Evaluating Aristotle Essay Example for Free

Evaluating Aristotle EssayFar from being a social constraint, or perchance a force that elicits fear of being caught, the motives that move a person to choose what is good and avoid what is evil draw well the fine withdraw that separates actions that may be regarded as incorrupt, or those that are immoral. Ethics is important, if non necessary in relation to military man living. At the very least, this science helps swear the complete order of and within a society. This is possible because ethics is not only a speculation that informs lot about what is good or bad, it in any case asks them to adhere to the principles it teaches. It is thus both informative and formative, or both a theory and practice, consistent with how it is commonly defined the discipline dealing with what is good and bad, and with moral duty and obligation (Merriam-Webster). But what would perhaps be an equ altogethery interesting point to look at is the diverging manner by which many people believ e to be the basis of moral action. Key to understanding this would be to ask why be moral? It may help to cite tierce notable thinkers who have given their own take of the matter.Aristotle, Immanuel Kant and fundament Stuart Mill on Ethics Aristotles most eloquent articulation of his ethical theories figures in his infamous work called Nicomachean Ethics. In it, his overarching concern to prove that ethics is chiefly related to the concept of ends (or purposes) can be learned. According to Aristotle, every homophile application hopes to achieve the end or the good to which it is pursued e. g. , in medicine this is health, in strategy victory, in architecture a house (Nicomachean Ethics, 7).While Aristotle just contends that there are activities which are pursued for its own sake and not for the sake of arriving at a good apart from the activities themselves (Nicomachean Ethics, 1) his work manifests a greater emphasis laid on the goal-orientedness of all mankind activities. Now, Aristotle further maintains that human life too has an inherent end that needs to be pursued. He thinks of this fundamental human good as rejoicing the best, noblest, and most pleasant thing in the world (Nicomachean Ethics, 8).And he himself argues that it is an end that moldiness be pursued not for the sake of anything else, still precisely because it is a chief good in itself (Nicomachean Ethics, 7). Ethics for Aristotle is therefore basically a virtuous accordance of all human activities relative to happiness. This is where his virtuousness ethics takes shape. In order for all men to attain happiness, Aristotle believes that every 1 needs to develop a virtue a habit of playacting that promotes an excellence in ones use of causal agency.This is what Aristotle in essence implies when he says that happiness is an activity of soul in accordance with perfect virtue (Nicomachean Ethics, 13). Immanuel Kants is a philosopher who elevated ethics into the realm of metaphysics that is, it is a science drawn from a priori principles (read from demonstration or logic and not from a particular(prenominal) experiences) but are applied to definite situations in life as well (Kant, 1). This implies that ethics is something that must be applied for all men, in all places, and at all times.Simply put, ethics for Immanuel Kant is both necessary and universal in scope. It is necessary because all men are obliged by the dictates of their reason to obey moral laws it is universal because moral laws care for no exception. Which is why, Kant believes that moral laws are categorical imperatives a law that concerns not the matter of the action, nor its intended result, but its form and the principle of which it is itself a result, because it is conceived as good in itself and that it conforms to reason (Kant, 18-19).If only to clarify, Kant here states that a moral law must be obeyed neither on account of the benefit it brings nor the pleasure it elicits, but precise ly because it is good in itself. In a way, a moral law is an exhaust construction about duty meaning, it is something that needs to be obeyed on account of nothing else but the adherence to the law itself.Should it be asked how one can puzzle at a knowledge of moral law which is both necessary and universal, Immanuel Kant suggests that one can test human actions in persona to, say, this particular formulation act only on a maxim that you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law (Kant, 23). John Stuart Mill meanwhile proposes a philosophy of ethics based on a more utilitarian perspective. In his work entitled Utilitarianism, he regards the topic of an activity as the basis for evaluating the ethical repercussions of any action.He articulate this idea quite clearly in saying, utility or Happiness (must be) considered as the directive rule of human conduct (Mill). In other words, ethics is based on how one care securey weighs in the maximum amount of happine ss that may result from choosing an action, against the background of a host of alternative options. He even calls this approach the Greatest Happiness Principle the ultimate end with reference to and for the sake of which all human activities become desirable (Mill).It works under the premise that before a person acts, he or she would have premiere appreciated which decision would turn in the best returns or outcomes, both in terms of quality and quality. Mills ethical philosophy, one may quickly notice, runs in serious contradiction with Aristotle and Kant, whose theories have taught the necessity of adhering to a virtuous life or to a moral imperative not on account of any purpose, but solely because of good inherent in the act itself.As Mill himself notes, according to the utilitarian opinion, the end of human action, is needfully also the standard of morality (Mill). By Way of Conclusion My Definition of Ethics Based on the above discussed ethical notions its basis, nature a nd implications I need to conclude this paper with a proposal to define ethics as a norm that forms human freedom and, like Immanuel Kant, a law that must be universal and categorical.Firstly, I take on that the tendency to define morality in terms of obligation does not at times appreciate the full weight of human freedom. But morality is precisely a human endeavor not only because humans have reason, but more importantly because actions stem from the fundamental use freedom as well. Moral acts, one must carefully note, are arrived at only with the proper education and nurturance of human freedom.It is in fact drawn from the basic premise that human freedom is at its best when one is able to use it to build up ones welfare, as well as those of others. I am of the opinion that anyone who wish to expound on the ethical standards of an action must first grow with the evaluation of human freedom. In this way, ethics can shed light into the need to use the faculty of freewill for t he sake of the goodness inherent in itself as Aristotle and Kant have argued , and directed towards the goodness of something else as Mill has on the other hand proposed.Second, in an ethical theory where human freedom is of censorious importance, it is thus wise to adopt the logic from which Immanuel Kant derives his categorical imperative. As one would notice, Kants maxim do something as though you would want that action be done for all people touches on two fundamental areas of ethics the decision of the person, or human freedom, and the universality of the scope of moral laws. I find Kant here to be a great source of insight.With his theory, I believe that I can adopt the position that ethics is a science that forms human freedom because, in Kants maxim, the subjective capacity for self-determination is tempered by the duty to obey objective laws. Kants categorical imperative does micro to undermine freedom, as it does try hard to protect the universal applicability of mora l law. In this regard, I would therefore say that Kants ethical theory is the best position to take, at least from the perspective of ethical notion that I have chosen to adopt.ReferencesAristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. 29 June 2008, http//classics. mit. edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen. 1. i. html ethic. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2008. Merriam-Webster Online. 29 June 2008 http//www. merriam-webster. com/ vocabulary/ethic Kant, Immanuel. Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals. 29 June 2008 http//www. scribd. com/doc/2225702/kantfundamental143 Mill, J. S. Utilitarianism. 29 June 2008 http//utilitarianism. org/mill2. htm