Test_Assignment_Philosophy
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
The Co - Operative University Of Kenya *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
1
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by ianmwabel
Surname 1
Student's Name
Professor's Name
Course
Date
Epicurus's Theory of Happiness and Aristotle's Theory of Friendship
1)
First, give a thorough explanation of Epicurus's theory of achieving happiness in life.
Next, use Aristotle's point of view to raise 3 objections to Epicurus, making sure to
relate those objections to specific points you made in the prior section. Then, evaluate
those objections from your own point of view; are they stronger than Epicurus's own
position, and why or why not? Finally, "improve" Epicurus; what modifications would
you make to his theory in order for it to provide an acceptable blueprint for living your
own life?
Epicurus is a famous Greek rationalist who referred to joy as the state of being excited about
one's pleasure and having confidence towards achieving their desires. He argues that fear is one
element that prevents an individual from achieving happiness. Epicurus further gives us an
abstract vision of the outcome of all our actions. Furthermore, his ideas hold that our
psychological satisfaction and bodily tranquility are the fundamentals of life as they bring
delight. His ideas provide that our lives must mutually have pleasure and agony because one can
only enjoy if there is no suffering. Therefore, Epicurus's theory holds that man is responsible for
his happiness because he is the only expert of his mind and the one in control of what happens in
his life (Dimitriadis 83).
Surname 2
Nonetheless, Aristotle disagrees with Epicurus's views; interestingly, he suggests several
principles responsible for one's pleasures. In any event, Aristotle's approach to happiness differs
from Epicurus, with Aristotle advocating for movement to achieve excellence in one's daily
living. This points to the issue of contentment as a goal to achieve or just a way of life. Our ways
of life and moral orientation are defined in a way for us to achieve happiness and not suffering.
The two philosophers agree that joy is different from one individual to another, and this makes
sense because a lack of fear does not define our lives, but contentment does. However, Aristotle
holds that God is the origin of everything, man is a political animal, and that happiness is the
exercise of virtue and not a passing pleasure. I will support Epicurus's theory because it
addresses our lives better than Aristotle's. The only thing that needs to be added to Epicurus’
views is the understanding that God exists and involves himself in our lives (Armitage and
Maureen 94).
2)
First, give a thorough explanation of Aristotle's theory of friendship. Then, referring to
specific points that you just made, critique Aristotle's notion of friendship from Kant's
point of view. Next, critique both Aristotle and Kant from Hobbes's point of view –
which view of friendship would he agree with, which disagree with, and why? Finally,
argue for the superiority of either Aristotle or Kant in framing your own interactions
with others.
Aristotle's theory of friendship holds that kinship is more significant in any individual who
sees kindness in another person. He argues that a relationship results from liking or loving
another person. Aristotle believes friendship is driven by another person's character,
attractiveness and helpfulness. Therefore, friendship only exists if the two parties involved can
see goodness in each other (Jeske 106).
Surname 3
On the other hand, Kant believes that fraternity is a responsibility and not an ideal that needs
to be achieved. Unlike Aristotle, Kant argues that kinship is based on ethics and specific values.
Kant disagrees with Aristotle on fondness as the basis for friendship. Kant first agrees with
Aristotle that one has to like another person for friendship to occur but does not support the
notion of fondness (Jeske 136).
Hobbes believes that man is a self-interested entity and does not care what happens to others.
Hobbes does not agree with both Kant and Aristotle on friendship. He argues that kindness
among men does not exist, and thus it is not easy to be friends. Therefore, companionship is built
on the personal satisfaction of each individual and not for any other reason (Slomp 57).
The three philosophers gave their honest views, and I cannot say that one is better. This is
because having a working friendship requires proper thinking. For instance, one needs to be
consistent if the companionship is to work. It is only sometimes valid that being kind to others
will reciprocate the same. Therefore, we should uphold our ethical ideals before engaging in any
friendship.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Surname 4
Works Cited
Armitage, Duane, and Maureen McQuerry.
Big Ideas for Little Philosophers: Happiness with Aristotle
. National Geographic Books, 2020.
Dimitriadis, Haris.
Epicurus And The Pleasant Life
. Lulu.com, 2018.
Jeske, Diane.
The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Friendship
. Taylor & Francis, 2022.
Slomp, Gabriella.
Hobbes Against Friendship: The Modern Marginalisation of an Ancient Political Concept
. Palgrave Macmillan, 2022.