Morals are developed from the moment we are born to the moment we die, and are cultivated by what we see, hear, and do within our lives, but more importantly by the people we meet. In the world there are all manner of things for us to bear witness to, whether it be the beauty of birth or the gritty horror that is war, in either case men and women are shaped and changed by these events whether it be good or bad. The greek philosopher Aristotle is quoted as saying, “And to say what makes good morals vs what are bad ones is completely based on self, for no two people have the same upbringing, class, or position in life, for how is a slave who has known nothing but the brutality of his/her master to understand under what morals, owned by their …show more content…
Aristotle is quoted as saying, “The child is imperfect, and therefore obviously his virtue is not relative to himself alone, but to the perfect man and to his teacher, and in like manner the virtue of the slave is relative to a master.” It talks about how no child is born into this world with a set of virtues or morals and that this development falls to whoever the child deems their instructor, like a father or teacher. Aristotle is also quoted as saying, “Slaves possess only bodily and ministerial qualities. And, whichever way we answer the question, a difficulty arises; for, if they have virtue, in what will they differ from free men?” this relates to the position one has in life, for throughout the course of history until current day time slavery has been extremely prominent in most cultures. But the quote ask the question how does the virtue of a freed man differ from that of a slave, or a man who has never been owned at all. For people born into wealth will never know hardship and will look down upon those around them thinking themselves superior to those beneath them and developing the idea that those without wealth are nothing more than goods, and that a life without monetary value is no life at all leaving it to be disposable like shreds of paper. While on the opposite of the coin, men and women bought or born into slavery will know nothing but oppression and nothing of wealth, they will come to understand that all lives are equal despite social status or class, and this is because they see the world through a different lense than that of their master. The two groups although living side by side will never come to truly comprehend the thought process of the other, and this divide is caused solely based on position in life and what they were taught. A child isn't born prejudice, it has
In Aristotle's "Justifying Slavery" and Seneca's "On Master and Slave," the two authors express their opposing sentiments on the principles of slavery. While Aristotle describes slavery as predestined inferiority, evidenced greatly by physical attributes, Seneca emphasizes the importance of "philosophical" freedom as opposed to physical freedom. (p. 58). The authors' contrasting views are disclosed in their judgments on the morality of slavery, the degree of freedom all people possess at birth, and the balance of equality between a slave and his master.
After reading articles from (David Brooks, Garth Kemerling, Al Gini, Natasha Trethewey). I have raised my own question at issue to does morals come from the experience of “self-responsibility” of realizing your own faults in life to create a good virtue of human character or is it involuntary? Touching basis on self-responsibility, is the start of creating a good person in life and to become a great person for yourself and others, you have to realize and face your own faults.
Responsibility and Vice is a topic that Aristotle argues in the Nicomachean Ethics . His argument is based off of the presumption that we are responsible, and open to praise or blame, for having a virtuous or vicious character. His claim for this argument is that we are ultimately in charge of our character, which is decided through our actions. Although Aristotle believes in this, however there are times in life where you are not in complete control of your actions.
In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he discusses the principles of virtue, choices and a desire for an end. In the 5th chapter of book 3, Aristotle gives a possible argument of someone who objects to his beliefs “But someone might argue as follows: ‘All Men seek what appears good to them, but they have no control over how things appear to them; the end appears different to different men” (1114b). Based on the objector’s generalization, he or she believes that all men strive to find the ultimate good, but they don't have the freedom or the wisdom to see things for what they truly are.
The goal of human life according to Aristotle is Happiness as he stated in Nicomachean Ethics, “Happiness, then, is apparently something complete and self-sufficient, since it is the end of the things achievable in action.” Aristotle states that happiness is not just about being content in life but that one has to have lived their life rationally, well, and to the fullest of their capabilities. Happiness, according to Aristotle, can only be achieved by focusing on mans’ life as parts of a whole.
One philosopher that gave a very sound explanation of morals is the Greek Aristotle who was a pioneer in a way in explaining how exactly one can be a moral person. Aristotle had a theory known as the Virtue Ethics. The Virtue Ethics provided a list of qualities that summed up what was considered virtuous, moral person. For someone to be a moral, ethical person they must have courage, temperance, liberality, magnificence, magnanimity, reasonable ambition, patience, truthfulness, wittiness, friendliness, modesty, and righteous indignation. If a person can manage to have all of these virtues they are considered moral. It is something that requires balance, however, because having too much or too little of these qualities are considered immoral. This theory revolves around specific characteristics of a person as well as an idea of balance. One weakness though is a person can stay within the guidelines of the Virtue Ethics and still commit immoral acts also this falls upon a personal interpretation. Shooting someone in the face might seem courageous to some but cowardly to others given the situation
Throughout Aristotle’s life and career as a philosopher, he modified and formulated many ideas that deal with the psyche and state of the mind and body. One of the most prevalent ideas that he studied was the quest for happiness. He had many theories about it, but most merged to become the Nicomachean Ethics
In Book I of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle states that the ultimate human goal or end is happiness. Aristotle then describes steps required for humans to obtain the ultimate happiness. He also states that activity is an important requirement of happiness. A virtuous person takes pleasure in doing virtuous things. He then goes on to say that living a life of virtue is something pleasurable in itself. The role of virtue to Aristotle is an important one, with out it, it seems humans cannot obtain happiness. Virtue is the connection one has to happiness and how they should obtain it. My goal in this paper is to connect Aristotle’s book of Nicomachean Ethics to my own reasoning of self-ethics. I strongly agree with Aristotle’s goal of happiness and conclude to his idea of virtues, which are virtuous states of character that affect our decision making in life.
Many believe the two are interchangeable when speaking about morals and ethics, when the two in no way mean the same thing. Morals are subjective beliefs that belong to an individual, they are one’s own beliefs as to what is right and what is wrong. Ethics on the other hand are the rules that society creates and teaches regarding proper and improper, right and wrong, social behavior. Morals are internal, ethics are external, and they have been the unwritten rules of society as old as mankind, which govern proper social conduct based on the greater good of the popular belief. Philosophers have tussled over the nature of the concepts of morality and virtue, where they stem from as well as their true meanings.
Individuals are not born with an ability to understand moral values and apply moral standards. As people mature, their physical, emotional, and cognitive abilities develop and so does their ability to deal with moral issues. Aristotle, an early Greek thinker who proposed one of the most influential theories of ethical thinking in the West, argued that our moral abilities which he called virtues or morally good habits, develop solely through constant practice and repetition, in the same way, he argued, humans acquire their moral abilities and when they are taught and habituated by their families and communities to think, feel and behave in morally appropriate ways. Such vitally important human values as courage, generosity, self-control, temperance,
In spite of the fact that Aristotle was a companion and scholar of Plato, he didn't concur with Plato's speculations on ethical quality. In the same way as other Greeks, Aristotle did not have confidence in the presence of inalienably terrible practices.
Is morality an ideology that develops over time as people mature or an influential set of beliefs? “Just Lather, That’s All” written by Hernando Téllez demonstrates how making a decision, whether it be ethical or not, is influenced by the different morals that the person believes in.
Aristotle’s thoughts on ethics conclude that all humans must have a purpose in life in order to be happy. I believe that some of the basics of his ideas still hold true today. This essay points out some of those ideas.
A virtue is a trait believed to be morally good, and a vice is a trait believed to be morally wrong. Eventually, a person will make a decision and take action based on their virtues and vices. Therefore, it is virtues that help engineers reach their purpose and evaluate ethical behavior. This paper will attempt to generate a list of virtues that an engineer must possess in order to be regarded as virtuous. Before doing this, Aristotle’s virtue ethics, virtues of thought, and virtues of character will be explained.
According to Aristotle, the good life is the happy life, as he believes happiness is an end in itself. In the Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle develops a theory of the good life, also known as eudaimonia, for humans. Eudaimonia is perhaps best translated as flourishing or living well and doing well. Therefore, when Aristotle addresses the good life as the happy life, he does not mean that the good life is simply one of feeling happy or amused. Rather, the good life for a person is the active life of functioning well in those ways that are essential and unique to humans. Aristotle invites the fact that if we have happiness, we do not need any other things making it an intrinsic value. In contrast, things such as money or power are extrinsic valuables as they are all means to an end. Usually, opinions vary as to the nature and conditions of happiness. Aristotle argues that although ‘pleasurable amusements’ satisfy his formal criteria for the good, since they are chosen for their own sake and are complete in themselves, nonetheless, they do not make up the good life since, “it would be absurd if our end were amusement, and we laboured and suffered all our lives for the sake of amusing ourselves.”