Ethical Virtue: Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics

To discover the nature of human happiness it is necessary to determine what the function of a human being is. A person's happiness consists of fulfilling the natural function toward which they are being directed. This natural function is something that is specific to only human beings. This function is something that sets human beings apart from everything else in the world. Generally speaking, a person is primarily his intellect. Where the spirit and desire are also important, it is the rational part of the soul that should be considered the person's identity. Aristotle emphasized that eudaimonia was constituted by rational activities that were associated with human virtue rather than human power, or honor. According to Aristotle, the rational activity has to be indicated as pride, bravery, or friendships that are mutually beneficial, pride and honesty among others.

Happiness to Aristotle is to have virtuous activity of the soul and to have achieved the highest good in life (Book I, Chapt. 9, Para.3). To be a virtuous activity of the soul means to participate in honorable and noble activities and to truly be happy and caring when doing them. In Book I, Aristotle implies that someone who does a virtuous activity, but does not really care to do it, is not really being virtuous, whereas someone who does care is truly being noble. Aristotle implies an argument from eudemonia, or happiness, where in order to live a jubilant life, one must live well, but what exactly Aristotle means by this is to live contemplatively and virtuously. He becomes clearer about the behaviors in having a good

J.S. Mill’s Principle of utility, also known as the greatest happiness principle, is an ethical philosophy that looks at the development of morals and how people choose to follow these morals. The basis of Utilitarianism is the idea that our morals are designed to create the most amount of happiness while minimizing the amount of pain felt. Mill’s utilitarianism looks at everyone’s happiness as equal, with individual actions concerning the feelings of everyone equally. Utilitarianism argues that decisions are made based on whether that decision will create happiness for the most while minimizing pain for the least amount of people, looking at the opportunity costs of various decisions and using this to lead to the best course of action. From this Mill suggests the idea of the first principle of morality.

“Can virtue be taught?”, was a question I struggled with when Meno ask Socrates. In Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle answers the question in a way I better understand. He believes that virtue can be taught and if you are taught good behavior you are excellent. He especially believes that the virtue of a human being is “being characteristic”, which helps me understand “What is virtue? “Virtue, according to Aristotle, are the characteristics that makes us either good or bad. Everything we do is not natural we learn what is moral and immoral by what we were taught. Somethings we believe are right might not be right to others, but just because we may think it is immoral does not make it necessarily wrong. Aristotle mentions that passion is presented in the soul virtue.

As one of the greatest philosophers of all time, Aristotle was one of the greats. He altered history and the way our world views philosophy and ethics. One of his theories of ethics that he written in the form of 10 books was Nicomachean Ethics, this theory consisted of Aristotle’s perspective on the life of man and what makes a good life for man. Personally, I think his theory of ethics is a good outline of how to be an ethical and happy, I think Nicomachean ethics is a valid theory as it makes sense, and as a base line or starting point can be applied to many situations. Aristotle purposes that all human beings work toward a supreme happiness or good, this good is

In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, ethical virtue is at the base of every Aristotle argument. Aristotle’s goal is to discover: what constitutes human excellence? A key position Aristotle takes in ethical virtue involves habit among human actions, “Neither by nature, then, nor contrary to nature do the virtues arise in us; rather we are adapted by nature to receive them, and who are made perfect by habit.” (Nic.2.1.1103a23-25). Through this statement, Aristotle believes that humans do not have virtues by nature, which means humans cannot be born with virtue. However, nature equips humans with the potential to acquire virtue over time through social training and habituation. Aristotle’s concept is on the same grounds as Roger Bergman’s, author of Catholic Social

Aristotle was a well-known and respected Greek philosopher. Some of his philosophies have been time less and are still around and being debated. He primarily pondered on what is a good person and a good life? His philosophy focuses on these questions. For Aristotle in order to know whether a person/ life is good, then we first need to understand what is the goal or purpose of that person/life. Aristotle believes that there are virtues, which are good habits or skills that allow us to live a good life. This is called the virtue theory, which aims to achieve the ultimate objective to a good life, which is happiness. He however does state that virtues should not be at extremes, and that one should try to achieve the idea of the "golden mean". In his view, morality is based on these virtues rather then right and wrong. Virtues define our person, our character while the right or wrong are only

Aristotle provides the teleological approach of how to live well in his collection of lectures, Nicomachean Ethics. In Book II of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle presents his definition of virtue in which it is "a kind of mean" (N.E. 129). According to Aristotle, moral virtue is a means to an end, happiness. By using Sophocles's Antigone, I will support Aristotle's theory of virtue in which he reasons it to be a state of character between two extremes. A virtue that remains relevant today as it did during Aristotle's era is that of courage. By using Aristotle's account on what represents the virtue of courage, I will demonstrate how it could be applied to the dilemma the characters of Antigone encounter. Even his definition of justice is

It was Aristotle’s belief that everything, including humans, had a telos or goal in life. The end result or goal was said to be happiness or “eudaimonia”. He explained that eudaimonia was different for each person, and that each had a different idea of what it meant. Further, he said that people must do things in moderation, but at the same time do enough. The theory, of “the golden mean of moderation” was the basis to Aristotle's idea of the human telos and concluded that living a virtuous life must be the same for all

In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle discussed his theory of happiness and attempted to answer the many questions related to what makes people happy. Questions asked were “What is the purpose of human existence?” “What is the end goal we are trying to achieve so that we know how we should conduct ourselves?” With so many people seeking pleasure through a variety of means such a wealth, reputation, personal belongings and friends, they may be missing the mark when it comes to happiness. While these each have a value attached to them, none of them contains what is truly needed to be described as the “good” we should be aiming toward. According to Aristotle, to be an ultimate end, an act must be self-sufficient and final, “that which is always desirable in itself and never for the sake of something else” (Nicomachean Ethics, 1097a30-34)

Humans are categorized as the only rational animal; we have the ability to reason, and using our skills of reasoning allows us to oftentimes act against what (could be considered) a “natural” instinct and do something seemingly selfless simply because it conforms to the individual’s notion of what is right. There is an inherent self-awareness to human sentience that does, indeed reasonably separate us from the animal kingdom. However our defining self-awareness and free will is precisely what feeds into the illusion that we are in complete control over our actions, when as Aristotle argues, our absolute adherence to what we believe to be morally right, is entirely dependent upon our environment.

Through books one to three in Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle distinguishes between pain and happiness, clarifying the endless war that men face in the path of these two extremes. Man’s quest for pleasure is considered by the self-conscious and rational Aristotle; a viewpoint traditionally refuted in contemporary, secular environments.

In his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle explores virtues as necessary conditions for being happy. A virtuous person is a person with a disposition toward virtuous actions and who derives pleasure from behaving virtuously. Aristotle distinguishes between two types of human virtue: virtues of thought and virtues of character. Virtues of thought are acquired through learning and include virtues like wisdom and prudence; virtues of character include bravery and charity, which are acquired by habituation and require external goods to develop. As a consequence, not all people can acquire virtues of character because not all people have the external goods and resources required to develop that disposition.

The philosophy of virtue ethics, which primarily deals with the ways in which a person should live, has puzzled philosophers from the beginning of time. There are many contrasting interpretations regarding how one should live his or her life in the best way possible. It is in my opinion that the Greeks, especially Aristotle, have exhibited the most logical explanation of how to live the "good life". The following paper will attempt to offer a detailed understanding of Aristotle's reasoning relating to his theory of virtue ethics.

“EVERY art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim” (Ross, n.d.). Aristotle believed that both external (wealth, material possessions) and internal (temperance, courage, etc.) contributed to a person’s happiness and that a person’s final goal was to find the “good” or their function in life. He also believed that the pursuit of the final goal led to certain actions and pursuits and that the cumulative sum of these actions over a lifespan would determine a person’s morality. In other words, a person may spend his or her whole life committing moral acts, such as giving to charity and saving lives but may act out of character and commit one immoral act such as theft. Since his or her life was spent mostly committing moral acts, that one immoral action does not make him or her immoral and therefor he or she should not be judged by that one aberration.