| Papers [1-16] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "ARISTOTLE MORAL RESPONSIBILITY": |
|
|
Aristotle and Moral Responsibility, 2008.
This paper provides an analysis of Aristotle's beliefs of moral responsibility.
705 words (approx. 2.8 pages), 3 sources, MLA, AU$ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses Aristotle's belief that human beings are morally responsible for their conception of the good life, which was based on his determination that every form of activity people engage in has an ultimate goal that they consider good. The paper explains Aristotle's argument that because there cannot be an endless regression of external motivations, an intrinsic motivation for achieving the highest good must exist. The paper further explains how moral responsibility extends across desires to the conduct those desires produce and to the ends such conduct achieves.
From the Paper
"Aristotle believed that we are morally responsible for our conception of the good life, and based this belief on his determination that every form of activity people engage in has an ultimate goal which they consider good. Furthermore, Aristotle argued that because there cannot be an endless regression of external motivations, there must be an intrinsic motivation for achieving the highest good. This highest good is the goal towards which all human activity is directed."
| |
|
Marx and Aristotle: Morality, 2004.
This paper examines the moral philosophy of Marx and Aristotle.
3,375 words (approx. 13.5 pages), 7 sources, MLA, AU$ 191.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper the writer compares and contrasts the moral philosophy in the works of Marx and Aristotle. The writer examines the contributions of Engels and Marx and of Aristotle to the nature of morality. The writer also discusses the differing methods of Aristotle and Marx.
From the Paper
"The purpose of this research is to examine the contributions of Marx and Engels on one hand and Aristotle on the other with regard to the nature of morality. The research will set forth the discourse context for the issue and then discuss how the two approaches to analyzing morality coincide and how they differ with a view toward identifying and evaluating the significance and influence of these commentators on the discourse of morality. At first glance it seems that Aristotle and Marx can have very little in common ... "
| |
|
Aristotle and "Today's Moral Issues", 2002.
A comparason of the themes in "Today's Moral Issues: Classic and Contemporary Perspectives" by Daniel Bonevac with Aristotle's "Nichomacean Ethics".
2,150 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 6 sources, AU$ 128.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper will discuss the book by Daniel Bonevac called "Today's Moral Issues: Classic and Contemporary Perspectives" and make a contrast and comparison to Aristotle's "Nichomacean Ethics" and the vices and virtues of Philippa Foot. By analyzing these two perspectives we can see how they relate in the philosophies that the present and give a better understanding of how they contrast within the spheres of thought that they seem to represent. By revealing what the author of this book tells us about morality in today's society, we can see how these other thinkers think in relation to him.
| |
|
Aristotle's Moral Theory, 1996.
Analyzes qualities & actions which comprise ethical behavior, role of education & practice, pleasure & pain; applied to President Jimmy Carter.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 1 source, AU$ 76.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"In his Nicomachean Ethics, 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:
Moral virtue . . . is formed by habit. . . . None of the moral virtues is implanted in us by nature, for nothing which exists by nature can be changed by habit. . . . We are by nature equipped with the ability to receive [the virtues], and habit brings this ability to..."
| |
|
"Ethics" - Aristotle on Personal Responsibility, 1990.
Review of Aristotle's "Ethics" with an emphasis on personal responsibility and moral culpability.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 1 source, AU$ 37.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"In the Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle carefully considers the issue of responsibility and finds that the human being is indeed responsible for his or her actions and may be morally culpable even for unintended consequences. This applies both to the private conduct of individuals and to the conduct of legislators acting for the public good. For Aristotle, acting unjustly is tantamount to wishing to act unjustly. The individual is responsible both for his or her moral disposition and also for the manner in which moral questions are decided by him or her. Indeed, this is seen as a natural process so that the individual is born with the ability to differentiate between good and evil. For Aristotle, it does not matter whether the individual is born capable of differentiating good from evil or that this is ingrained by society over time as the individual grows."
| |
|
Morality in Aristotle, Paul, and Modern America, 2004.
The ways in which the morality of both Aristotle and Paul converge in modern America.
2,500 words (approx. 10.0 pages), 5 sources, MLA, AU$ 121.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines the ways in which morality of both Aristotle's and Paul's schools of thought come together in modern America. It looks at how Aristotle's idea of reason, or "logos," must be taught and then be used in the real world. It then moves on to Paul, who believes that morality must be gained by giving oneself completely to God. The paper finally looks at how modern America has brought these two schools of thought together.
From the Paper
"Do to others as you would have them do to you," is something we have all heard in some form or another at some point in our lives. To put it another way would be to treat people how you would want to be treated. This simple rule can be seen as the foundation, the beginning of many people's moral code, which they will use for the rest of their lives. It will guide their decision-making processes from the simplest choices like whether or not to tell a white lie, and all the way up to life and death situations. The question is how do we come to those decisions that can have such far-reaching consequences and feel comfortable that we have made the right, or shall we say the best decision? Are moral decisions based on the rules we have been taught by our parents, the laws of society, the consequences of an action, or a more deep desire to promote goodness in the world in which we live in? There has been a countless number of people who have attempted to define the moral code. Aristotle believed that one learns morality through philosophy and then actually using it in the real world. The apostle Paul thought that one should follow God's will, or moral code, out of love and faith. Modern America can see a convergence of these two schools of thought, which form our morality. Our morality comes from learning through our parents, religion, and the society around us where by repetition of these rules we are able to base our decisions on these principles, which are ultimately used with our natural reason."
| |
|
Morality through Plato, Aristotle, and Hobbes, 2005.
A paper comparing and contrasting Plato, Aristotle, and Hobbes, particularly their views about happiness and morality.
1,642 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 0 sources, MLA, AU$ 86.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An exploration of the similarities and differences among three philosophers. One who embraced a theory of absolute truth and the belief in one clear right and wrong; one who clearly rejected it and believed in assigned right/wrong for each person; one who would say that there is no right or wrong at all, only a social contract. It explains how all three explore the idea of metaphysics.
From the Paper
"Some of the greatest philosophers have sought to bring an understanding to basic metaphysics and morality. Plato is known for his great thoughts and philosophical ideas about politics and social values. He used a very effective and clever way of writing his views, a technique of exoteric and esoteric writing. Plato's "Allegory of the Cave" from The Republic, a children's story about a cave, had an esoteric meaning that was letting the intelligent know what the government was doing. The point that Plato gets across is that the government wants to keep everyone in the dark. It was important to him that people see the reality of the society they live in; to be happy, we must realize the metaphysical, beyond what appears to be real. Plato, being the first to explore these concepts, sets the ground works to compare all thinkers who follow him. Aristotle and Hobbes take these same ideas and shed a vastly different light on them."
| |
|
Aristotle vs. Plato on the Objectivity of Morality, 2002.
This paper discusses and compares and contrasts Aristotelian teliology and perspective on the objectivity of morality with the Platonic idea of ethical rationalism and the Forms.
1,938 words (approx. 7.8 pages), 6 sources, MLA, AU$ 98.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper shows how Plato essentially believes in the relativity of morality whereas as Aristotle does not, but instead believes that human beings, like nature, have an inherent purpose that we are designed to aspire to. Plato, on the other hand, believes that there are undefinable Forms, like moral goals, that can be seen, appreciated and reached for in many different ways, thus making hm an ethical relativist, rather than a believer in moral objectivity.
From the Paper
"Both Plato (B.C.E. 428 ? 347/8) and Aristotle (384 - 322 B.C) are known for their ageless philosophy and revolutionary views. Some contemporary philosophers go so far as to suggest that these men are ?without equal in the history of human thought? (Cohen, Curd, and Reeve). Although neither man set out to transform the perspectives of the known world with regards to ethics and morality, both succeeded in doing so infinitely beyond what they lived to witness. To a great extent, their views actually differ; yet compliment one another in defining morality. Combined; their works identified and explained morality, shaping the understanding of much of the western world for centuries."
| |
|
Moral Standards and Moral Consistency, 2008.
This paper explores the moral standards in the associations of Eberhard Faber, Incorporated.
1,049 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 3 sources, APA, AU$ 58.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines the decision to allow Eberhard Faber to associate with known bribe-givers. The paper is of the opinion that this association seems like an affront to the moral consistency requirement demanded of any credible moral standard. The paper contends that respecting the law in some, but not in all, circumstances makes a mockery of the organization's avowed commitment to legal dictates and therefore is inherently immoral.
From the Paper
"Before going too far, the stakeholders in this situation need to be listed. Obviously, the share-holders of Eberhard Faber are one significant stake-holder; so too is the Board of Directors and, especially, the key principals (Mr. Faber and Mr. Carey) who offer widely divergent views on how to approach this matter. Not to be forgotten, the other company involved is a stake-holder as it could lose a major deal with an American company - a deal it would seem to covet. Lastly, IRS and legal consultants who convinced Mr. Faber that the deal was above-board and breached no US laws are stake-holders with credibility on the line (for a lengthier discussion on all of these parties, please see "Eberhard Faber, Inc.," n.d.). In the end, many people stand to win - or lose."
| |
|
Kant vs. Aristotle, 2005.
A comparative analysis of Kant's and Aristotle's views on morality.
964 words (approx. 3.9 pages), 1 source, MLA, AU$ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Kant and Aristotle both view duty as something that comes, not just from what is lawful or what is expected, but from the inside. Morality has nothing to do with what is expected, but from the character-the inner strength and disposition. However, that is where the similarities end. This paper discusses the differences between Kant and Aristotle in their views of morality, duty and choices.
From the Paper
"According to Kant, duty leaves little room for choices. Freedom means actually having a choice, but duty is what you need to do. Duty is reasons-choice is freedom, and when you can choose what to do, morality and ethics take a back seat. What is considered moral to some people may not be empowering to all people, and when someone says, "This is moral-this is what you have a duty to do. Therefore it is the law", not everyone may agree and will become disempowered when they are required to do the duty. Morality is nothing more than self-delusion and exaggerated conceit. (Timmermann, 10) What one person considers "saintly", may just be "normal" to someone else, and therefore not a moral or ethical duty."
| |
|
Aristotle's Views, 2002.
Examining Aristotle's views on moral virtues, education of ignorant and immoral youth.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 1 source, AU$ 56.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses that the reading of Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics as a model for ethical training in the contemporary world is a task which cannot help but lead to misunderstandings.
| |
|
Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, 2007.
A discussion on Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics", focusing on voluntary actions and responsibility for character.
1,458 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 1 source, MLA, AU$ 78.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics" which argues that one is responsible for one's character because character results from voluntary actions. The paper outlines Aristotle's main argument and discusses his view on actions done in ignorance. The paper concludes by suggesting a case where an agent did not know that her actions would harm her character and discusses whether, according to Aristotle,
she would still be responsible for her character.
From the Paper
"A good and virtuous person (that is, a person who practices and perfects virtues through moral education) will strive to behave both rationally and virtuously, whatever his or her conditions and circumstances; the person has, in essence, trained himself or herself to remain both rational and virtuous. Virtuousness means to not demean ones self or others, and to avoid descending into pettiness; jealousy; or meanness (vices). Therefore, one who harms her character due to ignorance is not virtuous, although still rational. Moral education can put that person on the path toward virtuousness, and toward achieving happiness based on virtues, morals, and ethics rather than on practicing vices."
| |
|
Aristotle, 2005.
This paper discusses the persons who influenced Aristotle and Aristotle's influence on many fields including the physical and biological sciences, politics, psychology, poetry and logic.
1,170 words (approx. 4.7 pages), 6 sources, MLA, AU$ 65.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Thales (c. 640-546 BC) of Miletus, who is considered to have been the founder of natural philosophy, and Empedocles' system of four elements, earth, water, air and fire were major influences on Aristotle. The author stresses that Aristotle's influence was not isolated to Western civilization but was translated first into Syriac and later into Arabic, beginning in 450 A.D.; the Arabs were primarily interested in the medical, astronomical and mathematical aspects of the Aristotelian tradition. The paper relates that one of Aristotle's contributions, which is still in existence today, is the university where Aristotle lectured at regularly scheduled hours as opposed to the debate of his predecessors.
From the Paper
"Biological principles were highly influenced by Aristotle. William Harvey, the founder of modern physiology was very much influenced by Aristotle and "...founded much of his work on the Aristotelian assumption that the shape, structure and size of each organ of the animal body indicated its purpose and function in the whole system." The idea of spontaneous generation was a commonly held belief, with it roots dating back to Aristotle and was not disproved until experiments were performed by Louis Pasteur."
| |
|
Aristotle's View on Capital Punishment, 2006.
A look at capital punishment through the eyes of Aristotle.
1,470 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 1 source, MLA, AU$ 78.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines capital punishment as viewed by Aristotle, as a moral issue and argue the opinion that it is an immoral practice. This paper also carefully identifies and explains the premises that lead to this argument, looking at the flip side of the issue and creating a possible counter argument.
From the Paper
"Aristotle also distinguishes between distributive and retributatory justice. Retributive justice, or punishment for things done wrong, is similar to criminal courts. Distributive justice is conceptually similar to civil courts and awarding financial compensation.
People should not be held accountable for involuntary actions; things they were forced to do, or that they did in ignorance of the facts, which may be called mistakes or mishaps. Voluntary unjust actions can be divided according to whether they were premeditated or not. Crimes done due to emotion rather than reason (ex: sudden anger) are acts of injustice, but the person who does things in the heat of the moment should not be regarded as a wicked or unjust person. Premeditated unjust actions can only be done by unjust or wicked people, Aristotle thought. This may seem fairly sensible, but is an important departure from Socrates and Plato who held that people never did things which they realized were wrong, and that all evil was caused solely by ignorance."
| |
|
Aristotle on Pleasure, 2008.
An analysis of Aristotle's views on pleasure, specifically in his work, "The Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle."
1,197 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 1 source, MLA, AU$ 66.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the views of Aristotle on the experience of pleasure in the world. The paper specifically focuses on "The Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle" by Aristotle and discusses his views expressed in the work. The paper explains how pleasure for Aristotle is an aspect of human existence that guides action and can guide virtuous living.
From the Paper
"Moderation seems to be the stand of Aristotle on pleasure, somewhere in between the contrary idea of all pleasure being a bad thing for man and all pleasure being a good thing for man Aristotle hangs his idea of pleasure and pleasure seeking as a natural state of man seeking eudaimonia. If a man seeks pleasure that is derived form his own desire in a natural state he is seeking pleasure that is necessary for the completion of a virtuous life. If a man seeks pleasure from an unnatural state, such as in the state of illness he is seeking pleasure for un-virtuous reasons and therefore such acts and emotions cannot be considered pleasure."
| |
|
Aristotle's View of Women, 2002.
Presents Aristotle's views of women and some feminist responses to these views.
650 words (approx. 2.6 pages), 5 sources, AU$ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This eight-page undergraduate paper examines Aristotle's view of women. Aristotle held a very repressive view, although he intended most of his discussion in a general way. Feminist responses to his view are included.
|
|
|
