Six Philosophical Texts - Essay Example

Philosophical Texts School There are a lot of ideas that may be retrieved from different philosophical texts, as philosophy means love to wisdom, so this is the kind of discipline that gives people some useful advices or make them think of the truth they’ve never thought about. The following six texts showed me some things that I’ve never considered to be important when in fact they are crucial for better understanding of this life. Aristotle’s “Nicomachean Ethics” (books from 1 to 3) is absolutely a unique text that considers the cores of what does it really mean to be happy and how to become a virtuous human being. Reading Aristotle made me think that the man knew literally everything, as the things written in the Ethics are absolutely truthful and applicable. This in fact makes them universal, as they may be used by people of all times, because the author manages to describe ethics and moral values precisely as they are, so the text is still relevant. For instance, in the first book of Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle claims that happiness (or eudaimonia) is such thing that all people should strive to achieve, but not because people tend to satisfy their selfish needs, but because good must be itself a goal. But people often consider some wrong values as real happiness and this makes them strive to the wrong values (EN 1095b-1096a). This touched me deeply when I was reading the book, because it made me think of those wrong values like having constant fun or being careless and I realized that this is not how a rational human being should behave. Hence, I think this part of the text was the most affecting and I’m going to think twice before making my choices engaged with right values in the future. Aquinas’s “Summa Theologica” (Question 94) analyses what the natural law is and whether it is the same for all people. The concept of the natural law was definitely a life-changing one for me, because according to Aquinas, all people live in the universe in accordance with some order, which has been established long time ago or even has always existed in the eternity of the universe. From Aquinas I’ve learned that this law contains a priori in human nature and people are determined to live in accordance with it. This idea affected me most, because it reveals inevitability of every action I do and proves that I’m actually determined by some factors, which affect my life a lot, as I realize that some of my actions may not come from my free will but are consequences of God’s guidance. Hobbes’s “Leviathan” (Part I. Of Man, 2010) was quite shocking for me. What I’ve learned from Thomas Hobbes is that human beings are maleficent and greedy, which makes humans constantly want more than they have. In fact Hobbes’s assertion is definitely very rough but quite fair, considering people’s conduct in general. Perhaps, Hobbes was definitely right, even though it is difficult to admit that indeed people’s nature is not that virtuous and there is no other way to stop it except start behaving rationally and make a common agreement to be virtuous. However, according to Hobbes, “the war of all against all” is inevitable and will be going on unless people agree to stop such kind of existence by regulating their own conduct within the scopes of the social contract. Though this thought of Hobbes made me think that in order to achieve this goal of a perfectly regulated society where everyone would feel safe in, I should start with myself, applying the principle of rational life; so that if people began doing the same looking at me, we would eventually end up with the social contract that would satisfy each and every person in the society. However, in order to define what kind of behavior is right and moral, we should first consider the nature of morality itself and what is it that causes morality in humans. Thus in this point David Hume’s “An Enquiry Concerning The Principles of Morals” (1912) is an extremely useful text, as Hume argues that moral comes from sentiments, or feelings, which means that people get affected by something and this creates their will. In fact the anti-intellectualist position stated by Hume did not really affect me, because even though I learned the philosopher’s point of view on the matter of the nature of morality, still he underestimates the role of intelligence (and reason) in the processes of construction o morals. The problem is that I’m not into empirical point of view, so Hume’s ideas about perception and affects are not convincing enough for me, although the idea to analyze perception in terms of morality made me question the roots of morality that I believed in; hence, Hume’s criticism was quite useful for me to reconsider my previous views on the matter and I’m going to keep questioning my beliefs by his empiricist statements. Kant’s moral philosophy is one of the most prominent among others and is described in his “Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals” (Sections I and II, 1785). I’ve learned that Kant considers morality as some kind of imperative which must be followed by all people regardless different circumstances. Hence, it turns out that, according to Kant, there are either good or bad things to do and people should always act according to the categorical imperative, which discerns these bad things from the good ones. If lying is a bad thing to do, then a person should never lie under any circumstances, even though one’s dishonesty may be actually a good thing in this particular situation. The entire concept of categorical imperative is based on the duty to act morally, which all people should follow; considering the imperative in terms of Hobbes’s social contract, Kant’s idea of categorical imperative is probably the way how people could achieve the perfect society they want to live in. Kant’s categorical imperative was the thing that touched me and made me think of those situations in which people justify their immoral actions, when in fact immoral actions are unethical and bad. Therefore this principle of Kant’s ethics will definitely affect my life and I will start thinking twice before doing something. Mill’s “Utilitarianism“(Chapters II and IV, 2001) definitely differs from Kant’s doctrine of categorical imperative. The point is that Mill claims that people should strive to personal happiness, trying to reduce the overall quantity of unhappiness in the world. Thus, according to Mill, if there is a situation where lying brings more happiness to everyone, then it is necessary to lie in order to make the outcomes of the situation suitable for everyone. Thus utilitarianism is the philosophy of relative moral conduct, where actions are estimated by the quantity of happiness that they bring into this world. Mill’s utilitarian point of view touched me deeply, because the doctrine is quite achievable and I loved the idea of bringing happiness and pleasure not only to myself but to other people as well. The Greatest Happiness Principle is very flexible and allows people to adjust their actions according to particular circumstances, which is not possible in terms of Kant’s doctrine. Although Kant’s imperative seems more straightforward and therefore more moral, Mill’s utilitarianism is more applicable, because indeed people should admit that not all moral actions bring happiness, some of them may hurt. Mill’s utilitarianism will definitely affect my life by making me estimate the amount of happiness that I can bring by every action. Hence, the six philosophical texts have revealed a lot of truths that will affect my life and make me think of multiple things engaged with ethics and morality in my life. References Aristoteles. (1990) trans. H. Rackham. The Nicomachean Ethics. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Aquinas, Thomas. (1920). Summa Theologica. Question 94. The Natural Law.Literally translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province. Retrieved from: http://www.newadvent.org/summa/2094.htm Hobbes, T. (2010). Leviathan. Revised Edition, eds. A.P. Martinich and Brian Battiste. Broadview Press, Peterborough. Mill. J.S. (2001). Utilitarianism. Batoche Books, Kitchener. Retrieved from: http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/mill/utilitarianism.pdf Hume, D. (1912). An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. Project Gutenberg. Retrieved from: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/4320/4320-h/4320-h.htm Kant, I. (1785). Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals. Project Gutenberg. Retrieved from: http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/5682/pg5682.html Read More