Aristotle’s teleological viewpoint and Kant’s more modern stance offer different perceptions to be happy and live virtuous lives. A further look into their theories and how these philosophies differ from one anther will further be looked at. Backgrounds
To understand Aristotle better it is important to look at the time period in which he lived. Aristotle was born in 384 B.C. The Greeks viewed the world as the center of the universe. Aristotle looked at the world around him as a whole and believed that all living things have ‘internal goals’. His viewpoints influenced by his environment effected how he viewed the world.
Emmanuel Kant was born in the 17th century during the enlightenment. It was a time for question; ideas of science, politics and philosophy were being …show more content…
One of the main differences is that Aristotle connects good acts with virtue and Kant proposes that a good will is good in itself and not because of its accomplishments. The highest morals of a person’s life rest on the good will. (2012) Thus, all individuals of good will achieve complete their actions using the greatest moral worth.
According to Aristotle, if a person is to be virtuous always in his or her actions he would have to tell lies at some time so that he can reach a mean of his actions. This argument would mean that all humans would have to lie at some point and there would be no truth in the world. However, Aristotle responses to this that such a man would have to consider the circumstances.
In comparison, Kant states the the moral worth of an act depends on the principles underlying the completion of the act. (1785) Moral worth is not related to the activities preceding the completion of a certain activity. Good will is thus the object and subject; it is never a product of some other act. Good will, according to Kant is the ability to complete actions successfully for their sole purpose and
To understand Aristotle better it is important to look at the time period in which he lived. Aristotle was born in 384 B.C. The Greeks viewed the world as the center of the universe. Aristotle looked at the world around him as a whole and believed that all living things have ‘internal goals’. His viewpoints influenced by his environment effected how he viewed the world.
Emmanuel Kant was born in the 17th century during the enlightenment. It was a time for question; ideas of science, politics and philosophy were being …show more content…
One of the main differences is that Aristotle connects good acts with virtue and Kant proposes that a good will is good in itself and not because of its accomplishments. The highest morals of a person’s life rest on the good will. (2012) Thus, all individuals of good will achieve complete their actions using the greatest moral worth.
According to Aristotle, if a person is to be virtuous always in his or her actions he would have to tell lies at some time so that he can reach a mean of his actions. This argument would mean that all humans would have to lie at some point and there would be no truth in the world. However, Aristotle responses to this that such a man would have to consider the circumstances.
In comparison, Kant states the the moral worth of an act depends on the principles underlying the completion of the act. (1785) Moral worth is not related to the activities preceding the completion of a certain activity. Good will is thus the object and subject; it is never a product of some other act. Good will, according to Kant is the ability to complete actions successfully for their sole purpose and