Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Aristotle on virtue ethics
Critique of nicomachean ethics
Aristotle's theory of virtue
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Aristotle on virtue ethics
Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics provided a valuable framework based on his theories of achieving happiness and which life is the most worthy of fulfilling in life. One of his foundational beliefs in his system of beliefs is that happiness can be achieved on an individual level with the embracement of virtue. Determining what the virtue is, there exists two vices that set parameters as excessive or deficient, and what is in between is considered the virtue, or ‘mean state’, for which one should relate towards when using “good reason” to make an action. The ‘Doctrine of the Mean’ explains that a virtue is a mean between excessive and deficient, and the doctrine’s intentions were to push one towards achieving Eudaimonia, a Greek phrase that roughly …show more content…
To define the aretê, it is the overall excellence of something that is good and possesses the ability to function well at its role. For example, if one claims the excellence of an eye, it automatically attributes that the eye is both good and that of its work, the characteristic to have immaculate vision. Using such rationale, the excellence of a man would be defined as a state of character which makes a man good and that which makes him do his own work well. According to Aristotle, anything in this case can be virtuous, even inanimate objects like dry-erase markers for a whiteboard, can achieve its function, or Ergos, in the marker’s case, to have provided enough marker fluid to perform the action of scribing the information in question. The Doctrine of the Mean was in design a framework for defining what the virtues of man are. In turn, the framework provided a foundation for the aretê, the virtue or excellence itself, playing an essential part in the quest to achieving Eudaimonia. This doctrine contains precise steps for a precise path towards Eudaimonia and Aristotle demonstrates why such precision is needed, quoted that, “It is the mark of an educated man to look for precision in each class of things just so far that as the nature of the subject
Aristotle’s virtue ethics is based on eudaimonia. Eudaimonia is the ultimate end which means that your life is flourishing and you’re doing well in life. Eudaimonia is self-sufficient and gives one the ability to make life choices and have a lack for nothing.
The Nicomachean Ethics, written by Aristotle, represents his most important contribution within the field of Ethics; it is a collection of ten books, covering a variety of interesting topics, throughout the collection. 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. Without pretending to exhaust with too many references, it would be rather useful to focus on the most criticized part of the philosopher’s attempt, which is also the very starting point of his masterpiece, identified as eudaimonia (happiness, well being) and ergon (function), in Aristotelian terms.
In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle says that virtue and happiness come from achieving the moral mean. The moral mean is the midpoint between deficiency and excess in any particular behavior. For example, the moral mean of recklessness and cowardice is courage. In matters of ple...
From examining ends and goods, Aristotle formulates eudaimonia. He questions “what is the highest of all the goods achievable in action?” (Shafer-Landau 2013, 616). Aristotle argues that the majority of people agree that the highest good is achieving happiness, however, they disagree over what happiness actually is, for example, some claim t...
Simply defined, happiness is the state of being happy. But, what exactly does it mean to “be happy?” Repeatedly, many philosophers and ideologists have proposed ideas about what happiness means and how one attains happiness. In this paper, I will argue that Aristotle’s conception of happiness is driven more in the eye of ethics than John Stuart Mill. First, looking at Mill’s unprincipled version of happiness, I will criticize the imperfections of his definition in relation to ethics. Next, I plan to identify Aristotle’s core values for happiness. According to Aristotle, happiness comes from virtue, whereas Mill believes happiness comes from pleasure and the absence of pain. Ethics are the moral principles that govern a person’s behavior which are driven by virtues - good traits of character. Thus, Aristotle focuses on three things, which I will outline in order to answer the question, “what does it mean to live a good life?” The first of which is the number one good in life is happiness. Secondly, there is a difference between moral virtues and intellectual virtues and lastly, leading a good life is a state of character. Personally and widely accepted, happiness is believed to be a true defining factor on leading a well intentioned, rational, and satisfactory life. However, it is important to note the ways in which one achieves their happiness, through the people and experiences to reach that state of being. In consequence, Aristotle’s focus on happiness presents a more arguable notion of “good character” and “rational.”
The virtues defined by Aristotle consist of two extremes or vices, the excess and the deficiency. The mean or the intermediate between the excess and the deficiency is the virtue. One virtue Aristotle explains is bravery, with its vices being rashness and cowardice. Each aspect of these is contrary to the others, meaning that the intermediate opposes the extreme. Similarly, one extreme opposes the mean and its other extreme. The implications of this are that the excess opposes the deficiency more than the mean. This causes the mean to sometimes resemble its neighboring extreme. Obtaining the mean involves the challenge of being excellent. The challenging part, however, is “doing it to the right person, in the right amount, at the right time, for the right end, and in the right way” (Nicomachean Ethics 1109a28-29:29). Fortunately, one can steer themselves to the mean if one is conscious of the extreme they are naturally inclined to go towards. Since everybody is uniquely different the means by which one steers themselves in the right direction is different for each individual. In addition, Aristotle names three requirements for an action to be a virtue. First one must be cons...
The seeking of arête can be seen as a universal code of virtue or as the heroes code in the Iliad by Homer uses this code to very condescending making the hero code so important to achieve arête. Homer demonstrate that in the beginning where if the army conquered a land the spoils are divided by the ranking membe...
Aristotle’s “doctrine of the mean,” I believe, may shed some light on the nature of moral virtues (virtues of character). The doctrine of the mean can tell us some things about moral virtues, but I would also that the doctrine of the mean ultimately creates a rather unhelpful and overly simplistic concept of morality. More than anything, I think the doctrine of the mean tells us more about Aristotle than the nature of moral virtues. First, we should define the terms we are discussing. When Aristotle talked about “moral virtue,” he considered it a state of character— character as opposed to “virtues of intellect” (which Aristotle also talked about). The doctrine of the mean is Aristotle’s analytical model for determining how people can best
When we consider the questions of how we ought to live our lives, we often seek for some schematic that we can employ to help us categorize actions or qualities as good, bad, or indifferent. Such a means of organization would indeed make it easier to determine what the right thing to do is. Aristotle once attempted to formulate a similar plan. His ethics used a scheme by which characteristics could be measured and the right amount attained. Such an account is known as the doctrine of the mean. Aristotle’s doctrine is meant to illuminate the nature of eudaimonia, which can be briefly defined as succeeding or flourishing, the key to which is arête.
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.
Interest is sparked in this area that Aristotle writes of because there is a natural need for Ethics in human life. John K. Roth states, “Aristotle assumes that all things, human beings included, have a good, a purpose or end, which it is their nature to fulfill”. This helps one understand Aristotle’s way of thinking, and provides insight to the basis of his theories. A common theory explored by Aristotle is the Ethics of Virtues, and how to practice them. A theory included in Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics is the unity of all the virtues, and in order to be virtuous, one must exhibit all the virtues. One of these virtues being practical wisdom, or Phronesis.
It was Aristotle’s belief that everything, including humans, had a telos or goal in life. The end result or goal was said to be happiness or “eudaimonia”. He explained that eudaimonia was different for each person, and that each had a different idea of what it meant. Further, he said that people must do things in moderation, but at the same time do enough. The theory, of “the golden mean of moderation” was the basis to Aristotle's idea of the human telos and concluded that living a virtuous life must be the same for all people. Aristotle maintained that the natural human goal to be happy could only be achieved once each individual determined his/her goal. A person’s telos is would usually be what that individual alone can do best. Aristotle described the humans as "rational animals" whose telos was to reason. Accordingly, Aristotle thought that in order for humans to be happy, they would have to be able to reason, and to be governed by reason. If a person had difficulty behaving morally or with ethics, he was thought to be “imperfect”. Moral virtue, a principle of happiness, was the ability to evade extremes in behavior and further to find the mean between it and adequacy. Aristotle’s idea of an ideal state was one where the populous was able to practice eth...
Happiness is the goal of every human beings according to Aristotle, however what does happiness imply? It is in his attempt to define happiness and to find a way to attain it that Aristotle comes across the idea of virtue. It is thus necessary to explain the relationship between these two terms. I will start by defining the good and virtue and then clarify their close link with the argument of function, I will then go into more details in explaining the different ways in which they are closely related and finally I am going to give an account of the apparent contradiction in Book X which is a praise of the life of study.
Aristotle once stated that, “But if happiness be the exercise of virtue, it is reasonable to suppose that it will be the exercise of the highest virtue; and that will be the virtue or excellence of the best part of us.” (481) It is through Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics that we are able to gain insight into ancient Greece’s moral and ethical thoughts. Aristotle argues his theory on what happiness and virtue are and how man should achieve them.
Probably one of the most controversial issues in philosophy is the search for Truth. The Truth in ethics and morality are particularly important, because it determines the way of life one would choose to live for individual; for society as a whole, it is the foundation of human civilization and it is the basis for laws and orders. I believe that the Doctrine of Golden Mean developed by Aristotle has provided a plausible guide to moral goodness, for him the golden mean is the desirable middle between two extremes, one of excess and the other of deficiency, this idea was first published in his book The Nicomachean Ethics. In my opinion, the middle path of moderation is achievable for any one; one can live his or her life through moderation and it can be accomplished by developing virtue as a habit.