During Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle puts forth a notion of virtue and how one obtains these virtues. Aristotle presents two types of virtues, virtues of thought and virtues of character. Virtues of though, Aristotle says exist in one’s mind. They are harvested and grow from teachings (1103a15). Virtues of character, however, Aristotle says, “none of the virtues of character arises in us naturally” (1103a18). Aristotle argues that these virtues are developed by habit. Once one practices the virtue over and over again, they then are able to gain the virtue (1103a). Basically, he says that the development of the virtuous activity, whether it be generosity, bravery, or thoughtfulness, all come from habit. Another thing that he argues though is that the habit should not make you …show more content…
If we go back to the same example of the unattended laptop at the library, if a person were to decide that they were going to steal the laptop, it would in fact involve more of a conscious deliberation than the virtuous person being a good person and leaving the laptop alone. He would have to first come up with a plan of attack on how to steal the laptop, decide the risk involved, decide what the best plan of attack is, and finally where how to be discreet when leaving. This requires much more thinking and decision making than the good person who can just ignore the laptop and not take it. While Aristotle says that in order to be virtuous, one should always be thinking about what makes a good person and once the habit is developed to continue to remind oneself of that. I however, do not agree with that stating that having good virtue once learned, becomes an unconscious decision, and in fact, it takes more of a drawn out thought process to become an unvirtuous
Franklin and Aristotle both agree that one can’t simply adopt virtue by force of will. However, Franklin believes that a virtue can be established by making it a habit through one’s actions; whereas, Aristotle believes that virtue is innately established in one’s nature. Franklin describes his definition of virtue when he says “...contrary habits must be broken, and good ones acquired and established, before we can have any dependence on a steady, uniform rectitude of conduct” (Franklin). Franklin writes about how to possess virtue and how actions establish a habitude of virtue. This differs from Aristotle’s views due to his belief that actions result from nature, not habit. He illustrates this when he says “Actions, then are called just and
The first question that immediately comes to mind is that these virtues seem to be only conceptions. Can these conceptions really be used for everyday practicality? An example of this could,again, go back to courage. For Aristotle courage is the appropriate response to danger. But, is that always the case? It would seem that in some situations of danger, the deficient vice of cowardice might be a more appropriate response. Consider a situation in which you are walking alone in a dark alley at night. Someone confronts you, points a gun in your face, and demands all your money. The correct response to this situation, for Aristotle, is courage, but what type of courage? Is there a mean within the mean of courage for this situation? Perhaps the best thing to do is be cowardly and just give up your money. Would this be acceptable or would this be a cowardly vice in response to danger? According to Aristotle, your wrong if you don 't employ courage to this danger, but in reality, this appears the “right” thing to
A conduct can't be either great or insidiousness, however an individual can have great or awful character qualities. Aristotle said that all individuals are made out of a consolidation of bad habit (awful character qualities) and ideals (great character characteristics). He utilizes this idea to illustrate the postulation: Virtue is a demeanor concerned with decision.
In consideration to Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle’s view of the great-souled man is that of an individual that represents happiness and obtains the five virtues: wisdom, justice, bravery, self-control, and the overall goodness within an individual (happiness). The magnanimous person is very complex and displays the proper virtues at the proper time, and in the proper way. In addition, the great-souled man accommodates to his surroundings where he is honorable but not boastful in his actions. Aristotle believes that it is only possible to attain happiness within a political organization because happiness represents living well without being concerned with others, they solely live for the truth and not approval.
Many times people believe that they can change as they get older but Aristotle in The Nicomachean Ethics claims this is not true. Aristotle believes that there are six types of character and everyone is in one of those characters and no matter what they do they will always be in that type of character. Aristotle also tells how truth is determined in matters of practical choice.
In the writings of Aristotle, seen in Nicomachean Ethics, it is evident that Aristotle believes that friendship is necessary for a virtuous and therefore happy life. I believe that this is accurate due to the similar conditions necessary for a complete friendship and a happy life. It is also evident that friendship is useful in achieving a happy life because friendship can make performing virtuous actions easier. His interpretation can be misunderstood and mistakes in practice can be made, so we will need to discuss these follies as well, in order to understand all the effects of friendship on achieving a happy life.
In Book II, Aristotle makes a distinction between two types of virtues; those which are considered ethical and those which are considered intellectual. Ethical virtues deal with actions of courage, generosity, and moderation. Intellectual virtues deal with wisdom and contemplation. Ethical virtues are created through habitual actions. Aristotle says that humans are not born with a natural capacity for virtue. He believes that education and cultivation as youth by one’s parents are pivotal in setting up humans’ ability in making virtuous acts habitual. He feels that humans have to perform virtuous actions as much as possible and through this humans can make a step in becoming virtuous. Aristotle also states that ethical virtues have to be attended by pleasure. He believes that humans cannot be pained when committing a virtuous action. If a human is pained by an action then it is not considered virtuous.
Aristotle's ethics consist of a form of virtue ethics, in which the ethical action is that which properly complies with virtue(s) by finding the mean within each particular one. Aristotle outlines two types of virtues: moral/character virtues and intellectual virtues. Though similar to, and inspired by, Plato and Socrates’ ethics, Aristotle's ethical account differs in some areas.
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.
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.
He claims that virtue of thought is taught and that virtue of character is habitually learnt. Either way, virtues do not “arise in us naturally” (216, 1103a20). He argues that humans have the capacities for virtues, but they must act on them (216, 1103a30). Thus, a person must learn to use the capability of being virtuous, meaning someone needs to teach them those virtues (217, 1103a10). To be virtuous, it is not just the action that matters, but the reason behind the action too. Aristotle says that a person should be consciously acting virtuous because this would result in him living a happy life (221, 1105a30). This takes time and a person must constantly repeat these actions to achieve the end goal of being virtuous (221,
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.
times. Then the sand was sunk. Aristotle was a great believer in virtues and the meaning of virtue to him meant being able to fulfil one's functions. Virtue ethics is not so much interested in the question, "What should I do?" but rather the question 'what sort of person should I become?'
Virtues are firm attitudes, stable demeanors, and the habitual perfection of our intellect and our will that guide our movements as per reason and faith. The human virtues develop in us through practice. Practice helps us outfit the power of grace within us, and as we practice more, it is easier to make better and good moral decisions.
In the Nicomachean Ethics (hereafter Ethics), Aristotle maintains that the virtues are formed by repetition as are other habits (see book II, chapters 1-5). "[I]t is by doing just acts that a just man is produced, and by doing temperate acts the temperate man," he explains, and without this kind of habit formation "no one would have even the prospect of being good" (1105b9-12). Further, the "mark" of a good "legislator" and "constitution" is that they: "Make the citizens good by forming habits in them" (1103b4). And in his investigation of the virtue justice, he takes as his "starting point" the ordinary meanings of a "just and an "unjust" man: the latter is "lawless," "grasping," and "unfair"; the former is "law-abiding" and "fair" (V:1129a30-34). In short, Aristotle's intention is to clarify the ordinary meaning of virtue as habit.