Moral Theories of Aristotle, Mill & Kant
This is an excerpt from the paper...
This study will examine and compare the views of three philosophers on how we should decide the right course of action. The study will consider the moral theories of Aristotle (in Nicomachean Ethics), John Stuart Mill (in Utilitarianism), and Immanuel Kant (in Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals). The study will conclude that each approach has qualities to recommend it, but Aristotle's appears to this reader to be superior. Kant's places great responsibility on the freedom of the individual's will as an expression of God's will, determined through reason, rather than on individual perception, but his categorical imperative is too extreme. Mill's approach is reasonable, but it ignores God's will and puts all power for defining morality in terms of man's definition of "pleasure" or "happiness." Mill also seems to turn some responsibility for action over to the community rather than the individual. Aristotle defines moral virtue as the possession of such qualities as self-control, courage, generosity, high-mindedness, gentleness, friendliness, truthfulness, etc. The possession of such qualities occurs through action---acts of self-control, courage, generosity, etc. Actions of such self-control, courage, etc., occur again and again in the life of the morally virtuous individual. Moral virtue, then, is a factor not of genetics but of action, and particularly repeated action. In other words, Aristotle's answer to how we should decide the right course of action is not base
. . .
can be taught to associate pleasure with vice rather than virtue, and pain with virtue rather than vice. Aristotle addresses this problem by emphasizing the importance of education, and by stressing the role of that education and experience in determining the right and wrong kinds of pleasure at the right time and in the right manner.
Both Mill and Kant rightly advocate the freedom of the individual in determining moral behavior, but both also rightly connect the behavior of the individual with the good of other human beings. However, Mill is concerned with results, as was Aristotle, and favors moderation for both the individual and society. Kant has the extreme view that results should have no bearing on choosing to do right.
To Kant, for freedom to mean anything requires the active and conscious involvement of the reason and the freedom of the will of the individual. Similarly, the basic idea of the connection between freedom and morality extends from the individual to the entire human race. Kant's moral imperative requires that the individual act as if his behavior were going to be emulated by all other human beings: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Instead Aristotle, Mill God, Mill Kant, Metaphysics Morals, Mill Aristotle, , course action, action based, John Stuart, moral virtue, Indianapolis Hackett, aristotle 1999, education experience, universal law, pleasure pain, based moral, indianapolis hackett, Kant Immanuel, god equation, References Aristotle, mill 1979 24, self-control courage generosity, decide course action, course action based, physical moral feeling,
Approximate Word count = 2087
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Moral Theories of Aristotle, Mill & Kant
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
