Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysis of aristotle
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
A theft problem has raised many questions from this common philosophical problem. To steal of not to steal, can it be justified. For an object to be considered stolen it must be worth value to another person, taken without consent, and taken without anything in return. The value doesn’t have to be in a way of monetary form either. If you leave something behind, is this still a form of stealing. From a merely legal perspective, theft is crime that is punishable because it is a criminal offense and is against the civic and natural law. From a moral perspective, Aristotle and Locke would both argue stealing is not permissible because it is not generous, virtuous or good. A thief is driven to provide for himself from other sources, which …show more content…
This is because theft does not achieve happiness, generosity or fulfill the human good. According to Aristotle, the human good comes to be disclosed as a being-at-work of the soul in accordance with virtue (Aristotle, 1098a16). In other words, one must work hard and practice what they intend to achieve in order to be successful. Theft skips the step of working hard. Thus, stealing is a form of laziness that someone may resort to who does not want to put in the work to rightfully obtain something with value. Once success has been achieved, one can fulfill happiness. By stealing, one is not in a state of being-at-work because they are participating in an action that is morally wrong. If doing good is virtuous and stealing is wrong, stealing therefore, cannot be virtuous and a happy person does not steal. Additionally, Aristotle’s discussion of generosity makes a thief less virtuous and good. The person who will use wealth best is the one who has the virtue that is connected with money, and this is a generous person (Aristotle, 1120a10). A thief does not use wealth best because he chooses to not pay for what he steals, thus a thief is not a generous person. It is more characteristic of virtue to act well than to be acted upon well, and to do beautiful things rather than shameful ones (Aristotle, 1120a15). Therefore, stealing is a shameful act because Aristotle says it is not a beautiful thing. So a thief is not virtuous, not good and not generous. A thief is a wasteful person who takes from where they ought not to (Aristotle, 1120a30). This is important because people who are generous, do good and are virtuous, can provide for themselves and not depend on others’ labor. Aristotle’s claim about the ultimate good and happiness support that stealing is not acceptable, even if it is for a good reason, because stealing is an
As Aristotle said in his “Nicomachean Ethics”, the wise people that you will meet in life will pick “honor, pleasure, reason, and every virtue” to try to achieve what they think is happiness. Also in this book he states that obtaining pure happiness comes from “sufficiently being equipped with external goods” and that this is what brings people happiness and satisfies them. Pretty much Aristotle is saying that people that would have excess goods, such as money, food, cars, clothes, houses, and other comforts to human beings, and if they had these items they would be ha...
I disagree with this idea presented by Aristotle for it has often been the case that a person 's moral character has actually been influenced negatively by the possession or desire for tangible object. Aristotle’s views on ownership parallel the ideas that are presented by Glaucon in Plato’s Republic when he proposed the Ring of Gyges as a way to show that it is human nature to accept material things in exchange for a loss in morality. In this way, Glaucon destroys the notion that ownership of materialistic objects helps to develop moral character for Glaucon’s scenario shows that it is human nature to disregard morality in search for material goods. In this way, Glaucon’s argument disproves Aristotle’s idea that ownership of tangible objects helps to develop moral
Ownership is the act, state, or right of possessing something. Many people believe taking ownership is parallel to taking responsibility. In some cases, taking responsibility can be rewarding, but in other cases, it can be very self centered. According to Aristotle, ownership of tangible objects leads to develop moral character, even though it is not stated whether those morals are good or bad. Plato exaggerates how disparaging ownership can be to one's character and life. The affect ownership obtains on moral character is intensely detrimental.
In conclusion, Aristotle’s elucidation of happiness is based on a ground of ethics because happiness to him is coveted for happiness alone. The life of fame and fortune is not the life for Aristotle. Happiness is synonymous for living well. To live well is to live with virtue. Virtue presents humans with identification for morals, and for Aristotle, we choose to have “right” morals. Aristotle defines humans by nature to be dishonored when making a wrong decision. Thus, if one choses to act upon pleasure, like John Stuart Mill states, for happiness, one may choose the wrong means of doing so. Happiness is a choice made rationally among many pickings to reach this state of mind. Happiness should not be a way to “win” in the end but a way to develop a well-behaved, principled reputation.
Aristotle begins his ethical account by saying that “every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and every choice, is thought to aim for some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim” (line 1094a1). Though some things might produce higher good than others, Aristotle looks for the highest good, which he says we must “desire for its own sake” and our actions are not decided on some other goal beyond this good itself (line 1094a20-25).[1] This highest good is then realized to be happiness (line 1095a16-20).
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.
To achieve complete happiness, Aristotle says that we need three kinds of goods. The first of these goods is that of the soul, which is moral character and practical wisdom. Aristotle explains that in order to maintain the soul, we must also have external and bodily goods. He says we need external goods such as friends, food, and some money; without these, we are not able to flourish. Furthermore we need goods of the body, which are the basic supplies for health, strength, and beauty. According to Aristotle, if we have all these we are able to live our life to the fullest, which means to live well and to do things well (NE 1098b20). Particular to this paper I will focus on why Aristotle thinks external goods are necessary for happiness. Aristotle says, “He is happy who lives in accordance with complete virtue and is sufficiently equipped with external goods, not for some chance period but throughout a complete life” (NE 1101a15). It is Aristotle’s explicit view that virtue is necessary but not sufficient for happiness. He views external and bodily goods as instruments deemed necessary to live a virtuous life. He says, “it is impossible or not easy for someone without equipment to do what is noble: many things are done through instruments, as it were—through friends, wealth, and political power. Those who are bereft of some of these (for example, good birth, good children, or beauty) disfigure their blessedness, for a person who is altogether ugly in appearance, or of poor birth, or solitary and childless cannot really be characterized as happy; and he is perhaps still less happy, if he should have altogether bad children or friends or, though he didn’t have good ones, they are dead. Just as we said then, [happiness] seems to require some such external prosperity in addition” (NE 1099b5). This quote contradicts in many ways with how Aristotle previously described happiness. Aristotle says happiness is
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.
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.
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.
To start, according to Aristotle, the end of every action aims at a good (1094a1-10). He goes on to say that the highest good is the most complete, that it is good in itself and is not chosen to gain something else. Aristotle believes that the highest good that every action aims for is happiness, because it is self-sufficient (1097b1-10). For example, why does a person want a high paying job? So they can earn money. Why does a person want money? So they can get things. Why does a person want to get things? So they can become happy, or believe that it would give them happiness. Aristotle comes to this conclusion by taking into account the opinions of people, realizing that almost everyone is trying to obtain happiness (1095a10-20). In addition, Aristotle believes the means for achieving happiness are through the excellence of one's being. The term Aristotle uses here is aretê, or virtue. Essentially, virtue is the excellence of something, in this case moral action (1095b20-30). Virtue leads to happiness because it "seems to be more durable even than the kinds of knowledge" (1100b10-20). Earlier, Aristotle came to the conclusion that happiness is something that is not changed easily. If ...
According to Aristotle, generosity is the mean virtue between wastefulness and ungenerosity. In broad terms, generosity is not ascribed to those who take wealth more seriously than what is right. Since generosity is relating to wealth and anything whose worth is measured by money, anything can be used either well or badly. Hence, in the virtue of generosity, whoever is the best user of something is the person who has the virtue concerned with it, which is the generous person. Whereas the possession of wealth is taking and keeping, using wealth consists of spending and giving, which is why “it is more proper to the generous person to give to the right people than to take from the right sources and not from the wrong sources” (1120a10). Since not taking is easier than giving, more thanks will be given to the giver. The generous person will also aim at the fine in his giving and will give correctly; “for he will give to the right people, the right amounts, at the right time, and all the other things that are implied by correct giving” (1120a25). As a result, it is not easy for the generous person to grow rich, since he is ready to spend and not take or keep,...
Aristotle rejects the idea of universal happiness by explaining how Plato does not incorporate the large number of variants. Aristotle believes that good is not a single, common universal, because what it is to be good is particular to the essence of the individual. One might also argue that other common factors associated with happiness were wealth, pleasure, knowledge, and honor. Aristotle disagrees and found each of these limited to the notion of the good of man. Some benefits that may motivate them to seek better opportunities within their career may be the thought of money bringing happiness and also they will practice living the good life. Developing a good character requires a strong effort of will to do the right thing, even in difficult situations. The general idea that happiness is a result of the wealth is skewed from reality. Wealth is a means to happiness, not actual happiness, one who is wealthy, but is unable to actually use the money is not happy. Aristotle feels the good for man is something that is not dependent on anything else, so being wealthy is not something desirable. Happiness is not pleasurable sensations that can be gained or lost, it is what we seek when acting and is a condition of a person over a lifetime, not at one
... our society, where good deeds are preformed with the hope of being rewarded, it is more than evident that personal happiness dominates. Personal happiness is not always bad, however, it just seems that the majority of times in our society it is dominated by self-interest. The domination of self-interest is seen everyday in the modern business world with companies unfairly using monopolies to eliminate their competition and also governments trying to invade other countries or regions in order to maximize their territory. It seems that unless the motive of self-interest is eliminated from the pursuit of happiness, we most likely will not experience the type of well being that Aristotle was describing.
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...