The Notion of the Good in the Ethical Views of Plato and Aristotle
1. Discuss the notion of "the good" in the ethical views of Plato and Aristotle. State which of potentiality would lead to normal life.
Plato explored such subjects as beauty, justice, and good government. Plato's ethics were ethics of happiness. He based his ethical theory on the proposition that all people desire happiness although, of course, people sometimes act in ways that do not produce happiness. Plato believes that they do this only because they do not know what actions will produce happiness. Therefore the reason why people act in ways that do not produce happiness is that they lack knowledge of those actions that would provide happiness. For example, a person who commits a serious crime and faces punishment by death or even imprisonment commits this crime because he or she does not know of any action that provides happiness.
Plato believed also that "we cannot gain knowledge of things through our senses because the objects of sense perception are fleeting and constantly changing." Plato stated that we can have genuine knowledge only of changeless things, such as truth, beauty, and goodness, which are known by the mind.
Plato further claimed that happiness is the natural consequence of the soul's healthy state. 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. Knowledge o...
... middle of paper ...
...ate of Plato's views and would appeal more to life as it is today. He mentions the good life involves things such as having friends, acting justly, and participating in community affairs. These things are too important in our daily lives.
Although neither Aristotle nor Plato did not specify those actions which are right and those actions which are wrong, we must accept the fact that in their time moral decisions were probably not difficult to make and therefore they did not consider such complex moral dilemmas as those we face today. We, however, should appreciate that many of their theories and resultant teachings have had some influence in the moral decisions we make.
Bibliography:
Encarta Encyclopedia 2000. CD-ROM. World Book Inc. 1999
World Book Encyclopedia 2000 CD-ROM. Microsoft Corporation. 1999
In Plato’s Republic, justice and the soul are examined in the views of the multiple characters as well as the Republic’s chief character, Socrates. As the arguments progress through the Republic, the effect of justice on the soul is analyzed, as the question of whether or not the unjust soul is happier than the just soul. Also, Plato’s theories of justice in the man, the state, and the philosopher king are clearly linked to the cardinal virtues, as Plato describes the structure of the ideal society and developing harmony between the social classes. Therefore, the statement “justice is the art which gives to each man what is good for his soul” has to be examined through the definitions of justice given in the Republic and the idea of the good
total good of the man. Plato holds that if the desire were truly for a good
Virtue ethics is a moral theory that was first developed by Aristotle. It suggests that humans are able to train their characters to acquire and exhibit particular virtues. As the individual has trained themselves to develop these virtues, in any given situation they are able to know the right thing to do. If everybody in society is able to do the same and develop these virtues, then a perfect community has been reached. In this essay, I shall argue that Aristotelian virtue ethics is an unsuccessful moral theory. Firstly, I shall analyse Aristotelian virtue ethics. I shall then consider various objections to Aristotle’s theory and evaluate his position by examining possible responses to these criticisms. I shall then conclude, showing why Aristotelian virtue ethics is an unpractical and thus an unsuccessful moral theory in reality.
To achieve this topic, I have sectioned my paper into three main sections, in which I have subsections supporting. In the first section, I will provide much information about Aristotle and his beliefs in virtue and obtaining happiness. Using information from his book of ethics I will provide examples and quote on quote statements to support his views. In the second section, I will provide my agreements as to why I relate and very fond of Aristotle’s book of Nicomachean Ethics. In the third section, I will provide research as to why there are such objections to Aristotle’s book of ethics, and counter act as to why I disagree with them. Lastly I will conclude much of my and as well as Aristotle’s views on ethics and why I so strongly agree with this route of ethics for humans.
Aristotle accepts that there is an agreement that this chief good is happiness, but that there is a disagreement with the definition of happiness. Due to this argument, men divide the good into the three prominent types of life: pleasure, political and contemplative. Most men are transfixed by pleasure; a life suitable for “beasts”. The elitist life (politics) distinguishes happiness as honour, yet this is absurd given that honour is awarded from the outside, and one’s happiness comes from one’s self. The attractive life of money-making is quickly ruled out by Aristotle since wealth is not the good man seeks, since it is only useful for the happiness of something else.
Both Plato and Augustine offer unusual conceptions of what one must acquire to live a truly happy life. While the conventional view of happiness normally pertains to wealth, financial stability, and material possessions, Plato and Augustine suggest that true happiness is rooted in something independent of objects or people. Though dissimilar in their notions of that actual root, each respective philosophy views the attaining of that happiness as a path, a direction. Plato’s philosophy revolves around the attainment of eternal knowledge and achieving a metaphysical balance. Augustine also emphasizes one’s knowing the eternal, though his focus is upon living in humility before God. Both assert that human beings possess a natural desire for true happiness, and it is only through a path to something interminable that they will satisfy this desire.
Plato states being a just person ultimately lead to being a happy person. By giving the definition of what it is to be just, he is giving the definition of what it is to be happy. Plato shows through the definitions of being just he has given us the key to happiness. Through rationality and harmony we can achieve happiness. The definition in its self is a solution to becoming happy. And I thank Plato, for showing me the light.
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.
Plato, like Pythagoras, believes that knowledge of pure Forms and of “Being” is the direct path to someone living a life of salvation and of the highest quality. Plato, like Pythagoras, also believed that all of the forms are geometric figures and mathematical in nature. Also, Plato, like Heraclitus, believed that our world is constantly changing, or in a constant flux. Plato, also agreed with Parmenides, who believed that the real world is not the same as the world of our experience.
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.
“The Good Life” in Socrates mind isn 't’ just simply defined in this primary source, however, it is implied. It is clear Socrates believes that “The Good Life” isn’t about where one ended up, or how much material gain they inhabited through the course of their lives, it is about if they clung on to mortality and lived their lives doing what they believed was good. Socrates says, “A man who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying; he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or wrong - acting the part
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.
However, we can wonder if the pleasures that derive from necessary natural desires are what actually brings us happiness, since having a family, friends, a good job and doing fun things seem to bring the most joy in life. Plato’s ideas on life are even more radical, since he claims that we should completely take difference from our bodily needs. Therefore it seems that we should only do what is necessary for us to stay a life and solely focus on the mind. Although both ways of dealing with (bodily)pleasure are quite radical and almost impossible to achieve, it does questions if current perceptions of ‘living the good life’ actually leads to what we are trying to achieve, which is commonly described as
Happiness can be viewed as wealth, honour, pleasure, or virtue. Aristotle believes that wealth is not happiness, because wealth is just an economic value, but can be used to gain some happiness; wealth is a means to further ends. The good life, according to Aristotle, is an end in itself. Similar to wealth, honour is not happiness because honour emphases on the individuals who honour in comparison to the honouree. Honour is external, but happiness is not. It has to do with how people perceive one another; the good life is intrinsic to the...
Question: What is Aristotle’s idea of a good life and why does he view a good life in this way? Is Aristotle’s understanding of a good life accurate? Why or why not? (Make sure to talk about the concept of the mean).