Aristotle's View Of Morality By Immanuel Kant

Improved Essays
In this essay I will argue that Aristotle’s view of morality is superior to that of Immanuel Kant because Aristotle takes into account an individual’s entire life when determining if they are an ethical person, whereas Kant looks only at the individual actions. He determines morality by looking at what kind of person we should be, while Kant answers these questions by looking at what actions we should perform. Secondly, Kant argues that happiness shouldn’t be involved in the ethical decision making process, while Aristotle believes that not only are happiness and ethical decisions linked, but in order to achieve happiness, it is required to make virtuous decisions. A third reason why I prefer Aristotle’s moral reasoning is that Kant says that …show more content…
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. I believe that a person cannot be judged based on a single act, because everyone has made decisions they wish they could change and no one is perfect, that is just how humans are. A better way to assess morality is to look at the habits a person forms and the decisions a person makes throughout their life. For Kant, a person would be virtuous if they saved someone’s life, for example, even though it made them late for …show more content…
I don’t think that this should have anything to do with the judgment of an action’s morality. An action, no matter how good, may be considered amoral or even immoral if someone performs it due to a bad motivation, such as money or power, but happiness is not a bad motivation. In fact, Aristotle says that it is better if someone associates happiness with ethical acts, and that enjoying virtuous things is a sign of a virtuous person. In his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle states that, “Pleasure in doing virtuous acts is a sign that the virtuous disposition has been acquired: a variety of considerations show the essential connection of moral virtue with pleasure and pain.” It makes sense that someone who enjoys doing virtuous things could considered a virtuous person. It seems to me that Kant wants someone who hates virtuous acts but still performs them to be the virtuous person, but if someone enjoys the act, they are not virtuous at all. That is not the type of person I would want to give that credit to. If both people perform the same activity, but one person has a good attitude and will perform that activity again, and the other hated it and will avoid that situation in the future, I would say that the first person was the virtuous one. But Aristotle goes further than this by saying that happiness is more than just a factor in

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    In accordance with Immanuel Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, I will argue that ethical actions should be judged by good will alone. By comparing the theories of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill, I will conclude that Kant’s theories are more realistic in regards to the nature of humans. Immanuel Kant argues that one’s good intentions should be the deciding factor in judging their actions no matter the outcome. What is beneficial about this is that it allows for the expression of the intrinsic values of a person. Since every person has different virtues and opinions, they can act in any way they choose.…

    • 1510 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Decent Essays

    To conclude, Aristotle is a strong believer that in order to live a truly good life, a virtuous person is someone who performs the distinctive activity of being a human. Rationality is our unique activity, that is, the activity that characterizes us differently from animals. Since our rationality is our distinctive activity, its exercise is the supreme good. Moral virtue is simply a matter of performing well in the function of being human. In order to be virtuous, the end of human life could be called happiness (or living well).…

    • 185 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent 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
  • Improved Essays

    Aristotle’s take on ethics is much different from any other philosopher. His view of ethics is very vague, do as the just man would do and for the same reasons as him. In saying this, Aristotle would reject Robert Nozick’s experience machine thought experiment. Though Aristotle’s ethics allow for less conflict that would come from a theory that contains rules, it is a problem that it is not very clear what one should do to be moral. Aristotle’s ethics are virtue ethics.…

    • 451 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In my paper I will be discussing that Kantian Ethics can make decide to do the wrong thing sometimes because of Kant’s maxims, his view on good will and also and also will be discussing the FEI and treating humanity merely as a means, also will be discussing his views on reason vs. desire. With these reasons come objections can refute his belief by stating good points, this objection is the murderer at the door. Even though there are objection to Kantian ethics I will respond to these objections in such a way that Kant would respond to anyone with these objections. Therefore because of Kant’s maxims, his views on good will and also using his ideas on using a person merely as means and also the FEI and his views on reason vs. desire.…

    • 1381 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    One of Aristotle’s key interests in his Nicomachean Ethics was to determine what is happiness and how is it achieved. Aristotle concluded that happiness is a life lived in accord with virtue. Virtue, then, is the intermediary between deficiencies and excesses. Any character trait or act, by Aristotle’s reasoning, exists on a continuum between excessive and deficient – both of which are vices. Since both ends of any character trait or act is a vice, and the aim is a happy life which is achieved through adherence to virtue, then it must be that the intermediary position is the virtuous one.…

    • 842 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The simple reward is doing the right thing. When based off of feelings as for a reward for doing the right thing then it is not morality. The main goal is to fulfill a duty, whether we think it’s right or wrong, whether we get pleasure from it or not, whether we benefit from it or not. In his view, morals are superior to emotions and desires. His theory consist of deontological ethics that are based on character (Kant, p 44).…

    • 881 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    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…

    • 1264 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Philosophers and individuals in general often disagree greatly on the tenets and qualities of morality. What the nature of morality truly is, how it applies to the individual, and what classifies as moral or immoral act. Three of the most interesting viewpoints, however, may come from Aristotle, Kant, and Mill, all of whom introduced their perspectives on the field and their own unique stance on morality. Aristotle was, of course, the earliest of the three philosophers, and thus has less of a base to work upon in his theories. According to Kraut (2014), Aristotle’s ethics found that the things perceived as good are generally shared across humanity, and there is little conflict regarding what is and is not good.…

    • 616 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Hobbes Vs Kant On Morality

    • 1409 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Kant believes that there is a specific standard to morality that it is based upon. Morality is…

    • 1409 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Again, Kant’s ethics are based on deontology, meaning they are not situational. He believed that morality was determined by set guidelines and codes of behavior, and should be followed to the latter regardless of the situation. Kant left no room for exceptions; something a good number of thinkers has considered lack of common sense. Aristotle on the other hand argued that morality is a midpoint between two extremes, hence his ethics were considered a bit teleological since they could be adjusted to fit specific situations. Aristotle also claimed that an individual could be considered virtuous as long as they chose morally upright action for the sake of greatest good.…

    • 238 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Both agree the morality is not based off the result of an action, but rather the individual 's judgment about that action. To understand the moral world both Kant and Aristotle believed that logic was the only way-- they argued that emotions alone were too risky and personal to be helpful in making moral claims. Also, both men agree that some actions are just evil and should never be taken. There are natural and moral evils-- hurricanes and toothaches are examples of natural evils, murder and lying are examples of moral…

    • 1199 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Kant's Moral Theory Essay

    • 910 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Kant’s moral theory is based on the fact that one’s action should be governed by a maxim that follows the purity of the will; the idea that one’s actions should be based on a will that aligns with duty and not on the consequences of one’s actions. In the contrary, rule utilitarianism is based on the consequences of one’s actions and how it impacts the overall happiness of the individuals involved. The following paper focuses on the ideas of duty ethics and utilitarian ethics; and how these ideas can be implemented in the case of James Liang. Kant believes that an act is morally acceptable when such an act perfectly aligns with one’s duty. Furthermore, he believed that all rational beings are obligated by the demands of duty.…

    • 910 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    For Aristotle he believes that inclinations are semi-rational, responsive to reason and can be changed by reason. For example if you know something is wrong you should be able to will yourself not to want it anymore because of reason. The level of virtue deemed to an action can be imagined on a scale from not virtuous to most virtuous, while in Kant’s case there are only two options for actions; having moral worth or not having moral worth. Much like Kant, Aristotle has his own way of determining if an action if virtuous. Firstly the person must have knowledge that the action is virtuous, meaning through their reason they must know this is the right thing to do.…

    • 1098 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    We are predisposed by nature to our moral virtues, but they can only be fully experienced by repeated expression and practice of them. Our moral virtues concentrate on our actions and feelings, and our actions and feelings always have an underlying presence of pleasure or pain (Aristotle 4-284). Being virtuous and understanding and recognizing the practical amount of pleasure and the minimal amount of pain one can take in help individuals to morally develop and in fact be virtuous. In turn how virtuous one is contributes to their capability to achieve happiness (Aristotle…

    • 1866 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays

Related Topics