Aristotle's End Of All Action

Aristotle's ethics are reliant on the basis that morality is susceptible upon how much the desire and action will bring certain goods. He believes that morality consists in doing certain actions, not because we see them as right in themselves, but because we see that they will bring us closer to the "good for the human" (Shimomissé). The end at which particular action targets may be hardly influential, so each action requires an ultimate end which is beneficial in itself and Aristotle construes that the end of all actions should be the same. The science which investigates this purpose is alleged to be a political science because of its difficulty to determine what this ultimate end is entire.

Ethics reasons that we must start with what is

as being considered as happiness, as they often by nature accompany stipulated happiness as the activity of virtue. This Aristotle goes on to consider, 1) the general nature of the good character and good action, then 2) the principal moral virtues, the virtues of that part of man which can follow the plan laid down by reason, then 3) the virtue of intellect (Shimomissé). He also examines the ideal life or the idea of the life of in agreement with virtue. Aristotle notes that all of us possess the good character by nature in the form of power, but it has to be sufficiently developed to an actuality by practice. So what we have to do is to develop a habit of doing virtuous acts without any thematic consciousness. Instead of telling a child not to tell a lie, it is of cardinal importance to practice always telling the truth. Consequently creating disposition by repeated practice as an education and we can do a good act that flows from good

It is often pointed out, however, that Aristotle's treatment of the virtues betrays the fact that he was under the influence of the predominantly aesthetic attitude of the Greek towards human conduct, a fact that appears in a clear light in his treatment of the "great-souled" man (Shimomissé). It has been assumed in moral and legal philosophy if one is physically forced to act or due in ignorance, that person cannot be morally responsible for the act. As to the action is due to ignorance, Aristotle distinguishes the act in ignorance from the act through ignorance. It raises some