Analysis of Moral Luck Views of Aristotle and Epictetus
Aristotle, the founder of western science, and Epictetus, one of the
greatest stoicists, both has their theories for the issue of "Moral
Luck". To have a basic idea about the topic, I believe we should
describe it from a non-philosophical point of view. After doing that
we can compare both Aristotle's and Epictetus' points of views and
distinguish between them with examples from "Into Thin Air"(ITA),
written by Jon Krakauer.
Moral Luck, if described from general perspective, consists of the
actions that happen by luck and result in moral ends. What I mean by
moral ends is the situations that have something to do with moral or
ethical values. Overall, moral luck deals with all the issues
concerned with assertion of praise and blame, deliberation of
responsibility, and things that are not in our control such as place
of birth, our parents, our nationality and so on. Although they both
have this structure in common, both Aristotle and Epictetus have
different arguments about moral luck.
Both Aristotle and Epictetus have a single point in common. They both
have the idea of luck. Aristotle describes this as things that are not
in our control and Epictetus describes this as things that are not up
to us.
The distinction between them is simple. Something that is not in our
control can be up to us. However, something that is up to us must be
in our control. "One climber's actions can affect the welfare of the
entire team. The consequences of a poorly tied knot, a stumble, a
dislodged rock, or some other careless deed are as likely to be felt
by the perpetrator's colleagues...
... middle of paper ...
...g so, he tries to control things that are not
up to him. If you want something that is not up to you and do not get
it, you are misfortunate then. Rob Hall is misfortunate here then.
Also, Rob Hall's judgment of the current situation was blurred. He was
not thinking properly, therefore not judging properly. All of these
facts considered, Rob Hall, in this case, is responsible for his
actions.
Now that we examined both Aristotle's and Epictetus' perspectives, we
can make a distinction between them. Aristotle is dealing with
everyday philosophy and has a less strict perspective. On the other
hand, Epictetus is a philosopher who is dealing with disastrous
situations and has a strict perspective when compared to Aristotle.
Both of their philosophies have a common base, idea of luck, but have
a different continuation.
A Greek myth by Alisoun Witting, “The Hero’s Test,” is about the son of Aegeus, who is the king of a monarchy, that shows that he has strong attitudes, abilities, and actions. Theseus showed he has a great attitude when he arrived at Crete and did not complain even though he did not have a plan. Although he was a kid, he just decided that he would sacrifice himself to the Minotaur, a psychopathic bull and man, and did not even think about it. Then he got on the ship and left his father, who also ruled an autocracy, to save all the Athenians.Theseus proved that one of his strongest abilities was quickness. The Minotaur tried to charge at Theseus, but he was too quick for the Minotaur. Then the Minotaur tried to force Theseus into a corner,
it is willed by the power of God and that man in himself should fight for
Do we control the judgments and decisions that we make every day? In the book,
In Oedipus Rex by Sophocles and “The Lottery” by Shirley Jackson, there is a deception where readers think one thing, but are presented with a different point of view. They are profoundly similar for various reasons regarding structure and theme. They are complementary in establishing the primary conflict of drama during the storyline; however, Oedipus Rex encompasses foreshadowing that divulges drama from past experiences. Additionally, the authors incorporate violence as a key component in the conflict presented. However, the drama differs in plot, as well as symbolism, in which the reader understands it before or amid the story through gradual discovery. The themes and presentation of these dramatic plots are initially compelling, distinctive,
Fate is defined as “the determining cause by which things in general are believed to…happen as they do,” “It is “an inevitable…outcome.” (Merriam-Webster) However, fate isn’t the determining cause, it is dependent on karmas. Karmas are derivatives of the invisible Karman particles that are all around the world. (umich.edu) Through ones’ thoughts and actions karmas bond to the soul. (umich.edu) Over time the karmas accumulate and begin to cloud the once pure and truly knowledge soul. Ancient Greek tragedian Sophocles uses the idea of fate as the basis for his tragedy “Oedipus the King.” The character Oedipus ultimately turns out to be an exemplification the notions of Karma and fate.
For instance, this is touched upon in Stanza 57, which states that , “If you want to be a great leader, you must learn to follow the Tao. Stop trying to control. Let go of fixed plans and concepts, and the world will govern itself”. From this, the Tao Te Ching explicitly states that we must let go of our need to control.
Who we are and what we do are factors that are beyond our control and through this, will limit our moral responsibility.
but we also need to be able to make up our own minds and direct our
In this class one key point kept coming up in the readings for me, and that was fate. Fate is an idea that nothing you do will change your final out come in life. Are we able to truly have free will in the way we live and die? Or is it fate and our life’s outcome is out of our control? Is the characters desire to go against fate what truly lead them to this path? In the readings I was never able to say either way but I lean in favor of fate. My three examples of this are the charters Loki, Odin and Oedipus. These three are said to have been fated on how they live, die and even kill in a way that is predestined.
In the world there are two distinct types of things. There are things that exist external to us, such as one's reputation or a relationship. We do not have direct control over these things since they exist outside of us. Then there are internal things that we do have control over, like out desires, or things we dislike. The internal things can be controlled, while the external can be harder to control. Some philosophers even believe that the external things cannot be controlled, and attempting to control them will just bring unhappiness.
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.
In ancient roman culture, being a man entailed much more than a difference in genitalia. In many ancient civilizations, a patriarchy was the main way to govern its citizens. Men were responsible for earning money, making decisions that could affect their household and/or their community, and fighting in battles that would inevitably change roman history. Ones reputation within their community would either make or break their ability to achieve certain goals in life. Whether it was to become a new merchant in the market, or to lead troops on their next expedition, a mans virtue controlled his fate. Many writers, such as Cicero, Augustus, and Virgil, found themselves defining virtue through their use of words and descriptions of their characters. Virtue played an important role in ancient roman society due to the powerful influence the beholder had over others.
Therefore we are not free to act as we wish due to our actions being
In Nicomachean Ethics, generosity is the third virtue Aristotle examines. He directly addresses the idea of generosity to be the mean of wealth, meaning anything whose worth is measured by money. As presented by Aristotle, generosity is the intermediate of wastefulness and ungenerosity, wastefulness being the excess and ungenerosity being the deficiency. This virtue however, does not come naturally; generosity can arise through habit and takes experience as well as time. While generosity appears to be an important virtue, it is not the most essential virtue to one’s well being.
Oedipus was a victime of fate, his futur was foretold by an Oracle, he had no way of knowing that his wife was his mother nor that the stranger he killed was his father. Oedipus could not prevent his own downfall. Oedipus was the king of Thebes, he became king when he cured the city of a deadly plague. He cured the plague by solving the riddle of the mythical creature, the Sphinkx. Now the city is suffering from another plague and as king Oedipus must solve the riddle of this one.