In Thomas Hobbes essay about Morality as Rational Advantage he discusses how his development of the social conflict theory helps emerge individuals to make a decision in a society where everyone can mutually agree. He talks into perspective of what life would be like without a government. For example in the text he states:
Whatsoever is the object of any man’s appetite or desire, that is it, which he for his part calleth good: and the object of his hate and aversion, evil; and of his contempt, vile and inconsiderable. For these words of good, evil, and contemptible, are ever used with relation to the person that useth them: there being nothing simply and absolutely so; (Hobbes, 4)
If there is no government or laws one’s human reason would comes into play to say what is right and what is wrong. However, this supports Hobbes view of where one is free to decide what is right or wrong without authority being involved. Hobbes only recognizes the self-interest of individuals mutually agreeing upon a head of state. When people take matters of trying to exercise power over others it can cause conflict powered by disagreements or in Hobbes view a state of war. This is why Hobbes developed the social conflict theory, which involves a society having enough of conflict by deciding to make an agreement on how to live a better life. …show more content…
Aristotle believes that in order for an individual to meet these goals they simply cannot do it alone. For example, as stated in the text it states “Happiness requires the addition of external goods; for it is impossible, or at least difficult, to do noble deeds with no outside means. He distinguishes between intellectual and moral virtues saying that intellectual virtues can only be taught and demand experience. Well as moral virtues are an outcome of a
Whatsoever is the object of any man’s appetite or desire, that is it, which he for his part calleth good: and the object of his hate and aversion, evil; and of his contempt, vile and inconsiderable. For these words of good, evil, and contemptible, are ever used with relation to the person that useth them: there being nothing simply and absolutely so; (Hobbes, 4)
If there is no government or laws one’s human reason would comes into play to say what is right and what is wrong. However, this supports Hobbes view of where one is free to decide what is right or wrong without authority being involved. Hobbes only recognizes the self-interest of individuals mutually agreeing upon a head of state. When people take matters of trying to exercise power over others it can cause conflict powered by disagreements or in Hobbes view a state of war. This is why Hobbes developed the social conflict theory, which involves a society having enough of conflict by deciding to make an agreement on how to live a better life. …show more content…
Aristotle believes that in order for an individual to meet these goals they simply cannot do it alone. For example, as stated in the text it states “Happiness requires the addition of external goods; for it is impossible, or at least difficult, to do noble deeds with no outside means. He distinguishes between intellectual and moral virtues saying that intellectual virtues can only be taught and demand experience. Well as moral virtues are an outcome of a