In Cicero’s De Finibus, Cato focuses strongly on “Moral Worth” as a doctrine of Stoicism. Cato considers “Moral Worth” as the essentially the only good; however, Cato makes concessions and contradictions about “Moral Worth” in his argument. The concessions and contradictions that Cato makes about “Moral Worth” compromises his focus on “Moral Worth”.
Cato’s idea of “Moral Worth” must first be defined. Cato argues that “Moral Worth” is the only path for a Stoic and any other path that veers from it is essentially evil. Cato defines good and evil as very black and white, especially when Cato says “Moral Worth [is] the only good and Moral Baseness [is] the only evil” describing the beliefs of Stoicism (32). Cato continues his argument by saying other philosophies “give us no assistance or support towards becoming better men, but are actually corrupting to the character” (34-35). Cato believes that other philosophies do not stress the idea of “Moral Worth” and do not have clear cut ideas of good and evil causing a skewed view of morality. “Moral Worth” at its core is essentially the one ...
The value attributed to the first virtue, wisdom, whose essence lay in “the perception of truth and with ingenuity,” concerns the comprehension of the nature of justice (7). In fact, Cicero asserts, within the public sphere, “unless learning is accompanied by the virtue that consists...
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.
...Epicureans and Stoics] offered a conception of the world and human nature which drew its support from empirical observations, reason and a recognition that all men have common needs” (6). Though both views opposed each other in various ways, they both provided man with a way to live and to care for oneself.
As to the perception of virtues and vices, Hume argues that sympathy, or theory of the mind, plays a significant role. Characters that are useful to the human society are virtues, because these socially beneficial actions would please observers by sympathy and consequently elicit their approval, which in turn brings pleasure to the good deed doer. On the contrary, those traits that are destructive to society are vices, because vicious deeds ca...
Epictetus, the Stoic philosopher, is one of the most influential ancient thinkers. Epictetus believed the purpose of moral philosophy was to help show people the way to lead better lives. He believed that some things in this world are un-controllable and some things are controllable; some things are up to us and some things are not up to us. Epictetus believed our opinions, impulses, desires, aversions, or whatever is our own doing is up to us; however, our bodies, our possessions, our reputations, or whatever is not our own doing, is not up to us. He also believed that we should not try and control the world, but accept it and make the best out of every situation. Epictetus’ aim was to live well, to secure happiness and to offer different solutions as to how life was to be lived. I will attempt to summarize some of Epictetus’ disciplines in a way that will give a simple view on how one should live their life; and also try to interpret his views into modern day living so that through their application ones life will become simplified and therefore enhanced.
With their philosophical roots grounded in ancient Greece, Stoicism and Epicureanism had contrary yet significant impacts on Roman society. These two philosophies differed in many of their basic theories. Stoics attempted to reach a moral level where they had freedom from passion, while Epicureans strove for pleasure and avoided all types of pain. Stoics like the Epicureans, emphasized ethics as the main field of knowledge, but they also developed theories of logic and natural science to support their ethical doctrines.
Gakuran, Michael. "Aristotle’s Moral Philosophy | Gakuranman • Adventure First." Gakuranman Adventure First RSS. N.p., 21 May 2008. Web.
Out of the confrontation with Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus, Socrates emerges as a reflective individual searching for the rational foundation of morality and human excellence. The views presented by the three men are invalid and limited as they present a biased understanding of justice and require a re-examination of the terminology. The nature in which the faulty arguments are presented, leave the reader longing to search for the rational foundations of morality and human virtue.
More specifically, Stoicism is a moral guide for humans. Though nature is absolute and perfect through God, the human thought is the one and only feature of life that is controlled and changed by people. Humans have the ability to reason and to know that everything in life is determined. For every event that they encounter, humans are able to acknowledge the fact that it is a part of their life plan. Therefore, a person can control whether he/she accepts that the action is unchangeable. Many humans think that they have a choice for all that they do and all that happens to them. But in Stoic reality, natures plan has one path with no possible differences. Thus, good is not defined by what a person does; but, by a per...
One of Aristotle’s conclusions in the first book of Nicomachean Ethics is that “human good turns out to be the soul’s activity that expresses virtue”(EN 1.7.1098a17). This conclusion can be explicated with Aristotle’s definitions and reasonings concerning good, activity of soul, and excellence through virtue; all with respect to happiness.
Seneca being the wise man that he was considered different views on topics, when gathering his own such as the styles of the Stoic and Epicureans, he was able to fuse the two together to create his own. In doing so Seneca attracted the attention of early Christian theologians who were fascinated by his philosophy. In this essay a comparison will be presented of Seneca and St. Augustine’s views on three specific topics friendship, social class, and death. Analyzing the differences and similarities in the two philosophies should help the reader better understand why early Christians may have found Seneca’s views rather intriguing and also why it seemed to align with Christianity’s perspective on ideas of friendship, social class and death. The two primary texts used to provide the information are Letters from a Stoic by Seneca, and Confessions by St. Augustine. Seneca being a philosopher during the late Roman Empire and St. Augustine being the church father who developed doctrine of the church, one would think they would have differing opinions but that is not always the case. The text will show that most of the time they build upon each other’s ideas.
Both Kantian and virtue ethicists have differing views about what it takes to be a good person. Kantian ethicists believe that being a good person is strictly a matter of them having a “good will.” On the other hand, virtue ethicists believe that being a good person is a matter of having a good character, or being naturally inclined to do the right thing. Both sides provide valid arguments as to what is the most important when it comes to determining what a person good. My purpose in writing this paper is to distinguish between Kantian ethics and virtue ethics, and to then, show which theory is most accurate.
Marcus Aurelius was a famous philosopher in 121 through 180 C.E. He lived a hard life and even though he was surrounded by crowds he was considered a recluse. He was known for his kindness and mercy. The last years of his life were spent on a military campaign. It is said that these years were the hardest and loneliest. However, instead of becoming bitter and angry Aurelius wrote The Meditations. This was a diary or journal of his personal thoughts. He believed that by writing this it was his duty to his soul. The Meditations, is a popular piece of stoic literature. In this paper I will be describing how Aurelius used stoicism in book two of The Meditations and what I liked and did not like about what he said.
The two concepts of Morality and Immorality can be discussed in many different ways, although Glaucon, brother to Plato and Adeimantus, and apprentice to Socrates takes a unique approach to showing the implications of both notions. Glaucon does this through his three-step argument that challenges Socrates by evaluating the benefits of being an immoral person versus one holding onto their morality. Glaucon’s argument dives into three separate segments, which in result leads to Glaucon’s conclusion that immorality is more beneficial than morality.
Harman, G. (2000). Is there a single true morality?. Explaining value and other essays in moral philosophy (pp. 77-99). Oxford: Clarendon Press ;.