Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Respect as moral value
Kant and Aristotle similarities and differences
Respect as moral value
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
What is "good" depends solely on the one judging. For someone to be labeled good they must maintain their judge’s approval in every task, quite difficult I would think. The character Stevens from The Remains of the Day remained a good human being to his employers in every task, so it appeared in the book. I want to explore in this essay if indeed Stevens remained a good human being by use of philosophers Aristotle, Kant, and Royce ethical works.
I personally believe Stevens is a good human being my reasons compile to his honor to his work and the respect given to others. Aristotle would also agree, he argues that every activity has a final cause, the good at which it aims, that since there cannot be an infinite regress of merely extrinsic
…show more content…
Stevens pursued dignity through self-determination; Kant explains that the dignity of a person is grounded in self-determination it is presupposed by morality. Kant is arguing the idea that self-imposed universal law is the true basis of morality. Steven is self-determined to be like his father "the best butler” through Kantian ethicshis choice is dignified thus moral. Kant argued that the existence of morality implies the existence of free will. Kant explains human dignity is related to human agency, the ability of humans to choose their own actions the idea of free will becomes a main focus (Kant). “If you don 't have free will, you can 't be moral, because you can 't be responsible for your actions. Acting with free will, on such views, is just to satisfy the metaphysical requirement on being responsible for one 's action,” (Separate Morality from Free Will). Stevens’ free will stirred him to dignity and greatness that ultimately led to morality. The pursuit of greater good remains dignified and ethical. Stevens remains a good human being under Kantians ethical morals …show more content…
Stevens begins to regret the way he acted toward Miss Kenton, he wished he had acting in love. The self-reinstating principal refers to learning by reason from a previous chosen cause and changing your interests to increase loyalty amongst all men. Stevens’ regrets guided him to the decision to perfect the art of bantering which didn’t seem as leveled as the losses taken in his life. But, to Stevens it was a way to use loyalty as a self-reinstating principal. The perfecting of bantering would help Stevens improving himself and his relationship with the new home owner Mr. Faraday. Steven is acting ethically in terms of Royce his interests remain in his need to serve others, and he has utmost respect for these interests. Royce describes loyalty as active furtherance of a chosen cause. The chosen cause is linked to personal interests to remain loyal he must respect these interests. Stevens remains loyalty to his virtue thus, Stevens is a good human been under Royce’s ethics of loyalty.
Stevens sustained his professionalism and loyalty to a great virtue, a virtue of a chosen path for greater good. Stevens continued to be a good person to his employer and became a convincing good person based on philosophical rationalities of Aristotle, Kant, and Royce. Struck with the theme of loss, loss of father, loss of lover and loss of Lord Darlington; Stevens used these
Wallace, David F. "Good People." The Norton Introduction to Literature. 11th ed. New York: W. W. Norton &, 2014. 149-55. Print.
Aristotle 's great-souled man is not only an inaccurate depiction of greatness of soul, honour, perfect virtue and human excellence, but also a hypocritical, short-tempered and insensitive human being. Aristotle describes the great-souled man as being the ultimate person but as Fetter points out in Aristotle’s Great-Souled Man: The Limited Perfection of the Ethical Virtues, we see that there are many flaws in his account. This article looks at the contradictory statements being made about Aristotle’s great-souled man by loyal readers of his works, other philosophers and metaphysicians before Aristotle’s time who seem to have a sense for the worth of honour. We see that nearly all of Aristotle’s statements regarding the great-souled man can
There are two basic kinds of ethical judgments. The first have to do with duty and obligation. For example: "Thou shalt not kill, lie, or steal." "You just keep your promises." These judgments often uphold minimal standards of onduct and (partly for that reason) assert or imply a moral ‘ought.’ The second kind of judgment focuses on human excellence and the nature of the good life. These judgments employ as their most general terms "happiness," "excellence," and perhaps "flourishing" (in addition to "the good life"). For example: "Happiness requires activity and not mere passive consumption." "The good life includes pleasure, friendship, intellectual development and physical health." I take these to be the two general types of ethical judgment, and all particular ethical judgments to be examples of these. The main contention of this paper is that we must carefully distinguish these two types of judgments, and not try to understand the one as a special case of the other.
Aristotle’s virtuous person and Kant’s moral worth have two different meanings. Kant and Aristotle, from different times, have different ways of looking at what makes people make the best decisions. Coming from different sides of ethics in Deontology and virtue ethics, they agree and disagree with each other as most other schools of ethical thought do as well. After stating both their positions, I will prove that Kant’s view of morality is more correct than Aristotle’s view of the person.
17, No. 3, p. 252-259. Urmson, J.O., (1988). Aristotle’s Ethics (Blackwell), ch.1. Wilkes, K.V., (1978). The Good Man and the Good for Man in Aristotle’s Ethics. Mind 87; repr.
person of the novel, different traits that can lead us to talk about virtue, and one of them is
In Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant argues that human beings inherently have capability to make purely rational decisions that are not based on inclinations and such rational decisions prevent people from interfering with freedom of another. Kant’s view of inherent ability to reason brings different perspective to ways which human beings can pursue morality thus it requires a close analytical examination.
In contrast with Hal’s definition, Hotspur’s definition of honor do not match noble honor. Instead, honor rests upon the shoulders of an individual in a certain situation. Hotspur’s honor parallels pride. King Henry tainted Hotspur’s pride and his family’s name. This hono...
This paper is about the life and values of Thomas More. I will explain why he is considered a saint and a martyr. His life consisted of being an upstanding citizen and a morally devout Christian. As a man who possessed an insurmountable number of virtues, I will reflect on three virtues that I believe Thomas More possessed. The virtues are justice, loyalty, and integrity. I will also incorporate my reflections of Man of all Seasons, as well as James Monti’s biography of Thomas More.
Kant believes that we are not merely products of our upbringing, but that regardless of a bad childhood, we still have the potential to become good adults. (PushMePress,
The issues of morality can be expressed through examples of different methods of analyzing a situation. John Stuart Mill's view of "Utilitarianism" is to create more pleasure and less pain for everyone involved. Immanuel Kant's view is to do what is morally just in the situtation. The Millian approach is a consequential theory because the act is determined by the outcome of what is right or wrong. However the Kantian view explains morality through forms that he believes are essential to free and sensible judgment. In this paper I will prove that Immanuel Kant's view is the best choice when these two theory's are discussed because free will gives people the right to make a decision not based on how it effects others but how it effects the individual.
Consequently, if indeed there are several kinds of constitution, it is clear that there cannot be a single virtue that is the virtue-of a good citizen. But the good man, we say, does express a single virtue: the complete one. Evidently, then, it is possible for someone to be a good citizen without having acquired the virtue expressed by a good man" (1276b). What Aristotle doesn't tell us is who is better off. Is it sufficient to be the good citizen or is it definitely more satisfying to be the good man? The good man is recognizably superior to the good citizen. The good man possesses everything that is good. He does what is just and what is just is beneficial to himself and to those around him. His soul is completely well-ordered and, therefore, cannot allow for his desires to take over and commit evil or injustice of any kind.
Reading the story of John Woolman helped in driving home Parker Palmer’s concept of the tragic gap. Parker Palmer states this gap exists “between what is and what could be” (Palmer, 2009). Upon reflection, I realized that I have stood within this gap and most likely, will do it again in the future. This course has provided the opportunity for self-reflection and analysis of my ethical beliefs and actions in both a personal and professional setting. The various readings and teachings throughout this course have brought comfort to my beliefs. Previous to taking this course, I was feeling like maybe my stance on certain issues and beliefs might be wrong because they clashed drastically with many of those closest to me. However, I’ve come to the realization that I have to be true to myself and respond to my critics in that same manner. I am who I am. I cannot appease others at the cost of living a divided life myself. The price is too high. Therefore, I recommit to authenticity of self. I aim to
Henry Thoeau once warned ‘Never look back unless you are planning to go that way’. This applies to Stevens in ‘The Remains of the Day’. Stevens embarks on a journey from Darlington Hall with the purpose of finding ‘new discoveries’, however he does the opposite as the journey results to the discoveries of his past mistakes which highlights his missed opportunities, thus all he can do is look back over his life with regret. Stevens is advised by a gentleman, 'Don't keep looking back all the time, you're bound to get depressed.' The ironic tone highlights that it is too late for Stevens to be warned as he has been emotionally repressed throughout his employment at Darlington Hall.
On the other hand, a person who is self-reliant can be assured that he or she is carrying out the divine purpose of life. This is true even of those who flout the rules and conventions of society and religion and suffer disapproval as a result. In fact, Emerson points out, those men who are now considered the greatest of all fall into this category. He gives as examples Pythagoras, Socrates, Jesus, Martin Luther, Copernicus, Galileo, and Isaac Newton