Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Aristotle on Nature of happiness
Aristotle doctrine of virtue
Aristotle doctrine of virtue
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Throughout the reading of ‘Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics’ I have gained a great interest of his ethical work on bravery. In Aristotle’s writing about bravery he comes across the meaning of bravery and how it differs from a rash man and a cowardly man. Although one may see as if a brave man is able to face his fear and conquer anything that will send him away from his purpose. There are different types of bravery that conclude to how bravery is applied to habits we rational humans have. We come to think of five of them, which are political, experience, spirit, hope, and ignorance.
Genuine happiness lies in action that leads to virtue according to Aristotle and this is seen
Thanks Christine! Yes, I believe virtue shouldn't be placed if one did good to other. And you must understand every good act comes in various ways. Just like Odysseus in the Odyssey, he showed a sign of virtue when he had the strength and courage leading his men into a dangerous journey. This does show he's virtue for exhibiting such strength and wisdom in his quest.
In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he outlines the different scenarios in which one is responsible for her actions. There is, however, a possible objection which raises the possibility that nobody is responsible for their actions. Are we responsible for some of our actions after all? If so, under what circumstances?
When considering how a person should act in order to gain the most honor or respect, there are varying opinions. Some may say that you simply must be a good person, but how does one constitute what a good person looks like? The Greek word arete represents what the ideal person in Greek society was. Sometimes arete is loosely translated to mean virtue, however this can be misconstrued in the English language. “Virtue, at least in modern english, is almost entirely a moral word; arete on the other hand is used indifferently in all the categories and means simply ‘excellence’”
Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics begins by exploring ‘the good’. Book I argues that, unlike other goods, “happiness appears to be something complete and self-sufficient, and is, therefore, the end of actions” (10:1097b20-21). In other words, happiness is the ultimate good. But how does one achieve happiness? Aristotle formulates this in the context of work, since for all things, from artists to horses, “the good and the doing it well seem to be in the work” (10:1097b27-28).
Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Book ll, is about his idea of how people should live a virtuous life. Throughout this book, he explains that humans learn virtue from instructions and we learn virtue from practice too. Virtue is something that is very important because it is a moral habit that results in keeping our moral values. Aristotle believed that nobody is born with virtue, everyone has to work at it daily. After reading Nicomachean ethics, Book ll, my main conclusion of it is that us as humans are better off being virtuous than simply doing what we feel like doing at any moment in time.
The Nicomachean Ethics begin with a simple concept-- everyone wants happiness. In Book 1 of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle explores what happiness is and how to achieve ultimate happiness and good life. In the passage, 1097b22-1098a18, also known as the “function argument”, he further explores the happiness as the chief good concept by examining human function and the good that comes along. In this passage, Aristotle’s thesis is that the good of humans resides in human function of activity with reason (rational activity). From this thesis, we can imply that the good performance of function can lead to ultimate happiness.
In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he describes his feeling and thoughts on pleasure; he discusses that pleasure is good and that the feeling of eudaimonia is connected to pleasure. Eudaimonia, also know as the term for happiness in Greek, means “a contented state of being happy and healthy and prosperous” (dictionary.com). Aristotle describes happiness as the main purpose of all human lives and that it is absolutely the essential goal for all humans. I disagree with Aristotle’s statement that a life of pleasure cannot be the best life because just because a person finds pleasure in different ventures other than being virtuous doesn’t make them an animalistic person.
The main topic of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is eudaimonia, i.e. happiness in the “living well” or “flourishing” sense (terms I will be using interchangeably). In this paper, I will present Aristotle’s view on the role of external goods and fortune for the achievement of happiness. I will argue that he considers them a prerequisite for virtue. Their contribution to happiness is indirect, via the way they affect how we can engage in rational activity according to the relevant virtues. I will then object that this view threatens to make his overall account of happiness incoherent.
Virtue is defined in many ways. Some say that it comes from the Latin word ‘virtus’, meaning virtue or courage, which comes from the other Latin word ‘vir’, which means man, meaning that virtue is the qualities of a man, such as courage. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines virtue as, “conformity to a standard of right [and/or] a particular moral excellence” (Merriam-Webster 899). With all these definitions floating around, it is hard to determine what virtues really is and what it really means to have virtue. In Plato’s Meno, Socrates and Meno discuss the definition of virtue and whether it can be taught.
Aristotle’s virtue ethics differs from other moral theories. Unlike deontology and consequentialism, virtue ethics emphasizes and describes moral characters (virtues). In my paper, I am going to explore the objection to virtue ethics from a relativist point of view and the responses to this objection that were presented in Nussbaum’s paper “A non-relative approach to virtue ethics.” Furthermore, I am going to present two out of three relativist objections to her responses that she anticipated, and her responses to them.
In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, the concept of happiness is introduced as the ultimate good one can achieve in life as well as the ultimate goal of human existence. As Aristotle goes on to further define happiness, one can see that his concept is much different from the 21st-century view. Aristotelian happiness can be achieved through choosing to live the contemplative life, which would naturally encompass moralistic virtue. This differs significantly from the modern view of happiness, which is heavily reliant on material goods. To a person in the 21st-century, happiness is simply an emotional byproduct one experiences as a result of acquiring material goods.
The first topic in philosophical ethics I would like to discuss is Aristotle’s virtue ethics. As an objectionist, Aristotle tried to determine what a good person is. To Aristotle, happiness is what made you a good person, and that is what the chief goal in life is. He believed that happiness was achieved when a species determines its’ own telos, or purpose. Along with that, Aristotle determined three facts of humanity.
This essay will provide an account that shows it is better for a teacher to demonstrate virtue, such as courage rather than to act according to a moral principle, such as duty. It is in a classroom where a seed is planted and the growth and development of an individual begins, whereby they are taught virtues and ethics in order to deal with a dilemma in a morally correct manner in the future. By reflecting on my own experience in the classroom during my Teaching Experience this year, the argument will be substantiated and a critical discussion will develop. Particular attention will be drawn towards Aristotle’s view of virtues and Kant’s view of moral principles. Thereafter, a consolidation will be necessary to determine whether or not these