Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Aristotle ethical principles
Evil and human nature
Human nature evil
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Aristotle ethical principles
word bad is defined as a poor quality or a low standard, or not such as to be hoped for or desired; unpleasant or unwelcome. In this paper I shall argue that people only do bad things when they are put in a specific situation or if it is how you grew up. Individuals are not all bad, but they are not all good either. There is a balance between the two and if you do too many things that are considered bad, you can tip the scale and cause chaos. While arguing my position, I will use Xunxi’s outlook on peoples nature, the concept of situationism, and Aristotle’s perspective on the incontinent and vice. I will also use sections of Anselm’s view on how one chooses to be bad, Kekes idea of being held accountable for ones actions, and Hamstra’s outlook on how we are fooling ourselves into thinking we are not bad, to further my argument. When a specific situation is brought up, people choose to act the way they do; however, this is …show more content…
This can be looked at through the eyes of John Doris, he pointed out the theory of situationism. This means that our situation explains our behavior better than our attributions of character traits. Since our situation will explain our behavior, one will never really know how they will react in a certain situation until it arises. Doris points out, “…we believe that the person of good character will behave appropriately, even in situations with substantial pressures to moral failure, and we are similarly confident that we would be foolish to rely on the person of bad character.” What Doris is saying here is that we would like to believe that the good character individual would do the right think in any situation; however, we are unable to determine this because due to situationism, we do not know how one will react. This is why it depends on the situation you are in to determine the behavior that will be enacted upon; whether it is a good or bad
... from previous experiences and bases future decisions on what they have experienced. When a person makes a decision that isn’t justified, they unknowingly change how they view future problems. If the decision has not been based in truth, it allows them a certain amount of unearned freedom to make wrong decisions, as opposed to when one make a proper decisions. It is crucial that every decision made is justified in order to keep their moral compass steady and to make the proper decisions when the choice is hard.
The first misconception claims that there is the notion that “evil” is only something committed by despots and tyrants, such as the atrocities studied in human history. Second, is the notion that the medical community is complicit in the decline of society by engaging in a “ridiculous pas de deux.” This meaning that eminently predictable problems attributable to bad choices made by individuals are conceptualized and treated as medical ailments, such as depression. The following point states that while few individuals specifically seek to do evil, virtually all of the evil in modern life (at least within non-tyrannical societies) is caused by the choices made by persons throughout their lives. Fourth, the idea that passing judgment on moral choices and irresponsible behaviors is “wrong.” As a final point, he expresses that the state blindly enables the conduct responsible for the decline of society by rewarding and incentivizing personal irresponsibility.
Moshe Chaim Luzzatto, a Jewish rabbi, wrote extensively about many topics. Luzzatto’s writings can be applied to us today and from which we can learn a great deal. Two of the topics that we discussed in seminar that Luzzatto addresses were vigilance and alacrity. Vigilance is the process of regarding someone's actions and affairs and about knowing if your actions are right or wrong. In order to be vigilant, two parts are necessary. The first part involves determining what is considered evil and what is good. By doing this, you can make the right decision and do the right thing. The second part is to “see if his own deeds are good or evil,” which means that you have to decide if your actions were good or evil. This applies at
Through the progression of William Golding's Lord of the Flies and the article, “Are Humans Good or Evil” by Clancy Martin and Alan Strudler, a multitude of undeniable evidence is provided to prove that humans are in fact inherently wicked. In Lord of the Flies, a human being’s savage nature and primal instincts are effectively portrayed through the development of Jack, the lead hunter in a group that gets meat for the boys. Little Jack Merridew, who seems to be nothing but a naive and obnoxious chorister, becomes one of the most malicious and violent boys on the island. Jack's wilder side shows itself the most when he goes hunting. Making one his first kills brought such exhilaration, satisfaction, and pure bloodlust, that it drove him to insane limits,
THEME: The line between good and evil is sometimes unclear, and as a result, people often think that they are doing the right thing when it is actually the wrong action, and vice versa.
“The truth is that nothing can give us what we think we want, and ordinarily think we have. We cannot be morally responsible, in the absolute, buck-stopping way in which we often unreflectively think we are. We cannot have "strong" free will of the kind that we would need to have, in order to be morally responsible in this way” (…).
...en when tough situations are presented to a person. Motivation from peers, educational leaders, or other members of society may help those that should learn to behave ethically, but the bottom line is following one’s inner code of ethics, which constitutes character.
Virtue itself turns vice, being misapplied,/ And vice sometime by action dignified.” (II. iii. 21-22.) The human condition follows the path of fate. Everyone makes choices out of their own free will which affects their life at that time, but will ultimately lead to their predetermined destiny. People inflict their own wounds during their life by the choices that they make. Some people may not believe that fate is something that truthfully exists in the world. They trust that whatever occurs in their lives comes as a result of the decisions that they make with their own free will. Others, however, believe that whatever happens during the course of their lives is inevitable and that every event is predestined and laid out before them like a
Agents vs Acts Louden opens this section with this statement: “… it is commonplace that virtue theorists focus on good and bad agents rather than on right and wrong acts.” This is a good th... ... middle of paper ... ...
The cause of how people have chosen evil has been a conceptual issue for thousands of years on many different perspectives. People from a religious point of view believe that the underlining cause of evil is sin and temptation. Half of the time humans can choose good over evil in situations based off the legal system and the moral standards of society. "The interest of work in the common would not hold it together, instinctual ...
Most people want to be good and not bad, but they have the ability to be bad or how they can handle their evil side. People’s bad side can be tempting sometimes but one has the power to either hold back or give in.
To start off an example would be from the story The Voyage of the James Caird, “ The men were soaked to the bone and frostbitten.” This just proves that on their voyage there was no sign of them having a terrible weather until they actually got there. The weather was something that happened out of their control. Another example would be from the story To Build a Fire, “The old timer on Sulphur Creek was right, he thought in the moment of controlled despair that ensued: after fifty below, a man should travel with a partner.” Well even though this man didn’t take this advice seriously it’s normal for a person to want to achieve something on their own you can’t blame someone for that can you? No, however it is common in situations like these for a person to take advice very seriously. To conclude the claim why people shouldn’t be held accountable is for last example from the story The Cost of Survival, “Some people wind up in trouble because of bad luck, but others make dangerous choices.” Now this explains it all, there are two separate groups in which need to be treated differently because people with bad luck is better than having the problem be caused
Are our decisions subject to the inclinations of our past actions, as behaviorist would proclaim? Or do we have governance over our actions, or in other words, free will, as Humanists would argue? Furthermore, what is “right?” Is it to succumb to the societal and religious expectations of “good?” Or is it to act on one’s own intent? These are the questions that Alex from Stanley Kubrick’s Film adaptation of Burgess’ “A Clockwork Orange” and Hamlet from Shakespeare’s celebrated tragedy both struggle in answering as they
In every aspect of our lives we have a choice that can determine our dishonorable effort
These factors were situations and how people 's responses might change to fit different situations. In stress, people might turn to anger or grief while during peace and serenity they might turn to happiness or joy. Every person is capable of good and evil. Parker talks about another author’s example of a German policeman during the Holocaust that once disobeyed a superior order that was deemed morally objectionable (605). Not only did Parker bring up examples in other author 's works, but a question with concern to Milgram, which explores the possibility that people tend to do things because of where they are, not just because of who they are, and we are slow to see it, often times ignoring