We are trying to reach happiness. According to Aristotle’s writing called, Nicomachean Ethics, all actions performed by humans aim to gain happiness, happiness is the ultimate end, and that happiness is greatly determined by moral and intellectual virtues. However, I will discuss how some believe that his doctrine of the mean lacks the direction of how one achieves equilibrium of the virtues. In addition, I will explain how Aristotle’s ethics, in fact, does give sufficient advice of how a person can live virtuously. Firstly, Aristotle
Virtue ethics, primarily founded by Aristotle, was the dominant approach in Western moral philosophy until Enlightenment [1].Its importance re-emerged with the dissatisfaction associated with deontology and utilitarianism, two theories unable to address issues such as moral character, moral education, friendship etc. Virtue ethics emphasize moral character and virtues, focusing on three central concepts: virtue, practical wisdom and eudaimonia. Cultural Relativism is the view that holds that moral truths cannot be applied universally, and that each person should be morally assessed based on his culture/society. This paper discusses relativist objection faced by Aristotle, its arguments and the responses offered by Aristotle, in addition to anticipated objections and Nussbaum’s responses in her paper “Non-relative virtues: An Aristotelian Approach” A major objection Aristotle faces is the relativist view connected to virtues. Contemporary virtue theory holds that criteria of ethical goodness are internal and different across societies, and therefore reject the concept of a single norm applied to all human beings.
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.
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. After I present an individual
Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Book ll, is about his idea of how people should live a virtuous life. Throughout this book, he explains that humans learn virtue from instructions and we learn virtue from practice too. Virtue is something that is very important because it is a moral habit that results in keeping our moral values. Aristotle believed that nobody is born with virtue, everyone has to work at it daily. After reading Nicomachean ethics, Book ll, my main conclusion of it is that us as humans are better off being virtuous than simply doing what we feel like doing at any moment in time.
The philosophical life/life of study –intellectual contemplation which responds to our rational side. It means to naturally have the interest and curiosity because for Aristotle the education is the cultivation of the character. 10. How does Aristotle define moral virtue in Nicomachean Ethics II, 1107a1-3? Explain the various parts of this definition.
In short knowing and doing are in the same line. In knowing the truth your virtues will ultimately be guided by this knowledge. The “telos” or ultimate goal of human life for Aristotle is to attain “happiness”. “Happiness” here is does not mean the common meaning which we use everyday but it is more synonymous to the war “eudaimonia” which means to be in a state of being that is in good spirit. This emphasis that happiness is not just a temporary thing but a permanent outlook on life which means that they only way for us to truly know whether we have had a happy life is when we die.
Intellectual virtues which come from practical and theoretical wisdom. This requires experience and knowing the right way to do the right thing. This is reason in the strict sense. Then there are virtues of character e.g. courage and generosity i.e.
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).
Though partially unrealistic, but functional, Plato’s and Aristotle’s models of their ideas of society, they both aim at happiness, justice, self-governance, and a virtuous life for each individual as a part of the community. Aristotle and Plato, theorize that virtue must be gained though practice and a form of self-control, and how to achieve happiness. In Aristotle’s, Ethics, Books 1., he studies ethics and asserts that there is an ultimate good which is both complete and self-sufficient. Aristotle believes that this ultimate good is happiness; it means living well. In Book 1, Chapter VII, Aristotle talks about the good being happiness, he proclaims that in accordance of virtue, human good turns out to be activity of the soul.