Aristotle's Virtuous Function Argument

Aristotle is one of the most popular philosophers, and also very well-known not only in philosophy but also in literature. A very popular argument of Aristotle is the “Virtuous Function Argument”. This argument concludes that; If any person is virtuous, then he/she performs his/her purpose/function well. But with this argument, it could have disagreed due to the vocabulary and it is noted “not sound”, or not valid in the sense that they set the argument up wrong. I tend to feel that this argument is not sound with the incorrect vocabulary of the argument. Secondly, with the serial killers I find to agree with Aristotle due to the fact that just because the serial killers are gaining joy out of kill a human does not fulfill their purpose, …show more content…
Beneath that we all of having our own individual purposes in life, but if one feels that his/her purpose is too capricious and maliciously murder people they are wrong. Because no one’s purpose is to bring harm to another. That also ties into the virtuous function argument in the case that “If anyone is virtuous then that person is good”. To be virtuous you need to be able to act the right way is any situation to know that you are a virtuous person. “There are three conditions arising in the soul- feelings, capacities and states-virtues must be one of these… Neither virtues nor vices are feelings… We are neither praised nor blamed in so far as we have feelings; for we do not praise the angry… person… but only the person who is angry in a particular way. We praised, or blamed, however, insofar as we have virtues or vices” (Aristotle 580). Aristotle truly believes that to be a virtuous person you have to have the right moral idea or the right moral feeling within a situation. He also states that you can only be ideally happy only if you are a virtuous person and fulfilling your purpose. By introducing Kant and Ross they exclaim that you never do something for the sake of itself it 's always for the sake of something