Also, if we look very closely at the notion of a "flourishing life," we will find that instead of helping us determine what the virtues are, it actually begs the question, since the flourishing life already contains value judgements. The very idea of a flourishing life is a normative concept. That of course was the original question: what are the standards by which we ought to live our lives? The virtue ethicist told us that we could avoid this quest... ... middle of paper ... ...lise moral principles simply by doing the morally good deed and through the action itself come to understand its value and begin to desire it. However, virtue theory offers a great deal to moral psychology -it tells us how we in fact learn moral principles.
A person who chose to think and act the right way than all other virtuous may be achieved. Plato also believed virtue is how one acquired happiness and there is no such thing as moral luck. However, Aristotle believed virtue was a necessity for happiness but not for itself because social constructs are what help an individual feel satisfaction and
Because moral virtue makes up the health of the soul, all people should desire to be virtuous. Plato said that people sometimes do not seek to be virtuous, but only because they do not realize that virtue produces happiness. He taught that only ideas are real and that all other things only reflect ideas. This view became known as idealism. According to Plato, the most important idea is the idea of good.
Aristotle is just simply saying that we should not let pleasure dictate all of the decisions that we make this is a practice of moderation and self-control. Animals may seem like they are experiencing happiness but in reality they are experiencing pleasure, animals also cannot form the habit of being good, as it does not come natural. According to Aristotle the habit of being good has to be practiced over a period of time until it comes naturally (Nicomachean Ethics p.71). Aristotle believes that happiness for humans must be something that is completely unique to humans. A trait that is unique to humans is being reasonable, so being reasonable means to be happy.
Aristotle was a great believer in virtues and the meaning of virtue to him meant being able to fulfil one 's functions. Virtue ethics is not so much interested in the question 'What should I do? ' but rather in the question 'what sort of person should I become? ' It has more to do with character and the nature of what it is to be human, than with the rights and wrongs of actions. Instead of concentrating on what is the right thing to do, virtue ethics
Humans possess this type of soul, and are able to be rational, and to instill rationality into their lives when dealing with their appetites, which are the objects and actions humans are attracted to. Aristotle believed that the ultimate goal in life is happiness, and people should live their lives in order to be happy. According to him, the soul doesn’t survive after death, so people should strive to be happy while they are alive. Since we haven’t direct knowledge of soul we try to understand to become truly virtuous. In Aristotle’s quest to understand virtue, he works rationally trying to rationalize the irrational.
There are many ways to approach morality, virtue ethics being one in which Aristotle went about evaluating how moral dilemmas are reached rather than just the outcomes. Ethical navigation approaches, acknowledge that humans are complicated beings and that our existence and purpose really isn’t known or exactly provided for us. It is up to us to determine for ourselves how to go about evaluating our lives and its purpose and what our responsibilities are, in order to live ethical lives. Aristotle discovered that his theory in approaching this dilemma relies on virtue ethics where virtue is a state of being and when we possess the right virtues we are able to live well and successfully. We are all trying to find our own ways of navigating through life and discovering the importance of what lies at the end.
Philosophers have tussled over the nature of the concepts of morality and virtue, where they stem from as well as their true meanings. Some philosophers believe that our moral and ethical beliefs stem from what we are taught by society based on rational acceptance of proper decisions, whereas others oppose saying that our morals and ethical beliefs belong to our soul alone and it is learned from within, rather than being taught by one’s society. One of Aristotle’s most influential works, Nicomachean Ethics, lays claim that there is an actual, material definition of what happiness is and ways one may possibly attain the greatest good in life, which is ultimately to be happy. Furthermore, Aristotle distinguishes that there is a difference between higher and lower pleasures that one ought to seek in life. He believed that the highest good one has the possibility of achieving is grasping true virtue.
will bring them true happiness. In spite of Aristotle finding a common goal that all mankind want to achieve, he poorly attempts to explain how to achieve happiness. In my opinion, the Nicomachean Ethics do not directly teach a person how to be good, but is a rather confusing attempt to define goodness and virtue. Yes you have to be a good person to be happy, but what is good? Is good and bad not defined differently by different cultures, religions, people and nations?
Aristotle believes that humans are essentially good; therefore, they are more likely to achieve their full potential as good people, whereas Hobbes believe in fighting against original sin. The social contract is the opposite of Aristotle’s philosophy of humans being born essentially good. Hobbes’ state of nature considers humans as selfish and destructive beings that need must be tamed in order to survive; otherwise, chaos is bound to strike. Hence why I agree with Aristotle’s philosophy of exercising and cultivating the values that we originally possess. As one matures, one is capable of reasoning the quality we need in order to become incorporated into society.