Nicomachean Ethics

The Function Argument is Aristotles proposal that the scat of being hu piece of music is the heads aspiration for reason. Aristotle says,If we decl ar that the function of man is a certain form of life, and define that form of life as the exercise of the souls faculties and get alongivities in association with rational dogma, and say that the function of a good man is to perform these activities considerablyspring and rightly, and if a function is well performed when it is performed in accordance with its own proper excellencefrom these premises it follows, that the wide-cut of man is the active exercise of his souls faculties in complaisance with excellence or virtue, or if on that point be several human excellences or virtues, in conformity with the best and most perfect among them (Book I, Ch. 7 PP Nic.+Eth.1098a14-15)Aristotles melodic line essentially stems from chaos. It is the re challenge to a chaotic initiation where there are many options scarcely very few re sults. He is basically recognizing that it is unrivaleds duty to make rational spirit out of the world with which they most immediately identify. In other words, one must examine their tendency, or as Aristotle calls it, their souls faculties, and then perform the overlord duties of this blueprint to the best of their ability. Therein lies the challenge.The entire purpose of Aritstotle even mentioning this croup be found in the challenge of one performing at the height of their craft. For one to know what they are good at is plain non enough. Aristote argues that once one has singled out their purpose, they must act on it to the full extent that they are capable. This is the path to excellence. Aristotle says, the highest good will be the net goal of purposeful striving, something good for its own saki (4).This final good for human beings is eudaimonia (happiness), which is always an end in itself. (6 15) This instruction cuts to the core of his argument basically acknow ledging that to strive for good for its own sake is to actualize the good record of ones purpose. He identifies this purpose as happiness. This is a vague goal, because happiness is an abstract concept, and the exactness of it is entirely dependant on the person pursuing it. But, key in the line of reasoning is the realization that if one does as Aristotle advises and they aspire to perfectly carryout the will of their soul (the work they were designed to perform), than they will committing the most reasonable and rational act.To act in accordance with reason is a matter of observing the formula of the mean relative to us (finding the appropriate response between surfeit and deficiency in a particular situation). This denotes an emphasis on moderation. When Aristotle refers to the principle mean relative to us he is acknowledging that everyone is different and that individuals must plain themselves first from believing their portions are in association with those of everyone e lse, second from the confide to overindulge.Aristotle rejects Platos teachings about Forms in his Nicomachean Ethics because he doesnt intrust the otherworldly aspect of Platos theory. Plato assumes that the human mind contemplates a item object and its abstract eternal form separately, and he sees this as test copy that they both exist separately. Aristotle argues that just because one can separate forms from objects in their mind it does not mean that they are separate. Aristotle organizes his critiques of Platos Forms in a list of six main arguments three of which he titles (2) Problems in the on-going Beliefs About good Strength and moral Weakness, (5) Moral Weakness and Brutishness (6) Moral Weakness in Anger.In Problems in the Current Beliefs About Moral Strength and Moral Weakness, Aritstotle points out Socrates view that one can not commit an immoral act knowingly. He talks about the right aspect of moral weakness, which he basically opposes and views as opinion.The p roblems we might energise are. As to (3) how can a man be morally weak in his actions, when his basic assumption is correct as to what he should do? Some people adduce that it is impossible for him to be morally weak if he has knowledge of what he ought to do Here it is clear that Aristotle basically feels the term morally weak should not be applied to those who have an understanding of their moral responsibility but lack the willingness to accept it.In Moral Weakness and Brutishness, Aristotle argues that brutishness can not be classified as moral weakness. He basically constitutes brutishness as habitual wicked acts that arent committed in a advised manner but as the result of disease or ethnic tradition.He describes this best when he says, the female who is said to rip decipherable pregnant women and devour the infants or what is related about some of the dun tribes near the Black Sea, that they delight in eating raw sum or human fleshthese are characteristics of brutishne ss (pg 228, line 20-25). Aristotle is very solemn in pointing out that as heinous as these acts are these individuals are in a culture where they have no sense that what they are doing is wrong. He makes this same connection with homo cozyity, which he says is often the product of sexual abuse.Aristotles argument corresponds with his position on the many and the wise in the sense that he is arguing individuals stay true to their personal nature. His argument pertaining to the many and the wise is basically that the wise are often find themselves in direct opposition to the many. Their views are always contrary to ordinary opinion. This argument would be the rationale screw the initiative for one to go out on their own and follow the path of their true nature as opposed to the crowd. It is also a good rationale behind questioning the crowd. It is a message that promotes free thinking.Ins sum, despite the intent of Aristotles argument on function, it does have its weak spots. Aristo tle says, Every art or applied science and every systematic investigation, and similarly every action and choice, seem to aim at some good the good therefore, has been well defined at that at which all things aim (1094a). The problem with this record is that Aristotle argues that all things aim at the good which is a decree that everything and everyone has confirmative purpose. He also stresses a value in community, arguing to alter the quality of life of those out there living and disregarding those who pull in ones horns themselves.The problem with Aristotles statement arises when one realizes he is trying to twitch a specific type of divine destiny on people. musical composition it is true that people can be gifted at overconfident things that nourish humanity, they can also have talents that degrade or add down communities as well.fundamentally Aristotle might argue that everyone has a function to coincide with the function of society, but it would be arrogant to assume there is no one alive whose sole talent is to earn money, or eat the most hot dogs, or even look attractive. Essentially Aristotle is arguing that we must lead a life that is influential. While it is stir to imagine that all people have a good purpose in life, society fails to imply the same message.Work CitedNicomachean Ethics Aristotle with an universe by Hye-Kyung Kim, translated by F.H. Peters in Oxford, 1893. (Barnes & Noble, 2004)