Aristotle believes we obey laws because by obeying laws and following the justice system it leads to a good relationship between a monarch and the citizens. For example, he believes that kings that operated within the laws were those who were most successful and willing to have obedient citizens. According to Aristotle, we disobey laws because of moral character or qualities. He believes that some people have good qualities and some people don’t. For example, someone’s bad action or quality could lead to that person breaking the law. To Aristotle, obedience is very important, he hates dishonest people. He has a very close connection between justice and law. Aristotle thinks laws should be made with strict principles of justice and that true
In what follows, I shall consider Aristotle's’ argument of the polis, or the city-state, as presented in his Politics I.2, and expound on the philosophical implications of this particular thesis; namely, a thesis which claims that the city-state exists by nature, and correspondingly, that a human being is ‘by nature a political animal’. Along the way, I shall present two objections leveled against each claim. The first pertains to the invalidity of the argument on ends; specifically, I shall protest that when a thing’s process of coming to be is completed, even if we regard this as an end, this does not necessarily confer that such an end is a natural end, for artificial processes too, like natural processes, share the potential to arrive at ends. The second pertains to the ‘part-whole’ argument, which in a sense takes from the argument of function. Here, I shall discuss that it is not quite clear whether the claim that human beings - as parts of the whole - are necessarily political animals, and so the view that the state is ‘prior by nature’ is uncertain. After that, I will present two Aristotelian responses against these objections; and judge whether or not these appear succeed. I conclude that he is correct in asserting that the city-state exists by nature, and correspondingly, that a human being is a political animal.
First of all, Aristotle believed that happiness is the main goal of human lives and he dedicated himself to the topic of just acts which lead to happiness. One of his description’s of philosophy is that a happy life requires fulfilment of physical and mental well being throughout their lifetime leading to full enrichment. This influences the law in Canada as the laws are there to help the citizens achieve success and avoid situations that would cause distress or misery. Aristotle also believed that virtue must be created and is achieved by maintaining a
The formula of humanity and universal laws help people decide how a certain act would affect the world and if it would be a moral thing to do. This allows for a more standardization of figuring out if something is moral or not. Aristotle’s view of virtue is like The Bible. The things that he finds are virtuous can be seen in different ways. For example, people use The Bible to say certain things like men shouldn’t marry other men or that capital punishment is bad, but other people can use the same text to argue that men should get married and that capital punishment is fine. Same can be said for Aristotle because he gives a list of virtues in chapter 7, but these virtues can be seen in different ways. An example of this could be friendliness which is a virtue. People can be too friendly or not friendly enough but it’s personal preference and changes for everyone. Furthermore, some virtues aren’t on the list, and as societies grow more virtuous characteristics arise as
Writers, such as Cicero and Ovid, investigated philosophical issues of life that bewildered antiquated Romans. These problems include, how to compose laws that can be justified as moral and civil absolutes, and how to manage the changes of love between two individuals. Within Cicero's On The Laws and poems written by Ovid, the authors address some of these issues and offer a resolution for each.
Act utilitarianism is essentially getting the best possible solution to benefit to greatest number of people. This theory that states the majority rules and takes everyone’s feelings into consideration. With act utilitarianism, there 's a measurement unit called the Hedonic Calculus which interprets the level of happiness and sadness. The approach act utilitarianism takes is to benefit more people than harm them. However, if the act harms more people than pursue their best interest then it 's considered wrong. Although this idea is quite multiplex it can distinguish what is right from wrong. In this particular theory, the critical thinking process consist of serval steps which involve identifying the ethical decision to be made, list all the various actions that could occur, list all the people who are affected by these decisions, and determine the total sum happiness and unhappiness with the results. With these steps, it can be determined what is the most superior possible outcome
Morals are developed from the moment we are born to the moment we die, and are cultivated by what we see, hear, and do within our lives, but more importantly by the people we meet. In the world there are all manner of things for us to bear witness to, whether it be the beauty of birth or the gritty horror that is war, in either case men and women are shaped and changed by these events whether it be good or bad. The greek philosopher Aristotle is quoted as saying, “And to say what makes good morals vs what are bad ones is completely based on self, for no two people have the same upbringing, class, or position in life, for how is a slave who has known nothing but the brutality of his/her master to understand under what morals, owned by their
This is particularly interesting with reference to the aforementioned passage, as there is no reference to which form of justice Aristotle is referring when he says “when men are friends they have no need of justice” (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, 1155a). Earlier in the text, Aristotle delineates two forms of justice: a justice that is “a part of virtue”, or “particular justice”, and a justice “that is not part of virtue but the whole of virtue [...] but their essence is not the same” (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, 1130a-b). The second form of justice is a more universal form of justice, differentiated from virtue as the exterior consequence of an interior quality of being virtuous. When Aristotle says that “when men are friends they have no need of justice”, he is likely referring to the first form of justice, the particular justice, which is itself broken down into four other types: distributive, rectificatory, reciprocal and equity. All four of these types of justices explain how it is that people should engage in transactions with one another, and how these transactions and engagements should be corrected. When people are friends, the idea that they have no need for justice simply means there is no need for a corrective form of justice, as all transactions made between friends—individuals who share concern and wish well-being for one another—should innately be done in a just fashion. Aristotle does not suggest that “when men are friends they have no need for [universal] justice”, nor does he suggest that abiding by the particular form of justice is unnecessary in the basest forms of
The goal of human life according to Aristotle is Happiness as he stated in Nicomachean Ethics, “Happiness, then, is apparently something complete and self-sufficient, since it is the end of the things achievable in action.” Aristotle states that happiness is not just about being content in life but that one has to have lived their life rationally, well, and to the fullest of their capabilities. Happiness, according to Aristotle, can only be achieved by focusing on mans’ life as parts of a whole.
Throughout Aristotle’s life and career as a philosopher, he modified and formulated many ideas that deal with the psyche and state of the mind and body. One of the most prevalent ideas that he studied was the quest for happiness. He had many theories about it, but most merged to become the Nicomachean Ethics
Aristotle, a student of Plato, is known for his contributions in many fields of philosophy, ethics being one of the most prominent. He produced the first methodical and collected ethical system to be produced by an ancient Greek philosopher, found in his book the Nicomachean Ethics. This, along with the less-read Eudemian Ethics, are his ethical accounts that we have today.
Gakuran, Michael. "Aristotle’s Moral Philosophy | Gakuranman • Adventure First." Gakuranman Adventure First RSS. N.p., 21 May 2008. Web.
Aristotle tries to draw a general understanding of the human good, exploring the causes of human actions, trying to identify the most common ultimate purpose of human actions. Indeed, Aristotelian’s ethics, also investigates through the psychological and the spiritual realms of human beings.
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 man and the good citizen are not one and the same. What can be said about one cannot be necessarily said about the other. It is essential for the good man to be a good citizen. It is not, though, vital for the good citizen to be a good man. This distinction is important to make, because it helps one understand that the qualities a good man possesses far supersede those of a good citizen. A good citizen does what is best for the community, his city. As long as he is no harm to his surroundings, and cares for the improvement and betterment of his city, he is a good citizen. Who a person is doesn't greatly affect what kind of citizen he will be. What if a man is a secret murderer? If we were to say that he only kills people outside of his city, would he be affecting the city in any way? If he was a great politician and lived this secret life as well would he still be a great citizen? The answer is yes. This is because the good citizen doesn't have to care about others. He can allow his desires to overpower his calculating. He doesn't have to have a well-ordered soul. In other words, he doesn't have to be a good man. Aristotle chooses to search for the difference between the good man and the good citizen by examining and analyzing their virtues. He concludes that, "Hence, the virtue of a citizen must be suited to his constitution.
Plato believed that everything had an ideal form, but Aristotle looked into the real world and studied that. Instead of inventing a system of government, Aristotle explored more of practical things that you can realistically put into effect. Aristotle’s main aim was to “consider, not only what form of government is best, but also what is possible and what is easily attainable”. Meaning that he wanted everyone to be able to relate and adapt to his form of power. He wanted people to be servant to his laws because if the law were an order, it would make a good society. He ended up maintaining a government somewhat like a democracy, where the middle class is strong. Aristotle produced natural domination as one of his biggest theories. Aristotle believed that people were born into being a ruler or in slavery. He wanted people to accept what they are and do what they were born to do. It was the only way that he thought the world would be able to work and not come out with a lot of problems. This is way he believes that everyone is born with a color that tells you your placement in the world. Your placement is not genetic and can’t run in the