The Nicomachean Ethics, written by Aristotle, represents his most important contribution within the field of Ethics; it is a collection of ten books, covering a variety of interesting topics, throughout the collection.
Aristotle tries to draw a general understanding of the human good, exploring the causes of human actions, trying to identify the most common ultimate purpose of human actions. Indeed, Aristotelian’s ethics, also investigates through the psychological and the spiritual realms of human beings.
Without pretending to exhaust with too many references, it would be rather useful to focus on the most criticized part of the philosopher’s attempt, which is also the very starting point of his masterpiece, identified as eudaimonia (happiness, well being) and ergon (function), in Aristotelian terms.
The meaning of eudaimonia, etymologically, is ‘good spirit’ and it is generally translated as ‘happiness’; in Aristotelian terms, ‘happiness’ represents the highest human good and it is also the representation of the soul’s virtues.
The identification of the soul parts as the contributors and main elements for the function of the most important human activity (reasoning), marks the inevitable psychological asset of Aristotle’s thinking; specifically, the classification of human virtues derives from the analysis of the soul’s types, attributing to human beings the ability of reasoning which distinguishes human beings from the rest of ‘natural bodies.’ Indeed, reason exists in two parts of the soul, namely the rational and the appetitive (desires or passions), and so it expresses within two different virtues, the moral and intellectual ones. Moral virtues satisfy the impulses of the appetitive part and the intellectual virtues hav...
... middle of paper ...
...tp://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.html.
Kraut, R., (2014). Aristotle’s Ethics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.) Available online at URL .
Grant, S., (2007). A defence of Aristotle on the good life. Richmond Journal of Philosophy (16) p. 1-8.
Hesse, H., (1930, 1957) Narcissus and Goldmund. Montagnola, Picador, New York.
Korsgaadar, C.M., (1986). Aristotle on Function and Virtue. History of Philosophy Quarterly, 3 (3), p. 259-279.
Nagel, T., (1972). Aristotle on Eudaimonia. Phronesis, Vol. 17, No. 3, p. 252-259.
Urmson, J.O., (1988). Aristotle’s Ethics (Blackwell), ch.1.
Wilkes, K.V., (1978). The Good Man and the Good for Man in Aristotle’s Ethics. Mind 87; repr. in A. O. Rorty, ed., Essays on Aristotle’s Ethics (Berkeley, 1980).
Aristotle’s virtuous person and Kant’s moral worth have two different meanings. Kant and Aristotle, from different times, have different ways of looking at what makes people make the best decisions. Coming from different sides of ethics in Deontology and virtue ethics, they agree and disagree with each other as most other schools of ethical thought do as well. After stating both their positions, I will prove that Kant’s view of morality is more correct than Aristotle’s view of the person.
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics. Rpt. in Ethical Theories: A Book of Readings second edition. Ed. A. I. Melden. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1967. 106-109.
Kraut, R 2014, ‘Aristotle's Ethics’, The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Summer Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), .
I chose to write about Aristotle and his beliefs about how the virtuous human being needs friends from Book VIII from Nicomachean Ethics. In this essay I will talk about the three different kinds of friendship that (Utility, Pleasure, and Goodness) that Aristotle claims exist. I will also discuss later in my paper why Aristotle believes that Goodness is the best type of friendship over Utility or Pleasure. In addition to that I will also talk about the similarities and differences that these three friendships share between one another. And lastly I will argue why I personally agree with Aristotle and his feelings on how friendship and virtue go hand in hand and depend on each other.
Simply defined, happiness is the state of being happy. But, what exactly does it mean to “be happy?” Repeatedly, many philosophers and ideologists have proposed ideas about what happiness means and how one attains happiness. In this paper, I will argue that Aristotle’s conception of happiness is driven more in the eye of ethics than John Stuart Mill. First, looking at Mill’s unprincipled version of happiness, I will criticize the imperfections of his definition in relation to ethics. Next, I plan to identify Aristotle’s core values for happiness. According to Aristotle, happiness comes from virtue, whereas Mill believes happiness comes from pleasure and the absence of pain. Ethics are the moral principles that govern a person’s behavior which are driven by virtues - good traits of character. Thus, Aristotle focuses on three things, which I will outline in order to answer the question, “what does it mean to live a good life?” The first of which is the number one good in life is happiness. Secondly, there is a difference between moral virtues and intellectual virtues and lastly, leading a good life is a state of character. Personally and widely accepted, happiness is believed to be a true defining factor on leading a well intentioned, rational, and satisfactory life. However, it is important to note the ways in which one achieves their happiness, through the people and experiences to reach that state of being. In consequence, Aristotle’s focus on happiness presents a more arguable notion of “good character” and “rational.”
Aristotle. "Nicomachean Ethics." Classics of Moral and Political Theory. 3rd ed. Trans. Terence Irwin. Ed. Michael L. Morgan. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 2001.
Aristotle’s goal in, “The Nicomachean Ethics,” is to argue that there is such thing as a chief good
Aristotle, W. D. Ross, and Lesley Brown. The Nicomachean Ethics. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2009. Print.
Baird, Forrest E., and Walter Kaufman. "Aristotle." Ancient Philosophy. 3rd ed. Philosophic Classics, vols. 1. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2000. 304 - 444.
One of the many questions with which Aristotle is concerned in the Nicomachean Ethics is: What is virtue and who is the virtuous man? However, this question of virtue is not considered in a vacuum. Aristotle’s discussion, far from amounting to mere ethereal musings, is firmly grounded in the everyday of life and consideration. So, in discussing the ideas of Aristotle, it is appropriate, and even necessary, that we ground our discussion in a like manner. That is, we should turn to a concrete example in order to help clarify Aristotle’s discussion of virtue in the Ethics.
In his function argument, Aristotle differs from Plato in that he examines human happiness as a distinct human function. In turn, Aristotle ultimately argues that a human’s distinct function is the soul’s activity that expresses reason (1098a-10). (Note: Aristotle
It was Aristotle’s belief that everything, including humans, had a telos or goal in life. The end result or goal was said to be happiness or “eudaimonia”. He explained that eudaimonia was different for each person, and that each had a different idea of what it meant. Further, he said that people must do things in moderation, but at the same time do enough. The theory, of “the golden mean of moderation” was the basis to Aristotle's idea of the human telos and concluded that living a virtuous life must be the same for all people. Aristotle maintained that the natural human goal to be happy could only be achieved once each individual determined his/her goal. A person’s telos is would usually be what that individual alone can do best. Aristotle described the humans as "rational animals" whose telos was to reason. Accordingly, Aristotle thought that in order for humans to be happy, they would have to be able to reason, and to be governed by reason. If a person had difficulty behaving morally or with ethics, he was thought to be “imperfect”. Moral virtue, a principle of happiness, was the ability to evade extremes in behavior and further to find the mean between it and adequacy. Aristotle’s idea of an ideal state was one where the populous was able to practice eth...
Baldwin, Richard. "Aristotle, Ethics." Aristotle, Ethics. Gulf Coast State College, 17 Mar. 2012. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. .
...that happiness is not found in amusement for it is too incongruous to end in amusement, and that our efforts and sufferings would be aimed at amusing ourselves. A flourishing life—a happy life, is one that consists of numerous requirements having been fulfilled to some degree. These include those things that preserve and maintain physical welfare such as, a certain level of material wellbeing, health, satisfaction, good familial and friendship bonds, and a comely appearance. Additionally, certain intellectual and moral needs ought to be met as well. It is a well-ordered and just state and community that preserves the freedom to have such a life. Thus, eudaimonia—happiness—for Aristotle is an inclusive notion consisting of life in accordance with intellectual and moral virtues, rational contemplation, and securing certain physical needs, such that one is flourishing.
McManaman, D. (n.d.). Aristotle and the Good Life. lifeissues.net. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/mcm/ph/ph_01philosophyyouth14.html