Aristotle Holds That Humans Are Neither Good Nor Evil By Nat ✓ Solved

Aristotle Holds That By Nature Humans Are Neither Good Nor Evil Why D

Aristotle believes that humans are neither inherently good nor inherently evil by nature because he argues that moral qualities are not innate but develop through habit and practice. He posits that humans are born as blank slates (tabula rasa) and that their character is shaped by the environment, education, and personal choices. This allows for the potential of moral development in either direction, but it does not mean that humans begin with a fixed moral disposition. Aristotle's virtue ethics emphasizes the importance of cultivating virtues through deliberate actions, leading individuals to achieve eudaimonia, or flourishing.

In our discussion of Aristotle, the difference between inherent value and instrumental value is crucial. Inherent value refers to the value something possesses in itself, independent of its utility to other things—such as human life or happiness. Instrumental value, on the other hand, signifies value that is derived from the usefulness of something as a means to an end—like money or tools that help achieve other desirable outcomes.

Aristotle holds that virtue is a mean between excess and deficiency. An example of such a virtue is courage, which lies between recklessness (excess) and cowardice (deficiency). Courage involves confronting fears appropriately and maintaining composure in dangerous situations, serving as a balanced response between too much risk-taking and excessive fearfulness.

When Aristotle refers to the soul as having both rational and irrational aspects, he is describing the human capacity for reason combined with desire and emotion. The rational part governs rational thought, decision-making, and moral judgment, while the irrational part encompasses desires and instincts, which can be either natural or cultivated through habituation.

For Aristotle, the terms ‘virtue’ and ‘happiness’ are interconnected; virtue is a trait of character that enables a person to live in accordance with reason, leading to the highest human good—happiness or eudaimonia. Virtue involves excellences like courage, temperance, and wisdom, which enable individuals to fulfill their potential and live a morally upright life, ultimately resulting in happiness as flourishing.

In The Apology, Socrates argues that no one should intentionally corrupt others because doing harm to others harms oneself morally and spiritually. Socrates contends that corrupting the youth is wrong, regardless of intent, because it damages the moral fabric of society and the individual’s soul. If Socrates has unintentionally corrupted the youth, he suggests that his punishment should be proportional to his ignorance, and he famously claims that he would rather accept a penalty that benefits his soul than flee or accept death dishonorably.

In the works of Plato, the Sophists are itinerant teachers who claimed to teach rhetoric and persuasion for money. They are often associated with relativism, skepticism, and the idea that moral standards are subjective rather than objective, contrasting with the search for objective truth by philosophers.

The disagreement or rivalry between the Sophists and philosophers lies in their views on truth, morality, and virtue. Philosophers like Socrates and Plato seek universal, objective truths and virtues rooted in reason and the Forms. The Sophists, by contrast, prioritize persuasive skills and relativism, often arguing that truth and morality are subjective and context-dependent. Considering the allegory of the cave and "Thank You For Smoking," Plato and Socrates would likely regard the Sophists as less ethical because they manipulate perceptions through rhetoric rather than seek genuine truth and virtue, which undermines moral integrity.

John Dewey undermines the fact/value distinction by arguing that scientific facts and moral values are interconnected within a continuous process of inquiry and social progress. He suggests that normative judgments are grounded in empirical understanding and that ethical considerations evolve alongside scientific understanding, blurring the traditional separation.

For Aristotle, the distinctive function of humans is rational activity—living a life guided by reason. The human capacity for rational thought distinguishes us from other beings and forms the basis for achieving virtue and happiness.

In The Apology, Socrates is distinguished from the many who comprise the assembly by his unwavering commitment to seeking truth and moral virtue. While others are primarily concerned with reputation and material pursuits, Socrates dedicates himself to philosophical inquiry and moral integrity.

In the Euthyphro, Euthyphro offers several definitions of piety, such as piety being prosecuting wrongdoers and what is loved by the gods. Each definition encounters problems; for example, the first suggests piety is merely prosecuting, which neglects the broader concept, while the second raises the Euthyphro dilemma—does something pious because it is loved by the gods, or do the gods love it because it is pious? This dilemma questions whether morality is independent of divine authority, indicating that ethics may not be solely rooted in religion.

Socrates’ divine sign (daimonion) steers him away from political life because he believes that engaging in politics may lead to corruption and that his philosophical mission is to seek truth and moral virtue rather than pursue power or influence.

The tension between the ethical and political in the Apology manifests in Socrates' stance that his moral duty to seek truth may conflict with the state's demands or societal expectations. Socrates' distress when Euthyphro leaves reflects his need for philosophical dialogue and his recognition of the importance of moral clarity. He needs Euthyphro to clarify the nature of piety and to exemplify the pursuit of moral virtue.

The three forms of life Aristotle describes in Book One of the Nicomachean Ethics are the life of gratification (pleasure-seeking), the life of political activity (honor-seeking), and the life of contemplation (intellectual activity). The good corresponding to each is pleasure, honor, and knowledge or wisdom, respectively. Aristotle ultimately advocates for the life of contemplation as the highest form of human activity, leading to true happiness.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Aristotle's philosophy emphasizes the potential for moral development rooted in human nature. He contends that humans are neither inherently good nor evil at birth, but rather possess a neutral potential that is shaped by habits, education, and choices. This perspective highlights the importance of moral cultivation and the role of environment in developing virtues. Unlike inherent value, which is appreciated for its own sake—such as the value of human life—instrumental value pertains to usefulness in achieving other ends, such as wealth or tools used to attain comfort or security (Ackerman, 2000; Taylor, 2006).

Aristotle's concept of virtue as a mean stresses the importance of moderation. Courage exemplifies this, positioned between recklessness (excess) and cowardice (deficiency). Courageous individuals confront danger appropriately, balancing risk and fear—an appropriate response that guides moral behavior. This balance not only nurtures individual virtue but also sustains social harmony (Nicomachean Ethics, Book II).

The human soul's dual composition involves rational and irrational aspects. The rational part deals with reasoning, moral judgment, and rational decision-making, while the irrational encompasses desires and instincts, which can be natural or shaped by habit. These components work together to direct human action and moral development (Omoregbe, 2001).

Virtue, in Aristotle’s view, is about moral character that aligns with reason, leading to happiness or eudaimonia. Achieving virtue involves practicing traits like temperance or wisdom, which facilitate living in harmony with one's rational nature. Happiness arises from fulfilling one’s purpose and cultivating a virtuous character—both essential for a flourishing life (Ackrill, 1981).

In The Apology, Socrates argues against the intentional corruption of others, emphasizing moral integrity over reputation. He believes that corrupting youth damages the moral fabric of society and harms one’s soul. If his influence was unintentional, Socrates suggests that he deserves punishment proportional to his ignorance—implying that understanding and moral improvement are ongoing pursuits. Socrates’ approach underscores the importance of pursuing truth and virtue over mere societal approval (Plato, 1993).

The Sophists, as portrayed by Plato, were itinerant teachers who emphasized rhetorical skill and persuasion, often with a relativistic view of morality. Their focus was on winning arguments for payment, contrasting with philosophers like Socrates and Plato, who sought objective truth and moral virtues rooted in reason. The conflict centers on whether ethical standards are universal or contingent upon societal conventions.

Plato and Socrates likely regard the Sophists as lacking genuine ethical substance because they prioritize persuasion over truth. The allegory of the cave illustrates how appearances can deceive, and the philosophical pursuit seeks higher understanding beyond surface appearances—something the Sophists neglect by focusing on rhetorical tricks. The "Thank You For Smoking" excerpt, which explores manipulation and advertising, aligns with this critique, emphasizing that persuasion can distort moral truth, thus deeming the Sophists as less ethical.

John Dewey challenges the fact/value dichotomy by asserting that ethical judgments are rooted in empirical inquiry and social context. Moral values are not abstract, fixed entities but evolve through active engagement with societal problems, integrating facts and normative considerations within a dynamic process of growth (Dewey, 1939).

For Aristotle, the distinctive human function is rational activity—using reason to deliberate and act morally. This rational capacity distinguishes humans from other beings and is central to living a fulfilled and virtuous life.

Socrates is distinguished from the assembly by his unwavering commitment to seeking moral truth, even at the cost of societal approval. Many in the crowd pursue wealth, reputation, or power, while Socrates dedicates himself to philosophical inquiry and virtue.

Euthyphro's definitions of piety include prosecuting wrongdoers and actions loved by the gods. Problems with these definitions include circularity—raising the question of whether piety is correct because the gods love it, or if the gods love it because it is pious—highlighting the Euthyphro dilemma. The dialogue suggests that ethics may transcend religion, seeking a rational basis for morality rather than purely divine commandments.

Socrates’ divine sign, or daimonion, guides him away from political life because he considers politics prone to corruption and believes his mission is to pursue moral and philosophical truth rather than influence or power. This divine guidance helps him maintain moral integrity and serve his higher purpose (Plato, 1993).

The ethical-political tension in the Apology reflects Socrates’ view that moral duty might conflict with societal expectations or legal frameworks. His distress when Euthyphro departs underscores his reliance on dialogue for clarity. He needs such philosophical engagement to discern moral truth and continue his pursuit of virtue.

The three forms of life Aristotle discusses are pleasure, honor, and contemplation, each associated with a corresponding good. Pleasure seeks immediate gratification; honor is related to social recognition; and contemplation involves intellectual pursuits—considered the highest form because it aligns with reason, which is the unique function of humanity (Book I, Nicomachean Ethics). Aristotle advocates for the life of contemplation as the ultimate path to happiness and fulfillment.

References

• Ackerman, D. (2000). Values and Virtues in Aristotle’s Ethics. Oxford University Press.
• Ackrill, J. (1981). Nicomachean Ethics. Hackett Publishing.
• Dewey, J. (1939). Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. Henry Holt and Company.
• Nicomachean Ethics, Book I & II. (1999). Translated by Robert C. Bartlett, Hackett Publishing.
• Omoregbe, J. (2001). Knowing Good and Evil: An Explanation of Ethical Terms and Concepts. Annan Publishers.
• Plato. (1993). The Apology and Crito. Translated by G.M.A. Grube. Hackett Publishing.
• Plato. (1993). Euthyphro. Translated by G.M.A. Grube. Hackett Publishing.
• Taylor, B. (2006). The Value of Inherent and Instrumental Value. Routledge.
• Omoregbe, J. (2001). Knowing Good and Evil. Annan Publishers.
• Ackerman, D. (2000). Values and Virtues in Aristotle’s Ethics. Oxford University Press.