It is important to understand the fact that a city can reach the ideal state of virtue only if all of the citizens living in it are virtuous. Therefore the main focus is directed towards the individuals. Under thee circumstances being virtuous means performing the specific tasks that one has. Aristotle on the other hand is more concerned with happiness. He ha established the fact that happiness is the ultimate goal that one can achieve and he is concerned with which are the best ways in order to achieve it. He manages to provide people with a sort of prescription for reaching happiness which lies in the expression of reason. If a person fulfils his function in the best manner in which he can that this is bound to lead him to happiness. The arguments might seem similar through the fact that they both underline the importance of reason, happiness and morality. The main difference resides in the very manner in which the function is conceived and perceived. For Plato the most important dimension of this function is the deliberative one. In other words the individual has the role to take care of things around him after he has understood what the right path is. A decision based on profound understanding is based by a course of action. Aristotle on the other hand claims that the function of men is that of performing actions which express reason. The most profound difference is actually the focus upon which each of the philosophers concentrate. Plato focuses on the place that the individual has in society. This place and his responsibilities turn him into a citizen, a member of a community. The actions of ruing and deliberating etc. are applied within the community- which represents the most important context. The individual is analyzed and defined in relation to this context. Since the individual is analyzed and defined in relation to a community the strongest implication is that the individuals are connected to each other. They depend on each other and therefore they have a...
They have a duty towards ach other in order to make the system work. Once the system is virtuous, that is, once the city functions well, this means that its components, the people are happy too.
This is Aristotle's launching pad for his discussion of politics. To him, ethics and politics are matters of rational judgment, stemming from the natural inclinations of individual humans. This notion is reflected in Aristotle's analysis of the constitutional doctrines of some 158 cities. Essentially, he recognized that every state -- necessarily city states -- exist in unique sets of circumstances that act upon the universal forms of ethics in ways
Aristotle & Metaphysics Aristotle calls the science he is seeking 'first philosophy or theology'. The objective of this study is to answer the question of what does first philosophy or theology consist and what is its object. In addition, this study will ask in what ways that it differs from other sciences and in what sense is it first? In the final analysis this study will answer if Aristotle's 'first philosophy
Aristotle thought happiness was longer in coming, it was the manner of being actualized and fulfilling one's true potential using their own individual gifts: Again, if the virtues are concerned with actions and passions, and every passion and every action is accompanied by pleasure and pain, for this reason also virtue will be concerned with pleasures and pains. This is indicated also by the fact that punishment is indicated by
Plato & Aristotle The Platonic theory of knowledge is divided into two parts: a quest first to discover whether there are any unchanging objects and to identify and describe them and second to illustrate how they could be known by the use of reason, that is, via the dialectical method. Plato used various literary devices for illustrating his theory; the most famous of these is the allegory of the cave in
Certainly, rhetoric lends itself to the discovery of truth, as truth (Aristotle suggests) always makes more intuitive and intellectual sense compared to falsehood, and so equally talented rhetoricians will be more convincing sharing the truth than sharing falsehood. However, critics have pointed out that there is so "tension between Aristotle's epistemological optimism and his attempt to come to terms with rhetoric as a culturally and contextually specific social institution....
Socrates asked them to come forward with their thoughts if they were "still doubtful about the argument." The two proceed to make a sophisticated argument, contrary to Socrates' points, that were counterexamples to the points about the body and the soul that Socrates had been making with such eloquence. It was cross-examination, but it was also a series of new hypotheses that Cebes and Simmias presented to the philosopher
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now