Nicomachean Ethics

The blend Argument is Aristotles proposal that the sh atomic number 18 of organism gentle is the brains aspiration for undercoat. Aristotle says,If we control that the function of man is a certain coordinate of life, and define that wee of life as the recitation of the souls faculties and activities in connective with rational principle, and say that the function of a safe man is to accomplish these activities obedient and rightly, and if a function is well performed when it is performed in conformation with its own proper excellencefrom these premises it arrives, that the exhaustively of man is the active exercise of his souls faculties in conformity with excellence or virtue, or if there be several compassionate excellences or virtues, in conformity with the best and most(prenominal) gross(a) among them (Book I, Ch. 7 PP Nic.+Eth.1098a14-15)Aristotles transmission line essentially stems from chaos. It is the response to a chaotic world where there ar many opt ions but very few results. He is basically recognizing that it is peerlesss duty to pack rational sense out of the world with which they most immediately identify. In other words, integrity essential find their purpose, or as Aristotle calls it, their souls faculties, and then perform the divine duties of this purpose to the best of their ability. Therein lies the challenge.The complete purpose of Aritstotle crimson mentioning this stooge be entrap in the challenge of champion performing at the height of their craft. For angiotensin-converting enzyme to know what they are genuine at is simply non enough. Aristote argues that once one(a) has singled out their purpose, they must act on it to the liberal extent that they are capable. This is the path to excellence. Aristotle says, the highest broad(a) volition be the final goal of purposeful striving, manything good for its own sake (4).This final good for human beings is eudaimonia (happiness), which is always an end in itself. (6 15) This report cuts to the core of his personal credit line basically acknowledging that to strive for good for its own sake is to actualize the good spirit of ones purpose. He identifies this purpose as happiness. This is a vague goal, because happiness is an abstract concept, and the exactness of it is entirely dependant on the person engage it. But, key in the logical argument is the realization that if one does as Aristotle advises and they aspire to perfectly carryout the will of their soul (the work they were designed to perform), than they will committing the most fair and rational act.To act in accordance with reason is a matter of observing the principle of the slopped proportional to us (finding the appropriate response among excess and deficiency in a cross situation). This denotes an emphasis on moderation. When Aristotle refers to the principle mean relative to us he is acknowledging that bothone is different and that individuals must unorname nted themselves first from believing their portions are in association with those of everyone else, second from the desire to overindulge.Aristotle rejects Platos teachings about Forms in his Nicomachean Ethics because he doesnt believe the un give the axeny aspect of Platos theory. Plato assumes that the human mind contemplates a item object and its abstract eternal form separately, and he sees this as proof that they both pull through separately. Aristotle argues that just because one can separate forms from objects in their mind it does not mean that they are separate. Aristotle organizes his critiques of Platos Forms in a list of six important arguments three of which he titles (2) Problems in the Current Beliefs virtually good Strength and Moral fadedness, (5) Moral Weakness and Brutishness (6) Moral Weakness in Anger.In Problems in the Current Beliefs About Moral Strength and Moral Weakness, Aritstotle points out Socrates view that one can not commit an immoral act kno wingly. He talks about the blameless aspect of moral weakness, which he basically opposes and views as opinion.The problems we might raise are. As to (3) how can a man be virtuously weak in his actions, when his basic assumption is correct as to what he should do? Some people claim that it is impossible for him to be morally weak if he has knowledge of what he ought to do Here it is clear that Aristotle basically feels the term morally weak should not be utilize to those who buzz off an understanding of their moral responsibility but neglect the willingness to accept it.In Moral Weakness and Brutishness, Aristotle argues that brutishness can not be classified as moral weakness. He basically constitutes brutishness as habitual vile acts that arent committed in a conscious(p) manner but as the result of indisposition or cultural tradition.He describes this best when he says, the female who is said to rip open large(predicate) women and devour the infants or what is related abo ut roughly of the savage tribes near the Black Sea, that they delight in eating raw meat or human fleshthese are characteristics of brutishness (pg 228, line 20-25). Aristotle is very dear in pointing out that as heinous as these acts are these individuals are in a nuance where they founder no sense that what they are doing is wrong. He makes this alike connection with homosexuality, which he says is often the crossing of sexual abuse.Aristotles argument corresponds with his position on the many and the wise in the sense that he is arguing individuals stay true to their personal nature. His argument pertaining to the many and the wise is basically that the wise are often find themselves in direct opponent to the many. Their views are always contrary to popular opinion. This argument would be the rationale tail end the initiative for one to go out on their own and follow the path of their true nature as foreign to the crowd. It is besides a good rationale behind questioning the crowd. It is a message that promotes free thinking.Ins sum, patronage the intent of Aristotles argument on function, it does have its weak spots. Aristotle says, Every art or applied science and every systematic investigation, and similarly every action and choice, seem to aim at some good the good therefore, has been well defined at that at which all things aim (1094a). The problem with this statement is that Aristotle argues that all things aim at the good which is a decree that everything and everyone has positive purpose. He also stresses a value in community, arguing to improve the timbre of life of those out there living and no matter those who seclude themselves.The problem with Aristotles statement arises when one realizes he is trying to force a specific type of divine destiny on people. season it is true that people can be talented at positive things that nourish humanity, they can also have talents that degrade or bring trim communities as well.Essentially Arist otle might argue that everyone has a function to coincide with the function of society, but it would be arrogant to assume there is no one alive whose sole talent is to earn money, or eat the most hot dogs, or even look attractive. Essentially Aristotle is arguing that we must execute a life that is influential. While it is inspiring to speak up that all people have a good purpose in life, society fails to imply the same message.Work CitedNicomachean Ethics Aristotle with an introduction by Hye-Kyung Kim, translated by F.H. Peters in Oxford, 1893. (Barnes & Noble, 2004)