Aristotle Thomas Hill Analysis

Aristotle has a firm belief that human being’s actions need to be aimed at and end with some sort of good. With this is mind, he further explains that happiness is the end result of our actions. Thomas Hill, although similar in view, advocates for the importance to not only preserve our environment but connects how the preservation of nature directly relates to human virtue. In this essay, I will argue that Thomas Hill’s beliefs on human virtue along side with the preservation of our environment goes hand in hand with Aristotle’s views of the development of human virtue. Both Aristotle and Thomas Hill believe that human virtue not only has the power to control our actions positively or negatively but can also influence whether human beings

Thomas Hill has an interesting perspective when it comes to human being’s relationship with the environment. Hill proposes that human beings should start looking at the problem of environmental destruction from a different view point. Instead of asking questions that pertain to the relativity of the environment to human beings, plants, God, and their intrinsic value, it must be asked what type of person, and their character traits, lead them to want to destroy the environment. More specifically, Thomas Hill raises the question of “What sort of person would destroy the natural environment--or even see its value solely in cost/benefit/terms?" (Hill 2008, pg 211). Hill’s perspective on the environment turns the argument to assess human being’s morals in relation to environmental issues instead of an an argument directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. In this way, Hill believes that people who are destructive towards the environment are missing key traits in their moral virtue. Hill does not believe that it is enough to persuade human beings that their actions are wrong in themselves. He has a strong belief that human beings who cannot see the impact that their decisions have on the environment cannot truly see what good other people hold. In this he describes how human beings who support the destruction of the environment cannot posses the traits of true human virtue. To dive in deeper, Hill wonders if someone, “one who had a broad and deep understanding of his place in nature really be indifferent to the destruction of the natural environment?” (Hill 2008, pg 217). Hill argues that human beings need to understand that they are merely specks in the entire universe’s history. If they cannot do this, they will not have