Aristotle's The Nicomachean Ethics By Aristotle

Better Essays
In the the first book of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle seeks to find the highest good of all human beings. In the process of deciding that the highest good is happiness, Aristotle ends up discarding certain entities, such as pleasure and honor, of being candidates for the highest good.
In Aristotle’s discussion of the goods we seek, he rather quickly disregards pleasure as a possible highest good. In Bk. 1. Chap. 5, Aristotle even states that a person who has chosen a life dependent on pleasure has chosen a life for grazing animals (1095b20-21). In life, grazing animals only seek to reach satisfaction from eating and then resting. By saying this, Aristotle means that by only seeking pleasure, a person is seeking no more than what a cow
…show more content…
Although a political life seeking honor is a life for more “cultivated people” rather than the “vulgar” people seeking pleasure, it is still an end not worthy of being the highest due to the superficiality. When people seek honor, they seek being seen as honorable by other people more than feeling honorable themselves. That is why politicians focus on trying to do things to improve their image rather than just simply being themselves. In order to be the highest good for human beings, that good must be fully internal and that is where honor fails. We do not achieve honor by ourselves and we can lose honor easily as opposed to virtue. In addition, Aristotle states that in trying to achieve honor, people are also trying to believe that they are virtuous or excellent. Regardless of if they really are or not, by gaining these opinions from other people, they are able to “convince themselves that they are good” (1095b28). This in itself shows that honor cannot be the highest good because honor is being used in order to gain another good.
In my view, I completely agree with Aristotle’s statements against honor because I cannot deny the fact that when people seek honor, they seek to be honored by other people. If people solely sought honor just for their own self, instead of seeking honor, that person would be seeking integrity and being virtuous, a completely different thing than the thing being sought after when Aristotle talks about

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    He also argues that a completely ethical person will not be conflicted about his ethical choice, opposite of Kant, who thinks that a person can make an ethical choice while desiring the wrong alternative. In fact, he prefers that, because it shows that the person is doing his duty, not the action just because it makes him happy. Kant might defend himself by saying that it would be too easy for a person to succumb to selfish desires if he is gaining happiness from his virtuous acts, and any action is not moral if there are any external motivators, but I will show how this defense fails near the end of the paper. Kant and Aristotle have very different opinions on what makes a person virtuous and what defines a virtuous act. My thoughts on morality line up more with Aristotle’s.…

    • 1242 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In his book, Mill speaks of many clarifications and objections to his own principle as a way to disregard critics of utilitarianism. Because he is utilitarian, one of the most important clarifications of his idea of happiness that he offers is that it does not matter if one person is unhappy. What matters the most to Mill is that a greater number of are collectively happy. Therefore, the unhappy person would have to sacrifice their own happiness so everyone else can achieve it. Mill also believes that there is no such thing as true happiness because happiness cannot be achieved without a little pain.…

    • 1325 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Essentially, virtues are habits by which one acts only for the sake of that which is good. Aristotle views virtuous actions as those that represent correct reason. By Aristotle’s definition, virtue is the mean between the two extremes of excess and defect concerning a feeling or action as a practical and intelligent person would determine it (Kemerling). For example, the virtue of pride is the mean between the excess of vanity and the defect of humility. However, it is important to take into account that a mean is directly related to the individual and the circumstances; the level of pride varies for a politician, a sports athlete, and a military officer.…

    • 1645 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Aristotle states that moral virtues are not inherent sources of reason but can be influenced by reason to aid in the acquisition of happiness. Hobbes believes that moral virtues are dispositions that are influenced by reason to make men more inclined to avoid returning to a state of nature. Hobbes makes the most compelling arguments mainly due to his pragmatism and understanding of the nature of man. His argument against an objective good thoroughly debunks the pomposity of Aristotle 's argument for ultimate happiness and the contemplative life because it applies more broadly to mankind. It is true that we desire goods for other goods but that does not necessarily mean that our desire is, in turn, vain and empty; it simply means that we are ambitious creatures that remain hungry for new input.…

    • 1409 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, the existence of a “higher good” is argued, as he assists his claim with the idea that every action in life is the means to an end. Each individual feat is not desired for its own intrinsic value, but for the sake of some other action it may bring upon. Due to this, Aristotle emphasizes the futility of each individual action, focusing on the greater motive above them all: the highest good. This theory of a greatest good is implicitly common, though proving its existence may have different implications. Generally, it appears that there is a collective lacking being experienced by many.…

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    By emphasizing the importance of character traits, Aristotle gives humans credit that they can be good people performing activities because of their character not just because of rules they ought to follow. The only weak point in the theory is the reliance on virtue being essential to happiness. It fails to consider that everyone is different, unlike character traits/moral virtues which can vary from person to person or culture to culture. If the ethics of virtue applied all of its components more universally, realizing that everyone is different and that some virtuous people are not happy and some non-virtuous people are, it would make a more sound…

    • 857 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Though Aristotle is implying justice as a whole the fact that he states, “friendship is not only necessary but also noble,” helps to eliminate justice as a virtue. As stated by HUANG the virtue of justice comes from a willingness to do noble things. “Non-virtuous people occasionally make notable contributions to society, but they do not act out of noble character” (HUANG 267). From Aristotle’s claim that friendship is noble, one can perceive that an individual with no friends is not noble, and therefore eliminated from Aristotle’s list of virtues, is the virtue of justice. Aristotle claims that friendship is independent of justice, because those that are in friendship must already be just.…

    • 1030 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Kant believed that actions are morally correct if these actions come from virtues that motivate these actions. Whereas Aristotle believed that you should do anything in your power to be happy. This means that as long as you are happy that is the highest good, even if you have to do something illegal it doesn’t matter because in the end you are happy and that’s all that matters. Aristotle’s point of view is quite selfish because it only talks about your own happiness. You don’t take other peoples feelings inconsideration when making decisions, you just do what is best for you.…

    • 1570 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Happiness is not an individual goal, rather it is something that should be accomplished together. This is why he claims that superficial things such as glory, honor, and wealth are not a part of happiness. For moral excellence it is essential to find balance between pleasure and pain according to Aristotle; “so as both to delight in and to be pained by the things that we ought; for this is the right education.” (Aristotle 1744) Pain is what causes people to avoid noble actions whereas pleasure is the temptation that results in evil acts. Aristotle admits it is nearly impossible to achieve the exact mean between pain and pleasure in extreme situations so it is best to strive for a second best and choose the least evil one (Aristotle 1751). Finally, in Book I Aristotle claims that happiness is constantly in flux.…

    • 839 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    However, a fault with Aristotle’s thinking concerning his theory on moral growth is that he almost assumes that everyone wants to become a better person. However, we need only to look at those who repeatedly commit crimes today to know that not every moves up in their moral growths. Additionally, Aristotle’s thinking is limited because he was an elite member of society in his day, or a member of the hoi aristoi. He believed that everyone else in the hoi polloi would want to be more “noble” and virtuous like the members of the hoi aristoi, which also may not have been the case. Finally, both philosophers have radically differing opinions on friendship and how it relates to happiness in our lives.…

    • 1228 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays