Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
A sample of philosophical evaluation on Aristotle's nicomachean ethics
Nicomachean ethics by aristotle essay
Book II of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Aristole’s Nichomachean Ethics is a critically acclaimed piece of literature that has laid the framework for philosophy as we know it today. It is considered to be a historical piece that was the first to address ethics in a unified, clear, and concise manner. The book was translated by F. H. Peters with an introduction by Hye-Kyung Kim. Aristotle was one of the great early philosophers who ventured to speak to humans about how they conducted themselves as they related to others; however, some of Aristotle’s ideologies were debated by his counterparts for hundreds of years. Aristotle’s plethora of ideas was and has been adopted by past and present philosophers as they approached subject matter that had very few definitive answers. Aristotle was born in circa 384 B. C. and died in 322 B.C.
According to Kim’s introduction, Aristotle considered ethics to be the “art of living well.” His writings reflected a perpetual quest to gain a better understanding of human character and how it is intertwined with virtues that are the impetus for human happiness. Aristotle has been deemed the writer of the first “systematic treatise” on ethics. He was essentially the first person to approach ethics from a more organized and deeper perspective. The book is divided into to sub-topics, and each human characteristic is examined and dissected without the constraints of a rigorous rule book. His teleological view of human life originates from his Greek background. He strongly supported the theory that there is an end or fulfillment that should be pursued by each individual. His theories are not as prominent in today’s world, but they are still considered the capstone for the discipline of philosophy.
He attempts to find the correl...
... middle of paper ...
...mbraced categorically.
Aristotle’s scholarly projections were not cursory overviews of the dynamics of the human quest for good over evil. He establishes his theory and gives several explanations, examples, and analogies that support his theory. Nichomachean Ethics explains the particulars of interactions with others, and it encourages the reader to examine himself. Evidence and traces of Aristotlian Nichomachean Ethics can be seen throughout All The President’s Men. Most human’s have the desire to reach a place of fulfillment or the “end” as described in the book. Aristotle has given us a guide book to better understand how we act and react. There are critics who disagree with some of his findings, but they do acknowledge that this piece of literature is a remarkable book that has allowed some to make strides in the interdisciplinary field of philosophy.
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.
Nichomachean Ethics by Aristotle attempts to define the meaning of ethics and to create the perfect society as did Plato in The Republic. In Aristotle’s attempt at definition he discusses the difference and significance of voluntary and involuntary action. Beginning by defining, Aristotle soon realizes many situations are too complex for just black vs. white terms and he introduces another term; non-voluntary. This leads to discussion of choice and deliberation, bringing his viewpoints into applicable terms, out of philosophy and into everyday life.
I chose to write about Aristotle and his beliefs about how the virtuous human being needs friends from Book VIII from Nicomachean Ethics. In this essay I will talk about the three different kinds of friendship that (Utility, Pleasure, and Goodness) that Aristotle claims exist. I will also discuss later in my paper why Aristotle believes that Goodness is the best type of friendship over Utility or Pleasure. In addition to that I will also talk about the similarities and differences that these three friendships share between one another. And lastly I will argue why I personally agree with Aristotle and his feelings on how friendship and virtue go hand in hand and depend on each other.
Aristotle. The Nicomachean Ethics. David Ross, trans. J. L. Ackrill and J. O. Urmson, revisions. Oxford World’s Classics paperback, 1998.
Aristotle. "Nicomachean Ethics." Classics of Moral and Political Theory. 3rd ed. Trans. Terence Irwin. Ed. Michael L. Morgan. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 2001.
One vigorous line of thought in contemporary moral philosophy, which I shall call ‘Neo-Aristotelianism,’ centers on three things: (1) a rejection of traditional enlightenment moral theories like Kantianism and utilitarianism; (2) a claim that another look at the ethical concerns and projects of ancient Greek thought might help us past the impasse into which enlightenment moral theories have left us; (3) more particularly, an attempt to reinterpret Aristotle’s ethical work for the late twentieth-century so as to transcend this impasse.
Aristotle, W. D. Ross, and Lesley Brown. The Nicomachean Ethics. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2009. Print.
Gakuran, Michael. "Aristotle’s Moral Philosophy | Gakuranman • Adventure First." Gakuranman Adventure First RSS. N.p., 21 May 2008. Web.
In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he discusses the principles of virtue, choices and a desire for an end. In the 5th chapter of book 3, Aristotle gives a possible argument of someone who objects to his beliefs “But someone might argue as follows: ‘All Men seek what appears good to them, but they have no control over how things appear to them; the end appears different to different men” (1114b). Based on the objector’s generalization, he or she believes that all men strive to find the ultimate good, but they don't have the freedom or the wisdom to see things for what they truly are.
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics. Rpt. in Ethical Theories: A Book of Readings second edition. Ed. A. I. Melden. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1967. 106-109.
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.
Kraut, Richard. Aristotle`s Ethics. Stanford Online Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Tue. July 17 2007. Retrieved Nov 22 2009
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.
Aristotle in his virtue ethics states that a virtuous individual is someone with ideal traits. These characteristic traits normally come from an individual’s innate tendency but should be cultivated. After they are cultivated, these character traits supposedly become stable in an individual. Moral consequentilaists and deontologists are normally concerned with universal doctrines that can be utilized in any situation that requires moral interpretation. Unlike these theorists, Aristotle’s virtue ethics are concerned with the general questions such as “what is a good life”, “what are proper social and family values”, and “how should one live” (Bejczy 32). Aristotle developed his virtue ethics based on three central principles; eudaimonia, ethics of care, and agent based theories. Eudaimonia stipulates that virtues can be seen in the way an individual flourishes; flourishing under this concept refers to one’s ability to perform their functions with distinct accuracy (Bejczy 33).
In Book III of Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle discusses the acquisition of character, responsibility for the end that occurs, and potential objections to his theory of moral responsibility. Though he doesn’t explicitly state his rebuttals, he does introduce a key idea that further supports his initial argument and revises the definition of people’s nature to do actions.