Comparing Aristotle's Virtue and Kant's Morality
Mark Eddington
Utah Valley University
Abstract
It is easily recognized that Aristotle and Kant have been among the top leading figures in the philosophical world. These two philosophers studied and explained human actions and what they ultimately considered to be ethical. Their ideas of happiness and virtue have encouraged many to live lives according to the principles which they taught. Aristotle's teleological viewpoint and Kant's more modern stance offer different perceptions to be happy and live virtuous lives. However, each philosopher lived in different periods of time which affected how they viewed the world. In fact, their philosophies contrast from each other in several ways. A further look into their theories and how these philosophies differ from one anther will further be looked at.
Backgrounds
To understand Aristotle better it is important to look at the time period in which he lived. Aristotle was born in the early 4th Century B.C in Greece. During this time period, the Greeks viewed the world as the center of the universe. Aristotle looked at the world around him as a whole and believed that all living things have 'internal goals'. His viewpoints influenced by his environment and culture effected how he viewed the world.
Emmanuel Kant was born in the 17th century during the enlightenment. It was a time for question; ideas of science, politics and philosophy were being viewed at differently. Scientist during this time were trying to atomize the world. He moved away from the typical rationalist and empiricist. This 'stepping-back' from what the world had been teaching already brought new ideas that were diverse yet enlightening.
Aristotle and The Nicomachean Ethics
One of Aristotle's most well-known works is the Nicomachean Ethics. In this he explains his theory of happiness. According to Aristotle, the end of human existence is 'eudaimonia'. The best translation for this is happiness. A happy life is a life that is one that is successful. He further explains by this by pointing out that happiness has nothing to do with pleasure, but the action lived according to virtue. (Aristotle, 349 B.C.) Aristotle wrote in the Nicomachean Ethics that there are two parts of the mind: the emotional and intellectual and two types of virtue accompany that. Interestingly enough, virtue, according to Aristotle is conscious action that is voluntarily chosen. Or in other words, to be virtuous one must consciously and personally make virtuous decisions. Further on in his work he goes into depth of what virtue is. He says that virtue is pursuing the mean (or middle) between a defect and an excess emotion.
For example, generosity is the mean between stinginess and extravagance; courage is the mean between cowardice and recklessness; modesty is the mean between shameless and terror-stricken. (349 B.C.) The list goes one, however his point is that by actively seeking out the mean in all of lives decisions will lead us to a successful life.
Kant and The Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals
Kant's moral philosophy is the view that right actions are actions that are not started as desires (as many had thought before), but by reason. It is only a right action if it's for the sake of fulfilling one's duty. Doing this means that people live within certain moral laws, he calls these imperatives. Kant explains his philosophy of the 'categorical imperative' which states 'Act only in accordance with the maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law' (Kant, 1785).
Kant further states in The Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals to 'so act that you use humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means' (1785). This statement was against the utilitarian style of that time. For example, a utilitarian would say that killing is wrong because it doesn't truly benefit that person. But Kant would say on the other hand that moral decisions cannot be persuaded by moral actions. One might say that he was strictly a follower of the Letter of the Law.
Although it can be said that Kant's moral holds a lot of moral worth because it states that human beings should be treated as ends in themselves rather than means to ends, I would argue that, as an ethical theory, it fails in that it looks on people as human beings as robots burdened by duty.
Differences between Kant and Aristotle
Kant and Aristotle differ on several ideas. One of the main differences is that Aristotle connects good acts with virtue and Kant states "A good will is not good because of its effects or accomplishments, and not because of its adequacy to achieve any proposed end; it is good only by virtue of its willing- that is, it is good in itself" (1785).The highest morals of a person's life rests on the good will.
According to Aristotle, if a person is to be virtuous always in his or her actions he would have to tell lies at some time so that he can reach a mean of his actions. This argument would mean that all humans would have to lie at some point and there would be little to no truth in the world. However, Aristotle responses to this that such a man would have to consider the circumstances.
Kant differs in this by stating that for an action to be of moral worth it has to have sound principles fundamental to that act (1785). According to Kant, duty must guide the right action. The Categorical Imperative is what should drive moral behavior. The "good will" isn't a result of others actions but it's the ability to act for oneself for sole purpose and duty.
Conclusion
Kant viewed the human individual as a rationally self-conscious being with "impure" freedom of choice. On the contrary, a person can only be labeled as good under Aristotle's theory after living many years virtuously. Although Aristotle and Kant have many differences both believed that human beings are naturally ethical. They encouraged people to act and live by developing a good character and practice virtuous behavior. Likewise, they believed that to be ethical we must be responsible for our actions. Each human being has an obligation to society, and to live a virtuous life is to contribute to the world in an ethical manner.
References
Ancient Greece: City-State and Classical period. (2016). Retrieved from https://www.greeka.com/greece-history/ancient-greece.htm
Aristotle. (2012). Retrieved from, http://www.pursuit-of-happiness.org/history-of-happiness/aristotle/
Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. (1785) Retrieved from http://www.inp.uw.edu.pl/mdsie/Political_Thought/Kant%20-%20groundwork%20for%20the%20metaphysics%20of%20morals%20with%20essays.pdf
Nicomachean Ethics. Aristotle (334). Retrieved from, https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/aristotle/Ethics.pdf