In considering what is a good person, Socrates teaches us that a person who lives a life that performs good will lead to living a life as a good person. Whatever our reasons may be for performing good will lead us to living a life as a good person. In choosing to do good we bring ourselves into a virtuous life. Aristotle believes in what Socrates teaches but goes further to define why we perform good brings a person happiness because we purposefully choose to do good. With a balanced personal character and living a virtues life, Aristotle believes that we can bring personal happiness to ourselves, the world and in the end become a good person. Socrates held that if we choose to do good, then we are essentially a good person regardless …show more content…
No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, or go into the houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, or kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects, be like a God among men. Then the actions of the just would be as the action of the unjust; they would both come at last to the same point. And this we may truly affirm to be a great proof that a man is just, not willing or because he thinks justice is any good to him individually, but of necessity for wherever anyone thinks that he can safely be unjust, there he is unjust” (Plato …show more content…
Through learned experiences and a continuous improvement of one’s self, we can be virtuous and develop a positive character that is interpreted as a good person. Aristotle states in Book I of Nicomachean, “to judge from the lives that men lead, most men, and men of the most vulgar type, seem (not without some ground, or happiness, with pleasure; which is the reason why they love the life of enjoyment. For there are, we may say, three prominent types of life-that just mentioned, the political and thirdly the contemplative life” (49). Continuous improvement of one’s self through the virtues and avoidance of the vices are Aristotle’s way of improving a person’s character. However, this requires a balancing act between the two extremes of virtue and vice. In Book II of Nicomachean, Aristotle
In Walter Mosley’s Always Outnumbered, Always Outgunned, the reader is introduced to Socrates Fortlow, an ex-convict who served twenty-seven years for murder and rape. Fortlow is plagued by guilt and, seeing the chaos in his town, feels a need to improve not only his own standards of living, but also those of others in Watts. He attempts this by teaching the people in Watts the lessons he feels will resolve the many challenges the neighbourhood faces. The lessons Fortlow teaches and the methods by which he teaches them are very similar to those of the ancient Greek philosopher for whom Fortlow was named: “‘We was poor and country. My mother couldn’t afford school so she figured that if she named me after somebody smart then maybe I’d get smart’” (Mosley, 44). Though the ancient Greek was born to be a philosopher and Fortlow assumed the philosopher role as a response to the poor state of his life and Watts, both resulted in the same required instruction to their populations. The two Socrates’ both utilize a form of teaching that requires their pupil to become engaged in the lesson. They emphasize ethics, logic, and knowledge in their instruction, and place importance on epistemology and definitions because they feel a problem cannot be solved if one does not first know what it is. Socrates was essential in first introducing these concepts to the world and seemed to be born with them inherent to his being, Fortlow has learned the ideals through life experience and is a real-world application in an area that needs the teachings to get on track. While the two men bear many similarities, their differences they are attributed primarily as a result of their circumstances provide the basis of Fortlow’s importance in Watts and as a modern-...
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.
In the reading “The Way of Reason” Aristotle tries to define the good that is within mankind. He moves through a variety of exercises that narrow down and simplify the ideas that man is inherently good and that his tendency for it is deliberate and pre-destined. He looks at different activities, then breaks them down and finds the part that leads toward the final happiness. He feels that if man is truly good within his soul that he will be happy. Not necessarily happy as joyful, but, more like content or satisfied.
There are times in every mans life where our actions and beliefs collide—these collisions are known as contradictions. There are endless instances in which we are so determined to make a point that we resort to using absurd overstatements, demeaning language, and false accusations in our arguments. This tendency to contradict ourselves often questions our character and morals. Similarly, in The Trial of Socrates (Plato’s Apology), Meletus’ fallacies in reason and his eventual mistake of contradicting himself will clear the accusations placed on Socrates. In this paper, I will argue that Socrates is not guilty of corrupting the youth with the idea of not believing in the Gods but of teaching the youth to think for themselves by looking to new divinities.
Aristotle develops his virtue ethics by first considering ends and goods. He claims that “every action and decision, seems to seek some good” (Shafer-Landau 2013, 615). Aristotle states that we pursue certain things because of the benefits it brings itself and other consequences it may bring. Aristotle suggests that this is the same for goodness. We must pursue what is good for good itself and for any other benefits it may bring. Furthermore, Aristotle suggests that through pursuing the good, we are able to determine the best way of life (Shafer-Landau 2013, 615).
In Book I of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle states that the ultimate human goal or end is happiness. Aristotle then describes steps required for humans to obtain the ultimate happiness. He also states that activity is an important requirement of happiness. A virtuous person takes pleasure in doing virtuous things. He then goes on to say that living a life of virtue is something pleasurable in itself. The role of virtue to Aristotle is an important one, with out it, it seems humans cannot obtain happiness. Virtue is the connection one has to happiness and how they should obtain it. My goal in this paper is to connect Aristotle’s book of Nicomachean Ethics to my own reasoning of self-ethics. I strongly agree with Aristotle’s goal of happiness and conclude to his idea of virtues, which are virtuous states of character that affect our decision making in life.
Plato’s “Defense of Socrates” follows the trial of Socrates for charges of corruption of the youth. His accuser, Meletus, claims he is doing so by teaching the youth of Athens of a separate spirituality from that which was widely accepted.
...Aristotle’s conclusion relates human good, activity of soul and excellence. It is this expression of virtue through action that allows happiness to be obtained. Such dependence on virtue sets the scene for Aristotle to examine virtue more closely. He will elaborate on the two parts of reasoning well (virtue). The first part of reasoning well is having the right desires to aim oneself at the right good and not just the apparent good. The second part of reasoning well is knowing how to get to this proper desire. This will be further elaborated in book two where Aristotle will explore what it means to reason well and what is means to be virtuous.
To be good is good but it has to be done for the right reason. Aristotle and Kant are two famous philosophers who have different ethical theories. The theory’s of virtue and duties rest not only on laws and obligations but from what comes from the inside. Morality comes from inner strength, character and how we live our life to the best end.
Aristotle believes the only way to reach a state of happiness is through virtue. The virtue that is to be practiced is meant to guide our behaviors in society and to learn the meaning of moderation. Aristotle deems human happiness as more then attaining the pleasures of life but satisfying the human potentialities. Reaching such abilities could be seen by making logical choices and being able to choose the needs in life rather then the wants. At this point it shows that Aristotle contends that a society that includes citizens that he believes are of human excellence will reflect the same values upon it’s state.
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.
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.
Aristotle proposes that we have a single Idea of Good which is both complete and self-sufficient, chosen entirely for itself, and that end is happiness. He must establish these three claims:
Aristotle then shifts to asking the question that we might feel we are already good people because we are already acting in a just manner. Aristotle disagrees with this. He brings up an example of an artist and shows that the skill of the artist is in what he creates. It is over once the art has been made. Virtue is different. The end does not fully matter, but also needs to be in a good state of mind. We should always want to act in a virtuous way. We can only make it to this by creating habits in living a virtuous life. He also brings up that speeches could make people think they are becoming more virtuous, but it will not do anything. Aristotle then discusses what virtue is. It must be in passions, capacities, or characteristics within the soul. Passions have to do with pleasures and pain, capacities are what helps us understand our
...good life is, Aristotle still defines a good life in a way that is too specific to be applied to all instances of human behavior. Personally, I see Aristotle’s idea of a good life to be close to my own idea of what a good life is. However, with access to thousands of years of accumulated human knowledge, I recognize that what is best for me is likely not best for everyone, and others must find their own path to happiness on their own journey.