the conditions it requires
Polemarchus responds by saying, “that the men one believe to be good, one loves, while those he considers bad one hates.” This is the problem with Polemarchus’ view of justice. He could easily be wrong about who is “good” and who is “bad” and you will end up treating someone who has done nothing wrong unjustly. Dividing a country into classes where each person must be loyal to ones own class would never lead to true justice because the different classes would only be loyal to their particular class. The ruling class would benefit more from this because they are in fact the higher
Comparative analysis of Aristotelian Equality In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle asserts one cannot live a virtuous and fulfilling life without the presence of a friend, despite the presence of the essential goods. In addition to his point, he states the best friendships are built upon a true equality which in turn builds on the mutual contributions and goodness of the character of the individuals within a friendship. Without equality, Aristotle argues, friendships tend to fall apart either due to eventual conflicts of interest or the friendship outliving it usefulness. However, some might argue the best friendships do not need any equality among individuals and can still produce the benefits of a Aristotle definition of the best friendship. 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.
This paper explores the similarities and differences in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics and John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism to coin a position in whether or not happiness is the ultimate end that human society aspires to acquire. In a critique of both the works, the paper adopts the Aristotelian thought citing that actions of human aims to fulfill goodness, which arguably is the happiness, one that arises from virtues practiced out of habit. Both the philosophers weigh in heavily on the role of happiness in the day to day lifestyles of humans. Adopting a sharp critic to the conventional principles of utility, Mill recognizes that happiness, as opposed to pleasure has a wider space in human attainments. He goes in deeper to explore the levels of pleasure
The concept of the Noble Lie is presented by Plato in the Republic. In Republic, Plato is engaged in creating an ideal political community, through the noble lie. The Noble Lie, ironically, despite being a lie, is still recognized as ‘noble’ by Plato since it aims to promote social welfare and harmony amongst the citizens. Plato’s idea of the noble lie led to the division of citizens into three distinct categories, namely, the rulers, the auxiliaries and the workmen . This paper will argue that Socrates principle of the Noble Lie must be considered justifiable under circumstances in which it intends to achieve moral ends.
Aristotle and plato also share some similarities, when aristotle mentions how we should be happy and not aim to what will get us happy. Plato also mentions our idea is ours and won 't amount to any physical item or goal. What they share there is when it comes to happiness and ideas we should already be happy and how our ideas wont be perfect as long as we can better ourselves thats what should matter and make us
Aristotle’s moral philosophy called virtue ethics and based on his theory of the golden mean. He wrote about this in his book called Nicomachean Ethics, in which he explains the origin, nature and development of virtues, which are necessary to obtains life’s ultimate goal of happiness. He tries to show that ethical virtues are no different from skilled laborers; these workers know how to avoid excess and deficiencies to make the right product. This is how he describes virtue as the mean between the extremes of excess and deficiency. The mean is what will directly provide each individual with happiness.
“Melians (90): It is useful at any rate the way we see it, not to destroy a principle that works for the common good; that one falling in danger should be treated with fairness and justice, and thus benefit from this, if he can persuade his judges, even short of the exact limits.” At this point the Athenians were quite confident in their power, and didn’t need power. Since they were stronger than the Melians, it means that it was better for the Melians to think of their survival and not justice at that point. According to the Athenians, justice would only be considered when both sides are neutral. However, the Melians were not ready to give up on justice as they believed that it was a principle that works for the common
Now he is trying to decipher what goodness is, at some point good may be taken as the glue that hold everything together, but also good may determine the functionality of any determinate object. The ability to become happy depends on how good you do your job, whether your performance is above average and produces profit. It it to be said that if good is the glue that holds everything together, then this must be acting at a cosmic level. Regardless of what he's aid about setting aside the visible heaven, he now is interested in creating a model in order to explain it. With this Plato introduces what is the Anima Mundi or world soul.
This brings Socrates to his assumption that “nothing” is good because no harm can be done to you when you are nothing. He makes the assumption that you cannot be harmed outside of a physical sense, which we do not know to be true. So, if death is the complete end of existence like he claims it could be, there is no way we could be harmed because he is assuming we cannot be harmed mentally or spiritual. In reality, we as humans can easily defend that we can feel both physical and mental pain. Heartbreak, loss of a loved one, loneliness, etc.
Another would be that it is foolish to want those close to you – family, friends, etc, - to live forever because that’s not up to you and as stated in the quote above, it’s foolish to want things that aren’t yours to be yours because that’s impossible. He gives example in his sixteenth rule that when a person is mourning, it’s not what had happened, but rather his/her judgment of what has happened, so the best approach is to not mourning it inwardly, or applying feeling/judgment to it. So nothing beyond our own opinions belong to us, and because we can control our opinions, we can apply his reasoning that’ll supposedly lead to achieving peace of mind in life. This is because in his thinking, reason is good, and irrationality is bad, and to be intolerable of the rational – things out of your control – is irrational. Another part of human finitude that he gives way to improve upon is lack of self-discipline.