Reflective essay completed

docx

School

Macquarie University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1032

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by JudgeMetal10661

Reading-based Reflective Writing Exercise In Book IV of "Meditations," Marcus Aurelius shares a powerful insight about facing challenges. He suggests that, instead of seeing difficulties as misfortunes, we should consider bearing them with dignity as a form of good fortune (Aurelius, 2000). This advice encourages us to explore Stoic teachings and compare them with Aristotle's ideas on virtue ethics. This essay aims to understand Aurelius' guidance, its connection with Stoicism, the differences with Aristotle's perspective, and to share personal reflections on the moral implications of these philosophical stances. To understand Aurelius' meaning, we turn to "Meditations of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus" and Richard Sharples' "Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics: An Introduction to Hellenistic Philosophy" (Aurelius, 2000; Sharples, 1996). According to Stoicism, facing challenges isn't about seeing them as bad, but as opportunities for virtuous behaviour. Sharples helps us see that Stoicism values inner goodness and wisdom above external circumstances (Sharples, 1996). Stoicism, as explained by Sharples and John Cottingham's "Western Philosophy: An Anthology," promotes an attitude that goes beyond external events, focusing on inner virtues for a fulfilling life (Cottingham, 2008). Aurelius, influenced by Stoic principles, urges us to transform our view of challenges into opportunities for personal growth (Aurelius, 2000). Further exploration of Stoic teachings, with insights from David Furley's "From Aristotle to Augustine (Vol. 2)," reveals a philosophy emphasizing inner virtues (Furley, 2003). Stoicism, as outlined by Furley (2003), encourages us to develop internal resilience that goes beyond external circumstances.

On the other hand, Aristotle's virtue ethics, as outlined by the same sources, values external goods (Cottingham, 2008; Furley, 2003). Aristotle advocates for a balanced and virtuous life, considering both inner virtues and external conditions as crucial for human flourishing. Cottingham's anthology (2008) highlights Aristotle's emphasis on the importance of external goods for well-being. Aristotle sees certain external conditions, like friends, wealth, and health, as significant for a flourishing life (Cottingham, 2008). In Aurelius' statement, Stoicism seems to overlook the importance that Aristotle places on these external factors. Furley's work (2003) adds a historical context, explaining how Aristotle's virtue ethics revolves around achieving excellence in character and action, incorporating external goods into the broader framework of well-being. In contrast, Aurelius' Stoic stance leans toward an internal focus on virtue, downplaying the role of external circumstances. In evaluating moral correctness, influenced by insights from Sharples, Cottingham, and Furley, Aurelius' Stoic perspective aligns with principles emphasizing the independence of virtue from external circumstances (Sharples, 1996). Stoicism assumes that true well-being stems from developing virtue regardless of external conditions. Aristotle's virtue ethics, as outlined in these sources, is more inclusive (Cottingham, 2008; Furley, 2003). Cottingham underscores Aristotle's view that external factors contribute significantly to human well-being. Aristotle's philosophy recognizes the complexity of human flourishing, encompassing the harmonious development of character and the conducive external environment (Cottingham, 2008).

Reflecting on these perspectives, the evaluation of moral correctness may differ on individual values and ideologies. Personally, Aristotle's approach is more morally compelling, recognizing the importance of both inner virtues and external conditions. However, I believe Aurelius' view is morally correct, as we cannot control everything in our lives. I encountered numerous complications with my studies, leading to a delayed graduation due to unforeseen and uncontrollable circumstances. Yet, I believe that it happened for a reason, as everything does, and that reason was to help me be patient and persistent, and to be at a stage in my life where I am mentally more capable of committing to studies. While Aristotle's perspective resonates with the interconnectedness of inner virtues and external conditions, Aurelius' Stoic outlook provides solace in accepting and learning from life's unpredictable twists and turns. In conclusion, comparing Marcus Aurelius' Stoic philosophy and Aristotle's virtue ethics shows different ways to handle life's challenges. Aurelius says we should focus on inner virtues and see difficulties as chances to act well, following Stoic ideas. On the other hand, Aristotle thinks both inner virtues and external conditions are important for a good life. Deciding which philosophy is morally correct depends on personal feelings. While Aristotle considers both inner virtues and external factors, I personally connect more with Aurelius' Stoic ideas. I see this connection in my own life, especially facing challenges in my studies that led to a delayed graduation. Embracing the Stoic view, I don't just see these problems as obstacles but as opportunities to grow, become more resilient, and be better prepared for the future. Choosing between Stoicism and Aristotle's ideas varies from person to person, showing the diversity of values and views on life's uncertainties. As we navigate life, finding strength and meaning in different ways of thinking enriches our human experience.

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

References: Aurelius, M. (2000). Meditations of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus. Hoboken, N.J.: Generic NL Freebook Publisher. Cottingham, J. (2008). Western Philosophy: An Anthology (2nd ed.). Blackwell Pub. Furley, D. (2003). From Aristotle to Augustine (Vol. 2). Routledge. Sharples, R. W. (1996). Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics: An Introduction to Hellenistic Philosophy. Routledge. Word Count: 761

Reflective essay completed

Related Documents