Comparing Function And Virtue In Plato's Nicomachean Ethics

In Plato’s Republic I and Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics (Book 1: Chapter 7), the philosophers examine function/virtue in its relation to human life through two separate function arguments. Both Plato and Aristotle reason that every material and non-material thing has a particular function and virtue that allows its function to perform better. Along these lines, Plato and Aristotle further argue that all humans possess a particular function and virtue in their souls that allows certain individuals to live better than others. For instance, Plato reasons that a just person will always live better than an unjust person. However, Plato ultimately fails to logically establish the basis for human function/virtue while also over emphasizing the value of justice in living a good life. In his function argument, Aristotle differs from Plato in that he examines human happiness as a distinct human function. In turn, Aristotle ultimately argues that a human’s distinct function is the soul’s activity that expresses reason (1098a-10). (Note: Aristotle

There are more factors that influence the quality of a human life than living justly. For instance, a person that is temperate or courageous might be considered to lead a substantially better life than a just person. Thus, a courageous surgeon would probably find his/her life more fulfilling than a wrongfully incarcerated just person. In a slightly different way, someone might further argue that some humans achieve a better life through a specific skill or craft. For example, the alpinist could live a better life in so far as he/she takes pleasure in climbing. In fact, some alpinists might value the act of climbing for its own sake without considering its external consequences. In turn, these people would presumably find their lives less fulfilling without mountain climbing even they had complete justice of the