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. You need to be good at governing and politics, because politics becomes the purpose of society. In the following essay, I will provide arguments and information about the reasons to believe that, in order to achieve the most significant virtue, one must take part in political life, regarding to Aristotle …show more content…
Men have the desire to live together in a common interest, so the state is formed towards equality between citizens. Nevertheless, male and female relationships are inevitable and necessary because it is a natural activity. That is why human beings need to be together in a common interest in order to progress, because they are unable to live by their own. As Aristotle values politics as the most significant virtue, he reflects that a citizen can only be a member of the state if he takes part in the political life of the city. Therefore, not everybody is allowed to be considered as citizens; slaves and foreign people are not citizens. In fact, only people who don’t work can be considered citizens. The main objective is to become decent and perfect citizens; thus, they must seek for an honorable life. To be the best human being, you have to be active in political life. However, despite being a proper citizen is related to being a desirable person, every citizen is not always a good person. What’s more, citizens are identical, i.e., the ones who have the power and are in control are equal to the ones who are being ruled, no one is superior nor inferior, and there is a political authority that is used to satisfy these common …show more content…
This means that we, as human beings, are endowed by nature with the capacity of communicating our emotions and feelings, and is the reason why we are social by nature, and our purpose can only be reached by living in the polis. In other words, humans have the capacity of debating about politics. In addition, political activity is the fullest expression of nature; you become a valuable member of society when you start participating in politics. Some people just have the natural capacity to talk about politics, the same as others are naturally qualified to be slaves; for Aristotle, slavery is necessary and natural. Necessary because while citizens are doing politics, someone has to take care of things, and natural because some people are born to be slaves, and it is what they do best. Aristotle states that politics create virtuous people but only as a result of training: ‘Moral virtue is the primary purpose of law, to cultivate the habits that lead to good character.’ This means that only path in order to become virtuous is to acquire habit by practice and the polis laws are created to educate people through good actions and
Aristotle also says, “Not being self-sufficient when they are isolated, all individuals are so many parts all equally depending on the whole. The man who is isolated—who is unable to share in the benefits of political association,
Next, Paine explains that “by the simple operation of constructing government on the principle of society and the rights of a man, every difficulty retires, and all the parts one brought into cordial unison” (Paine).
Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics begins by exploring ‘the good’. Book I argues that, unlike other goods, “happiness appears to be something complete and self-sufficient, and is, therefore, the end of actions” (10:1097b20-21). In other words, happiness is the ultimate good. But how does one achieve happiness? Aristotle formulates this in the context of work, since for all things, from artists to horses, “the good and the doing it well seem to be in the work” (10:1097b27-28).
In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Book ll, he explains that virtue is a habit of right action, formed by acting rightly (Nicomachean Ethics, p. 71). What he means by this is that everyone has the chance to act virtuously, but we must for work at doing what is right. Aristotle thought we should be virtuous because if we live virtuously than we will have a better life over
To reach this conclusion, I will be splitting this passage into 3 parts. The first section is Aristotle’s introduction to
Aristotle thought the best form of government was a polity or constitutional government; however, a polity was non-existent in Aristotle’s time. Correspondingly, Locke
“Every skill and every inquiry, and similarly every action and rational choice, is thought to aim at some good; and so the good has been aptly described as that which everything aims. But it is clear that there is some difference between ends: some ends are activities, while others are products which are additional to the activities. In cases where there are ends additional to the actions, the products are by their nature better than activities.” (Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics, as translated by Crisp, 2000, p. #3) Aristotle was the first philosopher who wrote a book on ethics titled, Nichomachean Ethics.
Pericles, a key political figure of 5th century Athens states, “Our constitution does not copy the laws of neighboring states; we are rather a pattern to others than imitators ourselves.” The Athenians had no desire to follow what appeared as mediocre government, the Athenians pushed for the best form they could find. Arete, for Athens, meant every person had a voice in politics. Politics embraces the reason of the mind as well as the emotion of the heart. Therefore, the very essence of a good human being would lie in being a politically active person.
Essay 1 Aristotle and John Locke both believe humans were not created to live alone but instead among other people of the same community. Humans are not independent beings, and those who live in isolation lack the purpose of life: becoming a citizen and exercising one 's full potential of human flourishing. According to Aristotle, the collective community or multitude of citizens coexisting with one another is happiness, whereas Locke believes that the collective community is protecting autonomy and property. Both philosophers believe that to become a citizen, one must contribute to politics with the intent of creating a better society for all. Aristotle and Locke however, have differing views on how a person accomplishes this.
Does John Locke have an answer to Aristotle’s question of: “what is a good citizen”? Aristotle wants to explore and understand nature of different states and constitutions but in order to do that, he argues that first we would have to take a deeper look at the nature of citizenship. Aristotle believes that saying that a citizen is someone who lives in a city or has access to the courts of laws is not enough, he supplements this argument by mentioning other people groups that has access to these things as well, specifically slaves and resident aliens (The Politics of Aristotle, 2009, p. 122). Instead, Aristotle proposes an idea that citizen is someone who upholds the public office and participates in administration of justice, this definition, which he suggests is only applicable to individuals in democratic state, is then further broadened stating that: “a citizen is anyone who is entitled to share in deliberative or judicial office”. To understand if John Locke has an answer to Aristotle’s question or if he’s even interested in such a question it is necessary to look deeper and explore more how Aristotle and John Locke views the states and constitutions, how they explain them and what are their views on citizenship (if they have any).
Introduction The assignment will be investigating the democracy of Aristotle and Jean Jacques Rousseau. Democracy in itself can be very different and varies from form to form. The assignment will investigate Aristotle’s view and Jean Jacques Rousseau concepts on state and man, the governess of the state, freedom and man .Each of these topics will be contrast on the views of Aristotle and Jean Jacques Rousseau alongside each other. Each of these philosophers’ key points will be looked and the inner working of out they thought a city should be run.
Upon evaluating Aristotle’s ideals of citizenship, one finds a world wherein citizenship and freedom are one in the same – active participation in debate and deliberation in the political community through the exclusively human use of reason and speech capacities. Given this ideal of citizenship, it becomes the case that the ideas for human flourishing and thus the good life follow suit. For Aristotle, human flourishing comes from the cultivation of virtue that is a result of continued participation in the political community, or, continued intentional citizenship. For the good life, it is important to note that it is the continued practice of virtuous activity, rather than the obtaining, that is required. For, “…possession of virtue seems actually compatible with being asleep, or with lifelong inactivity, and, further, with the greatest sufferings and misfortunes; but a man who was living so no one would call happy…”
Aristotle explains that the mean is extremes of excess and deficiency. Aristotle first explains this by comparing it to health and food. It was explained in medical terms that we ruin our health if we eat too little or too much. For instance, it is ruined by excess and deficiency. The mean is divided into three categories; extreme of deficiency (being a coward), mean (bravery or courage), and extreme of excess (rashness, reckless).
If Plato had portrayed an Ideal State in hid republic which could be built in heaven only, Aristotle came down to earth while drawing the outline of his ideal state. Like a true scientist he does not attempt any impossible scheme in formulating his theory if Ideal State. His ideal state is attainable on his earth. We must first consider not only what is ideal but also what is the best attainable in actual practice. The only difference between a monarchy and an aristocracy is that in the first case virtue is centered in one person.
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