Aristotelian Philosophy Essay Research Paper Aristotle argues free essay sample

Aristotelean Philosophy Essay, Research Paper Aristotle argues that felicity, map and morality are closely connected and that virtuousness is dependent upon all of them. To to the full grok Aristotle? s theory, we must foremost analyze each of these qualities and so find how they are related to one another. The deliberation procedure will demo that all of these qualities can be strongly connected, but non entirely. Happiness, map, morality and virtuousness can be independent of one another. The first deliberation is to specify felicity. Happiness is the highest of all practical goods identified with? populating good of making good? ( 100 ) . Harmonizing to Aristotle, Every art and every enquiry, and likewise every action and chase, is thought to take at some good ; and for this ground the good has justly been declared to be that at which all things aim. But a certain difference is found among terminals ( 99 ) . An illustration of this contemplation would be the concluding merchandise created by an designer. We will write a custom essay sample on Aristotelian Philosophy Essay Research Paper Aristotle argues or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page This single completed constructing a construction from start to complete and has reached the terminal of the undertaking. The designer is pleased by the consequences of what she created. The designer achieved the coveted result and is hence happy. A difference between the existent terminal and the desired result is what makes felicity different for each person. All terminals do non lead to happiness. For illustration, completing a picture makes the creative person happy but non the autoworker whose preferable terminal is doing vehicles. The fact that non all human existences portion the same ends proves that felicity is found at different terminals. Aristotle illustrates happiness as being the? head good? . In the following quotation mark he explains that rational human existences take felicity for itself and neer for any other grounds: Since there are obviously more than one terminal, and we choose some of these? for the interest of something else, clearly non all terminals are concluding terminals ; but the main good is obviously something concluding. ( 103 ) . By this definition, felicity must be merely the concluding terminal, which is the? head good? ( 103 ) . This means that felicity is the chase of all that which is desired, and the desire is to make the concluding terminal. If the terminal is concluding it becomes the? head good? ( 103 ) . In Aristotle? s ain words he says, ? Happiness, so, is something concluding and self-sufficing, and is the terminal of action? ( 103 ) . To state that felicity is the lone head good is non wholly true. If felicity is the lone head good than what is our map as human existences? Aristotle associates working good with felicity and felicity is the concluding consequence. He says that the map of human being is, ? ? an activity of psyche which follows or implies a rational rule? ? ( 103 ) . Human existences must hold the ability to exert their capacity to ground in order to map good. Reasoning is the cardinal factor in doing determinations. Human existences usage concluding to make up ones mind what choices to do in life. The result of the picks worlds make is what creates desire. As a consequence, desires are what determine the ? head good? ( 103 ) . If the head good is felicity, than the map of human existences and concluding must besides be happiness. One will remain on the way towards felicity if logical thinking is used as a map of life. Having virtuousness is an indispensable portion of the equation that sustains felicity and the ability to map good. Rather than taking roundabout waies down waies of lack and inordinateness, one may utilize concluding to go a virtuous individual. By remaining committed to the way toward felicity, one is considered virtuous. Aristotle claims that the, ? virtuousness of adult male besides will be the province of character which makes a adult male good and which makes him make his ain work good? ( 111 ) . If the above statement is true than merely virtuous human existences are happy and if they are happy than they must besides be working good. Aristotle so divides virtuousness into two separate countries: rational virtuousness and moral virtuousness. He says that moral vir tue is the consequence of? wont? ( 108 ) . If moral virtuousness is ? wont? ( 108 ) , it can non be? nature? ( 109 ) . Let us convey this to a deeper degree. Gravity by nature pulls everything to the Earth? s surface at a fixed rate. This rate can neer be changed by the wont of something else. For illustration, no affair how many times running H2O is diverted from its original way to the lowest point, the Torahs of natural philosophies will ever predominate. The running H2O will one time once more happen its way to the lowest point. This proves that any kind of wont can non alter nature. However, rational virtuousness comes from what is taught and learned throughout life by wont. Aristotle? s illustration of rational virtuousness is made clear when he says, ? ? legislators make the citizens good by organizing wonts in them, and this is the want of every legislator, and those who do non consequence it miss their grade, and it is in this that a good fundamental law differs from a bad one? ( 109 ) . If virtuousness is the province of character, than the province of character defined by Aristotle is, ? what makes a adult male good and which makes him make his ain work good? ( 111 ) . If it is true that virtuousness gives people a pick, than Aristotle is right when he states without uncertainty that we as human existences could, ? ? take more, less, or an equal sum? ( 112 ) . If a individual chooses to remain within the mean than they are ? intercede? or equal. If they choose to? take more? than they are inordinate. Finally, if they choose to take? less? so they are lacking ( 112 ) . Therefore, felicity and virtuousness are mediate extra and lack. For illustration, if one is inordinate in the feature of bravery than others might see them as being afraid of nil. If an person is afraid of nil than they can non be happy. Peoples do non ever look up to absolute bravery. There is a clip and topographic point for bravery. The same can be said for those people who are deficient or deficient bravery. In other words, felicity is being intermediate. Aristotle has some good points when he speaks about the constructs of felicity, but his ideas besides imply that felicity, map, morality and virtuousness are all tied together as if they are inseparable. He states that felicity is the purpose of the? head good? . Function is the ability to ground, morality is cognition gained through wont of what is right or incorrect and virtuousness is a province of head of that which is intermediate. The manner Aristotle ties these separate elements together is singular and in a perfect universe his theory would likely be true. The lone down autumn to his hypothesis is that this universe in which we live is non a perfect 1. Even Aristotle says that the? head good? is the ? concluding terminal? ( 100 ) . If this is so, than life can non be considered happy until it ceases to be. The ability to ground is non the lone intent of human being. The chief map of human existences is alternatively the ability to last with the advantage of being able to ground. Morality is the differentiation between what is right and incorrect and this differentiation is dependent on the person and the state of affairs. Virtue includes all features that have merit and that are held in high respect. This deliberation with Aristotle? s theory has proven that felicity, map, morality and virtuousness are tied to one another in a perfect universe. These four elements are besides inter-mingled in our non-perfect universe, but merely under certain fortunes. This is because every homo being has their ain perceptual experience of what represents felicity, map, morality and virtuousness. Finally, Aristotle says that virtuousness is being intermediate, but how realistic is it to believe that virtuousness can merely be for those who ever stay with-in the intend? Merely as we don? Ts have a perfect universe, there is no perfect homo being either. Newberry, Paul A. Theories of Ethical motives. Mayfield Printing Company: California, 1999. Nicomachean Ethical motives. 2000. Online. Internet. 22 Feb.1994-1998. Available: hypertext transfer protocol: //classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.1.i.html