StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Aristotle and Kant: Comparative Analysis of Ethical Philosophy - Essay Example

Cite this document
Summary
Aristotle and Kant are two philosophers that are well known in the field of ethics. However, before critically analysing the two philosophers accordingly to their philosophical framework…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER98.7% of users find it useful
Aristotle and Kant: Comparative Analysis of Ethical Philosophy
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "Aristotle and Kant: Comparative Analysis of Ethical Philosophy"

Aristotle and Kant: Comparative Analysis of Ethical Philosophy Aristotle and Kant are two philosophers that are well known in the field of ethics. However, before critically analysing the two philosophers accordingly to their philosophical framework, it is better to have a full grasp or understanding of societal contexts where they are confined. Aristotle, a Greek philosopher, has formulated his ethical thought during the Greek period that became one of the foundations of the contemporary philosophical thought. Kant, on the other hand, has worked out his philosophy during the period of Enlightenment wherein there is already an advancement of knowledge system. Firstly, what is the most common between the two philosophers? It is mainly the thought of the good. The assessment of good in this case adhere to a more individualistic approach that values more the importance of doing what is right on the part of the individual. Aristotle, in his case, asserted that the idea of good can be questioned if it validity is indeed valid like one person getting what he needs for being excellent in doing something (Ross 5). In this case, the very foundation of doing something that is good, whether in thought or form, is basically on gaining happiness or pleasure (Ross 6). In this paradigm of Aristotle, there is a dominance of a very hedonistic approach towards human attitude on things. Kant, on the other hand, highlights the importance of will as one of the factors that greatly influence human activity (Gregor 52). In this case, Kant points out that reason provides a crucial role for the occurrence of human activity which will eventually result into good or bad depending on the circumstances that surround the matter of the act (Gregor 52). Presumably, humans, through their rational thinking, allow them to decide what they will do. There is a presence of impartiality in terms of the manner of thinking because this requires a thorough deliberation of the outcomes of the matter. Synthetically, what seems to be relation of these two paradigms presented by the philosophers? By careful observance on a very practical level, there is nothing wrong for humans to seek pleasure and gratification on their part when it comes to choosing things that will indeed be beneficial for them. However, there is also an implication that the actions that we choose can eventually have a drawback on others even if we desire gratification. This highlights that the individualistic and hedonistic tendencies of humans will be beneficial for them but will not always be beneficial for others. In the real world, how do these paradigms of Kant and Aristotle apply on a very synthetic level? Take a look for the example, the increasing gap of the rich and the poor. There is nothing wrong for the rich to fully assert his desires and wants to live a hedonistic life. The same way that the poor is not even prevented to desire a good life. However, due to economic imbalance and instability, there is no chance on the part of the poor to attain his desire and the rich will continually exploit what he has. On a moralistic level, this kind of act cannot be fully considered as something moral since there is suffering. This suffering is the main line of difference between the two philosophers since there is a relatively different approach coming from both of their moral paradigms. Aristotle deals with desire as something that is normal for humans to do since it is already an inherent and intrinsic capacity on their part (Ross 26). This desire allows humans to attain their needs and wants to live a life that is good and pleasurable for them. However, Aristotle also pointed out that is still the human’s choice whether he will seek and assert his desires (Ross 26). The capacity of thinking provided by choice implies that the act of humans can have a relatively different impact because it can be good or bad. The unexpectedness of the outcome of a certain act can be questioned ethically. Therefore, despite of the intrinsic nature to be hedonistic, it is still the choice of humans to do so. This scenario highlights the condition that humans must be fully aware of the context of their hedonistic acts and must be keen to their outlook on things to prevent the occurrence of troublesome ones and prevention occurs by the manner of choice. On the part of Kant, he has a very different approach on desire. For Kant, desire can prove to be problematic on the part of humans since there is a possibility of the occurrence of a problematic condition once desire is not fulfilled (Gregor 61). This desire appears to be the gateway to the very innate hedonist nature of humans. However, desire also gives a reason for humans to be highly conceited and ambitious once these desires are fulfilled and will continually act in accordance to the fulfilment of their desires. Kant challenges the notion of desire since it can lead to suffering of man (Gregor 12). This has become possible since non-fulfilment of desires would invariably provide a condition for humans to seek ventures and commit acts that are relatively problematic and intolerable. This is relative true in most cases since this has opened the eyes of the people to the current social condition of the world and provides a venue to discuss the problems that have long been neglected to discuss that are related to human desire which have placed other humans at risk. Despite of this difference between the two philosophers, their approach on certain things is still commendable and can be tackled on a very synthetic level. For Aristotle, it is the choice of humans to seek their desires (Ross 26) and Kant asserted that desire is the detrimental factor of human thinking that gives rise to suffering (Gregor 12). How is the synthetic analysis possible? First is that it is the choice of humans to live out a lavishing and a very hedonistic lifestyle which can be good or bad for them yet they cannot blame anyone if they suffer from non-gratification and non-fulfilment of their desires. This only shows that humans must be responsible of their acts and must not blame others for the failure of it since they are the ones that have chosen to explore these ventures in which uncertainty dominates yet they pushes their limits for the sake of satisfaction. This can be regarded to be somehow utilitarian in approach since there is a need to maximize avenues for hedonistic acts. There is nothing wrong with this on an individualistic level as long as there is intrinsic consciousness on the part of the individual to understand that there must be compliance to the responsibility that comes with it. However, on the facet of social level, then there is indeed a problem to these hedonistic tendencies because this gives a reason for humans to suffer on their own. This suffering occurs due to inequality that exists between humans especially in fulfilling the needs and wants that they have yet their status in the society does not allow them to be so. Going back to the example of the rich and the poor, it is already clear that the rich ones gets more and more ambitious as long as they keep on satisfying their wants. This makes them greedy and this attitude has displaced most of the people in a state of desolation and a greater gap between the rich and the poor that has existed for a very long time increases further which evokes greater complexities on individuals and society in the long run. Given the two scenarios of the philosophers, one thing is made clear. Humans must learn to be at least sensitive and considerate of their acts and be responsible for the effect of it. There is nothing wrong to desire, to want and to need things for happiness yet one must realize the importance of choice and a deliberative assessment of it. Choice gives us the freedom to do what we want yet we are all aware that freedom is not absolute. It must not be abused but rather it must be valued. Being responsible and sensitive is important to fully understand the innate human complexities that come along the way. This will eventually leads us into living a morally balanced life that shows concern not just for the individual but also for the society. WORKS CITED Ross, W.D. Nicomacheaen Ethic by Aristotle. MIT Classics. 24 Nov. 2011. Gregor, Mary. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge University Press. 1998. PDF Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“Aristotle and Kant: Comparative Analysis of Ethical Philosophy Essay”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/philosophy/1437633-aristotle-and-kant
(Aristotle and Kant: Comparative Analysis of Ethical Philosophy Essay)
https://studentshare.org/philosophy/1437633-aristotle-and-kant.
“Aristotle and Kant: Comparative Analysis of Ethical Philosophy Essay”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/philosophy/1437633-aristotle-and-kant.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Aristotle and Kant: Comparative Analysis of Ethical Philosophy

The Philosophical Theories

This paper provides a careful analysis of the theories of Aristotle, Plato, and Machiavelli.... nbsp; Also, the author describes how Machiavelli's positions have contrasted greatly with the views of aristotle and Plato, particularly their views on the government and the State.... hellip; Platonic philosophy is hinged on moral virtue as practiced by just rulers.... nbsp;     Adherence to categorical imperatives provides for autonomous ethical choice in the sense that human dignity is combined with universality so that the product of each one's autonomous will shall at the same time be for oneself and for all....
16 Pages (4000 words) Term Paper

Law and Justice Relationship Philosophy

This paper ''Law and Justice Relationship philosophy'' tells that According to Aristotle, while all persons share a common "nature," some persons can acquire by engaging in habitual behaviour something like a "second nature" that is as much a determinant of their actions as is their "first" nature.... hellip; Barker writes about aristotle's viewpoint and how being ruled by a constitution and rotation of office provides everyone with the same rights and worth, rather than being ruled by a king judging by his/her feelings and thereby, not having a 'neutral' mind when exercising authority....
29 Pages (7250 words) Essay

Justification Employed by Kant in his Groundwork of Metaphysics of Morals

Metaphysics of morals, by Kant, is one of the most known ‘philosophical' texts which refer to the analysis of the issues that lead to certain human behaviour.... Although Kant deals with the analysis of the human behaviour, he stills avoid to refer to the human reactions from a… as to whether a particular action was moral or not) but he just defines certain criteria for the evaluation of the human behaviour supporting that the integration of the human reaction with the particular system of evaluation (as presented in his ) can be achieved only with if based on the observation of the actions from an objective point of view and not a critical one because in this case there is the possibility that certain behaviours could be characterized as hostile to the general social framework, an action which should be avoided – at least at the primary stage of the behavioural analysis....
13 Pages (3250 words) Essay

What Is the Value of Philosophy

The coherence theory on the other hand states that the validity of a statement can only be concluded by a comparative analysis done with relative statements.... The importance of philosophy is so much, that if human kind needs to get liberated, it cannot be done without it.... He also says that man cannot live only be feeding his physical body alone and he… And hence, the value of philosophy lies in how he feeds his thoughts by questioning himself rather than looking for certainty. Aristotle is of the opinion that human beings are naturally inclined to know things and it is their curiosity that philosophy Questions What is the value of philosophy?...
3 Pages (750 words) Essay

A Comparative Analysis of Aristotle and Kants Ethical Theories

The paper "A comparative analysis of Aristotle and Kant's Ethical Theories" discusses that “achieving happiness necessarily involves fulfilling your distinctive function as a human being” (Chaffee 477).... nbsp;… It is important to state that based on the analysis on aristotle and kant's ethical theories, I believe that the more significant theory is Aristotle's virtue ethics.... While the emphasis on moral maxims is discussed under the category of deontology, which is “the ethical view that the moral value of one's action is determined by fulfilling one's duty” (Chaffee 486)....
5 Pages (1250 words) Coursework

Law and Justice Relationship Philosophy

nbsp;… aristotle and Plato have debated about the Rule of Law.... This paper "Law and Justice Relationship philosophy" focuses on the fact that according to Aristotle, while all persons share a common "nature," some persons can acquire by engaging in habitual behaviour something like a "second nature" that is as much a determinant of their actions.... Barker writes about aristotle's viewpoint and how being ruled by a constitution and rotation of office provides everyone with the same rights and worth, rather than being ruled by a king judging with his/her own feelings and thereby, not having a 'neutral' mind when exercising authority....
20 Pages (5000 words) Assignment

The Capabilities of Individuals and a Holistic Sensation of Health in Health Care

This paper describes the capability approach addresses issues of humanitarianism, not justice, while the social goods approach is too economistic both in its metaphors and in its actual focus; autonomy, freedom, community and institutional concerns and achieving the highest and most virtuous life....
17 Pages (4250 words) Research Paper

Lockes and Kants Moral Theories in the Modern Society

The comparative analysis in terms of the applications and effects of these theories to all humans in the modern setting is the key point of argumentation.... The paper "Locke's and kant's Moral Theories in the Modern Society" states that if morality teaches us to follow codes of conduct and to have amenability with accepted individual behavior, then it is only right to let each and every one cooperate with molding something to be morally acceptable.... any moral theories have been formulated by famous philosophers like Socrates, aristotle and Plato during the time of ancient ethics....
5 Pages (1250 words) Essay
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us