Aristotle's Role Of Pleasure In Morality

Great Essays
In philosophy there are many stands to take when it comes to a view of topic shared and discovered by many. Specifically, there are three philosophers that have differing ideas on the role of pleasure in morality, Aristotle, Kant, and Mill. They share and clarify their positions through a plethora of titles and information that will help a reader gain a better understanding of the role of pleasure in morality. Though each philosopher has their own share of ideas of what the highest good represents, they all believe in morality being the search for the highest good.
Aristotle begins with his description of happiness as fulfillment of all desires, in accordance with compliance of virtue. When he states,
“But in the case of the virtues, an act is not performed justly or with self-control if the act itself is of a certain kind, but only if in addition the agent has certain characteristics as he performs it: first of all, he must know what he is doing; secondly, he must choose to act the way he does, and he must choose it for its own sake; and in the third place, the act must spring from a firm and un- changeable character.” Aristotle is bringing attention to the actual implementation of the agent.
…show more content…
When these “agents” are being acted outward in well manner it is the practice of obtaining a virtue. When these virtues are obtained, Aristotle believes this is how we also obtain happiness, which is a pleasure. Aristotle mentions, “Virtue, being concerned with pleasure and pain...makes us act in the best way in matters involving pleasure and pain.” Basically applying that no man will want do act in objection to gaining pleasure, so aiming towards these pleasurable virtues will result in happiness. In much accordance with Aristotle, Kant also idealizes these actual duties being practiced. Kant describes pleasure as being goodwill, termed by proper duty. “Act in such a way that you treat humanity... always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means.” Implying, acts that compliment a virtue will result in pleasure for a greater good. Both Aristotle and Kant look for a certain set of actions to complete obtaining a pleasure. In Kant’s piece On a Supposed Right to Lie, “Therefore, whoever tells a lie, regardless of how good his intentions may be, must answer for the consequences resulting therefrom... regardless of how unforeseen those consequences may be. This is because truthfulness is a duty that must be regarded as the basis of all duties founded on contract, and the laws of such duties would be rendered uncertain and useless if even the slightest exception to them were admitted.” Kant’s complementary piece puts emphases on the indication that any omission to the principle of truth ends the common goal. This validates that in any situation each individual should be honest and should not fib in the heat of the moment. We may come across a particular situation that we may feel requires us to lie to ease a situation or avoid damage. In contrast, Mill proposes that happiness is achieved as a pleasure when pain isn’t present. Mill implies that the goal is to create a happiness that will benefit the greater good. To Mill, it seems that morality is more of a fulfillment in united circumstances rather than self-fulfillment. Kant puts out to us that laws should be viewed as a positive interest amongst a group in unity in his text from Utilitarianism, “First, …show more content…
The fact of comparison is the beginning and the persistence placed on the devotion of moral obligations Kant’s categorical imperative is indeed categorically imperative. Mill also has an outset of morality to be the responsibility of fulfilling one’s duty and succeeding following rules, but in a completely different logic. In the circumstance of Kant, duty must be done for duty’s sake, for Mill, duty must obey the happiness principle, preserving the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. In this approach of contrast, Aristotle varies due to him not viewing morality as duty for its own sake, or obedience of laws, for some idea of larger good, but in its place the protection of a balanced value controlling oneself between extremes. Aristotle values the fulfillment of the singular; both Kant and Mill are more apprehensive with the concentration of the

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    Kant’s view on duty has to do with duty for the sake of the law but Mill’s view is that one duty is increasing happiness among large numbers of people. They both feel that a person has a duty to fulfill whether it is self-sufficient or because they are following rules. A similarity that follows both Aristotle and Mill is that they both founded their views on happiness even though they might disagree on their understanding of the subject. Aristotle vies happiness as an “end in itself”, whereas Mill sees happiness as both quality and quantity. Mill has many similarities with both Kant and Aristotle.…

    • 1487 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    A Detailed Account of Aristotle’s Position on Happiness and why it is a Human Good According to Aristotle, happiness is an experience that is desired by all human beings. However, there are distinct views regarding what kind of life is considered happy. Aristotle provides readers with different types of lives that are believed to make people happy, including accumulation of wealth and a life of fulfillment that is characterized by comfort and pleasure. He also posits that a happy life is that which is pleasant.…

    • 823 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Aristotle's happiness, development to the peak in the ancient Greek period, is a comprehensive expression of classical thought. It has important significance to modern society, for the development of modern society in China has a very good point to effect. Aristotle's happiness is combining humanism and realism, is the summary of the values in ancient Greece. Aristotle think that happiness is a "good", "moral activities", the unity of the happiness is a personal happiness and city-states. To learn is a must to become a happy, make oneself become a man of virtue, with its own rational do moderately, to achieve a happy life.…

    • 180 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Aristotle claimed that the concept of possessing good in life was necessary for happiness: “some are necessary conditions while others are naturally useful and cooperative as instruments.” (Nicomachean Ethics 1099b28-29). He further explains that “having friends seems to be the greatest external good” (Nicomachean Ethics 9.9.1169b10-11). Friendship can be used to achieve this external good for it is deemed a virtuous action which is considered necessary for achieving the desired happiness that Aristotle speaks of throughout the all the books of the Nicomachean Ethics because “The solitary person’s life is hard, since it is not easy for him to be continually active all by himself; but in relation to others and in their company it is easier”…

    • 659 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    At Texas A&M, undergraduates and graduates wanting to get a higher education go by the Aggie Code of Honor, “An Aggie does not lie, cheat or steel or tolerate those who do.” (Texas A&M). This quote is one thing Aggies follow and hold very dearly and close them. As I almost complete my undergraduate degree at Texas A&M I understand the Aggie honor code more and more each day as to what it means to me. To me the Aggie honor code is important because it allows me to be proud of a college campus that not only provides a higher education, but a university that provides great communication and network between all students and also be respected all around the world by the great Aggie Network and that till this day and in the future will always be…

    • 802 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    The view of happiness as well as the role that pleasures and desires play in achieving happiness can be seen throughout Western philosophy. Detailing a hypothetical dinner conversation between Aristotle, Epicurus, Hobbes, and Epictetus, will such an understanding be described. In such an account, I will be detailing: what issue/s each guest would raise; what thesis would each defend, and how each would respond to the other; as well as who is most likely to disagree with whom and on which points, and who, on the other hand, might find allies or sympathizers. Each philosopher defines/views happiness differently. Aristotle defines happiness as an activity of the soul in accordance to virtue and reason.…

    • 1449 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    Kant Vs Aristotle

    • 1545 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Aristotle’s consequentialist base persuades and lectures that a man may be moral by taking after the “brilliant signify” or by being prudent, in this manner inevitably accomplishing bliss. Kant on…

    • 1545 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    5). Aristotle introduces the concept of happiness in relation to the motive and purpose present for decision-making and choices. Happiness is associated to the good that ‘choice’ and ‘knowledge’ partially…

    • 848 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Immanuel Kant On Duty

    • 1621 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Philosophy is a discipline that studies how one ought to live, as well as study reality, nature, existence, etc. However, there are a number of philosophers who propose differing sets of morals and have different ideas of living life to its fullest (Singer v. Mill). Kant proposes that moral actions are defined by the motivation of an action, and later on explains that moral actions are duties through reason, rather than inclination. This essay will explain the validity of Kant’s argument by first explaining Kant’s view on duty, then analyse his view of duty as an object of good will, which pertains to motivations without the slightest selfishness, then argue for moral duties motivated by duty instead of inclination based on reason. It is difficult…

    • 1621 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In this paper about ethical theories and cases I chose to discuss the positions of John Mill and Immanuel Kant, due to their dissimilar views on morality and ethical theories. From the four cases, I chose to apply the two philosopher’s theories to case number two. This case states the dilemma “My full-time (but not live-in) babysitter hinted that she would like to use my address to enroll her daughter in my excellent local public elementary school; her neighborhood school is awful. The alternative is for her to send her daughter to private school, a financial burden but not an impossibility. Should I offer my address?”…

    • 1295 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    He believed that virtues were a way to gain human pleasure. Aristotle did not agree with pleasure being the source of happiness. Instead, he believed that a person should look out for their own self-interests. Secondly, both philosophers believed that happiness can be found in the community.…

    • 1025 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    1. What, according to Aristotle, is the relationship between happiness and virtue? Working to possess and exercise virtue is essential to achieve the highest degree of happiness. Virtuousness is a unique element of happiness in the sense that we can work to control it through our own habituation. This can be compared to the plethora of components that our disposition creates a predetermined outcome for, including the external and physical goods we desire. Aristotle expands on this idea, stating that when happiness, “...comes as a result of virtue and some process of learning or training, [it is] among the most god-like things; for that which is the prize and end of virtue seems to be the best thing in the world, and something godlike and blessed” (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, 947).…

    • 770 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Lifeboat Dilemma There were several issues involving ethics in The Queen v. Dudley and Stephens case. The case facts are subject to a major ethical issue involving whether it is ethical to kill a man to save three. Some would argue that when given a situation where at least one person will die, we should try to save as many human lives as possible. Others should state that the value of human life is immeasurable. Who are we to decide if one life is equal to another?…

    • 736 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Aristotle feels that virtue is key while Kant feels duty is used to determine if an action has moral worth. The backbone of Aristotelian virtue and Kantian moral worth is found in reason and inclination. In Kantian moral worth there is a distinct divide between reason and…

    • 1098 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Unlike Kant, Aristotle believed that virtue could be measured; and to be virtuous according to Aristotle, a person had to contain goodwill for the greatest good and make choices based on that. When it comes to pleasure and pain, Aristotle states that having the right attitude towards these two feelings is an important habit in forming moral virtue. For example, a greedy eater might feel inappropriate pleasure when presented with food and inappropriate pain when deprived of food; a moderate person will experience pleasure from abstaining from such indulgence. Although Kant and Aristotle have some contrasting views, there are some similarities.…

    • 1199 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays