| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "ARISTOTLE FRIENDSHIPS": |
|
|
Aristotle and Friendships, 2008.
This paper analyzes the highest level of friendship that induces Aristotle's idea of friendship as a virtue in Nichomachean Ethics.
1,660 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper analyzes the three different tiers of friendship in Aristotle's philosophy: friendships of utility, pleasure and of the good. The paper discusses Aristotle's argument that a friendship "of the good" provides a foundation for eudemonia (the happiest life). The paper explains how this level of friendship strives to discover the greatest good or happiness between friends, rather than seeking immediate gratification through superficial relationships.
From the Paper
"For Aristotle, the greatest good of life comes from having a friendship that can be purified from immoral or materialistic causation. The importance of friends is one of the major virtues of life that must be taken into account when living for eudemonia or for the greater good of life in Book VIII:
"After what we have said, a discussion of friendship would naturally follow, since it is a virtue or implies virtue, and is besides most necessary with a view to living. For without friends no one would choose to live (Aristotle para.1)"
| |
|
Aristotle and Friendship, 2000.
An argumentative paper on Aristotle's view on friendship.
850 words (approx. 3.4 pages), 3 sources, $ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Aristotle's analysis of friendship. The author discusses three types of friendship: a useful friendship, a pleasurable friendship and true friendship. These belong to two aspects of friendship: character friendship and advantage friendship. Included are examples.
From the paper:
"It is argued that there are three branches of friendship: (1) doing favors for each other, (2) using each other for pleasure, and (3) true friendship. These branches belong to the two characteristics of friendship, which are character friendship and advantage friendship. Character friendship belongs to or is related to civic relations because it requires citizens to have active goodwill toward each other."
| |
|
Aristotle and Friendship, 2007.
This paper offers a personal opinion on Aristotle's ideas of friendship among equals.
1,024 words (approx. 4.1 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 36.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses Aristotle's beliefs about the requirement for equal intelligence and reciprocity for true friendship. The writer concedes that some of Aristotle's points are correct. The writer contends, however, that to say that the intelligence of a person is directly related to his/her value and that people of different intelligence cannot be friends, is elitist and untrue.
From the Paper
"Jena Vanier states that "Aristotle bases the value of human beings on their rational and intellectual capacity alone", and therefore cannot conceive of the possibility of true friendship among unequals. I agree with this statement. In fact, the truth of this statement can be shown by reviewing Aristotle's ideas about friendship. I also think that Aristotle is for the most part correct - although not completely. As I will show, the idea that true friendship cannot be possible between people of different intelligence can be attacked quite strongly."
| |
|
Aristotle, Cicero and Friendship, 2008.
A comparative analysis of the concept of friendship according to Aristotle and Cicero.
2,561 words (approx. 10.2 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 77.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the parallels between the two perspectives on friendship, as proposed in Aristotle's "Nichomachean Ethics." and in Cicero's "Lealius." It looks at how they mutually reveal illuminating refutations of friendships, which are false in pretense and how the discord between their assessments shows Aristotle's view to be more refined in its differentiation between friendships based on shared virtues and those based on shared goods.
From the Paper
"Cicero's concurrence with Aristotle on the nature of friendship as it flows from 'goodness' points to a resolution that ends which accompany friendship and are not complimented by the presence of goodness do not then forge a true friendship. Cicero's foray into the subject of friendship is given prelude by the statement of intent that he must "at the very beginning lay down this principle - friendship can only exist between good men." (Cicero, I:5) This underlines Cicero's admonition that friendship stemming from a lack of good qualities, either within the parameters of the friendship or inherent in one or both of its parties, is not a friendship at all. Rather, he asserts, it is a relationship forged on false pretenses. Rather than through the pursuit of a mutual good, it is a relationship defined by its advantages to one or the other. "
| |
|
Aristotle, 2005.
This paper discusses the persons who influenced Aristotle and Aristotle's influence on many fields including the physical and biological sciences, politics, psychology, poetry and logic.
1,170 words (approx. 4.7 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Thales (c. 640-546 BC) of Miletus, who is considered to have been the founder of natural philosophy, and Empedocles' system of four elements, earth, water, air and fire were major influences on Aristotle. The author stresses that Aristotle's influence was not isolated to Western civilization but was translated first into Syriac and later into Arabic, beginning in 450 A.D.; the Arabs were primarily interested in the medical, astronomical and mathematical aspects of the Aristotelian tradition. The paper relates that one of Aristotle's contributions, which is still in existence today, is the university where Aristotle lectured at regularly scheduled hours as opposed to the debate of his predecessors.
From the Paper
"Biological principles were highly influenced by Aristotle. William Harvey, the founder of modern physiology was very much influenced by Aristotle and "...founded much of his work on the Aristotelian assumption that the shape, structure and size of each organ of the animal body indicated its purpose and function in the whole system." The idea of spontaneous generation was a commonly held belief, with it roots dating back to Aristotle and was not disproved until experiments were performed by Louis Pasteur."
| |
|
Aristotle as a Scientist, 2002.
This paper discusses and analyzes Aristotle as a scientist and as a philosopher with emphasis on Aristotle's theory of science.
1,180 words (approx. 4.7 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses that Aristotle originated the development of logic and logical thinking as related to science and mathematics, independent of the mathematical influence from other Greek philosophers and scientists. The author presents details of Aristotle's life both as a scientist and as a philosopher. He concludes that Aristotle's greatest contribution was his ability to communicate his scientific thoughts that were far beyond his age.
From the Paper
"Aristotle based his findings on his knowledge of Greek mathematics at the time, but since he created a new form of mathematical logic, his findings were also completely new and therefore independent of the mathematical influence from other Greek philosophers and scientists. He drew upon his teachings from Plato in his "Prior Analytics," then went on to refine it and add his own explanation for arriving at middle terms in equations and logical thought. "
| |
|
Aristotle's Rhetorical Theory, 2005.
This paper discusses Aristotle's rhetorical theory and its influence on modern democracy.
4,080 words (approx. 16.3 pages), 10 sources, APA, $ 109.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Aristotle was not the first philosopher to argue from a rational, humanistic perspective nor to suggest that debates and arguments should be performed as an art form known as rhetoric; however, he is the most influential. The author points out that in his "Rhetoric", which is substantially shorter and relatively more straight-forward than most of his work, Aristotle presents a theory of rhetoric as an art that focuses on the capacity to persuade, the usefulness of rhetoric, the necessary elements of persuasion including appeals to emotion, status and logic and presents a wide range of specific stratagem for convincing an audience of one's point. The paper relates that the foundation of the modern approach to society, including the entirety of the modern political system, is fallout from the medieval rediscovery of Aristotle's work; during the Crusades, Europeans re-discovered Latin translations of Aristotle in various libraries throughout the Islamic world.
Table of Contents
Aristotle's Personal Work on "Rhetoric"
Aristotle's Historical Effect on "Rhetoric" and its Continued Fallout
Aristotle's Effects on Modern Democracy and the Sensitivity of Pathos
Does Aristotle Inadvertently Justify the Chicaneries of Modern Lawyers?
Conclusion
From the Paper
"At the foundation of American democracy, the nation had a relatively homogenous culture. (Assuming, of course, that one follows in the founder's footsteps and ignores the presence of slaves and natives) Athens, also, was a homogenous culture, where the members had most interests in common. So Aristotle's ideas on comprehending the common beliefs on one's audience and building on them based on syllogism and appeals to the common good were quite efficient. However, as the nation aged it has become increasingly multi-cultural, with a wider variety of base worldviews interacting to create the polis. A similar progression has taken place through-out the European democracies, and of course many post-colonial colonies have had to deal with such disparities from the beginning. Hence, it may seem that Aristotle's vision of rhetoric may have difficulties in a modern setting."
| |
|
Aristotle on Economic Exchange and Slavery, 2001.
An analysis of the works of the philosopher Aristotle and the economist Karl Polanyi, evaluating Aristotle's arguments on slavery and economic exchange.
1,095 words (approx. 4.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines Aristotle's arguments on slavery and economic exchange. The paper outlines how Aristotle validates the concept of slavery under one principle of economic exchange. The paper also provides that when measured against economist Karl Polanyi's definitions of the market principle, Aristotle's views on slavery fall into his own definition of the "unnatural" category of economic exchange.
From the Paper
"Economist Karl Polanyi and the philosopher Aristotle have differing views on economic exchange. According to Polanyi, the three principles of exchange are market principle, redistribution, and reciprocity. The market principle describes the buying and selling of goods and services based on the laws of supply and demand, and often involves bargaining. Redistribution is the moving of products from the local level to a hierarchical center, reorganization of those products, and sending them back down to the local level. Redistribution is a form of exchange that works with the market system."
| |
|
Aristotle's Ethics, 2006.
This paper reviews and analyzes Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics," which express the Greek philosopher's numerous fundamental concerns.
1,732 words (approx. 6.9 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines Aristotle's argument that the happiest life is the one in which a person does everything for philosophical contemplation. The philosopher contends that a life lived for the sake of morally virtuous activity is happy, though in a lesser sense. This paper explores the contents of Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics," in which the philosopher establishes the idea of a goal-directed activity as the concept necessary for an understanding of human goodness and excellence. This paper analyzes Aristotle's frequent use of the term Eudemonia, the Greek word for happiness. The writer of this paper contends and explains why eudemonia is constituted, in Aristotle's opinion, not by honor, or wealth, or power but by rational activity in harmony with excellence. This paper also focuses on Aristotle's lengthy dialogues on moral virtue and friendship and his evident admiration for the morally virtuous person, which led many to assume that human good is the exercise of practical and not theoretical virtue.
From the Paper
"The best way to make sense of the notion is to observe happiness as something of a framework for all the other various goods that we aim for. We achieve eudaimonia with the correct ordering of such items, by imposing a pattern on our activities that gives all of them the fitting significance, by adopting a suitable hierarchy for all the different goods pursued by mankind. Therefore, eudaimonia consists of many different goods and will provide the general significance to all of them (providing a significant meaning to our lives). Eudaimonia is not achieved by actively seeking it. Rather, it is attained it by ordering our pursuit of all the other goods in the proper manner. Happiness, which is the highest and final goal of human existence, is, in other words, somewhat of a by-product of carrying out our pursuit of all the other goods (wealth, fame, learning, and so on) in the correct manner."
| |
|
Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics", 2006.
This paper reviews Book IX of Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics," and the philosopher's argument whether a happy man really needs friends.
1,386 words (approx. 5.5 pages), 1 source, APA, $ 46.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The author of this paper outlines Aristotle's view on the nature of friendship and goodness. In Book IX, the Greek philosopher concedes that everyone is not the same and that these dissimilarities may be a detriment to friendship. The writer stresses Aristotle's opinion that according to the ethics of the time, a good man would want for a friend what he would want for himself. This paper shows why Aristotle's philosophy continues to have an influence on developing Western philosophical theories.
From the Paper
"Aristotle assumes that a happy man is also a good man. This will be elaborated further in this paper. First, in a consideration of friendship, let us look at what friendship does for the good and happy person. Aristotle's view is that the one characteristic of a friend is rather to do something good for a friend than to do something good for himself. This is of course a virtue. So the good man, being good, would need to do good things for other people. Because
the good man enjoys doing this, many people will be attracted to him and want to have him for their friend. And so many will also do good things for the good person, because they are his friends. And thus goodness and friendship feed upon each other. This need to do good things for people is the basis that Aristotle uses for his view that we need friends both in prosperity and adversity."
| |
|
Investigating "Aristotle for Everybody", 2002.
A chapter-by-chapter summary of M.J. Adler's "Aristotle for Everybody" which simplifies the philosophies of Greek philosopher, Aristotle.
1,900 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 1 source, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Investigates M. J. Adler's book "Aristotle for Everybody" as a text that is accessible and appropriate for open learning. This paper investigates both the presentation of these philosophies and Adler's intentions in formating these philosophies in a more accessible, more "modern" context. There is a chapter-by-chapter summary.
| |
|
Aristotle vs. Mill, 2004.
A discussion and comparison of the philosophical views of Aristotle and John Stuart Mill.
1,769 words (approx. 7.1 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 57.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the similarities and differences between the ideas of Aristotle and John Stuart Mill. The paper examines the notions of morality and friendship and elaborates on the innate goodness of a person. Mill's opinions regarding these issues are identified and compared to those of Aristotle. The paper contends that while there are several correlations between the two thinkers, Aristotle tends to reason deductively, while Mill reasons inductively.
From the Paper
"The Greek philosopher Aristotle and John Stuart Mill agreed that the objective of morality was the pursuit of general happiness and the good life in society and in the individual. But they deviated in the concept of, and the manner of arriving at, "the right thing to do," especially in reference to friendships. Mill held that actions are right in the proportion that they tend to promote that happiness and wrong, as they tend to promote unhappiness. He advocated the action/rule-based type of morality, which determined the goodness of an act according to the consequences of that act and independently of the doer's virtues or character traits (Fieser). This type directly opposes the virtue-based morality propounded by Aristotle, who believed that happiness as the ultimate end of existence that is sought for itself and not for any other end. "
| |
|
Aristotle: Anarchist or Totalitarian?, 2002.
Examines the opinions of philosophical authors Jonathan Barnes and David Keyt on Aristotle's position.
3,740 words (approx. 15.0 pages), 5 sources, APA, $ 103.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
According to Jonathan Barnes, Aristotle's political philosophy runs rife with totalitarian principles. Not so, replies David Keyt, since Aristotle, perhaps never recognizing it himself, approached his political philosophy from a fundamentally anarchistic base. Was Aristotle essentially a totalitarian or an anarchist? This paper attempts to answer that question. First, it interprets Barnes' argument as presented in his 1990 essay "Aristotle and Political Liberty." It then moves onto an exposition of David Keyt's position as put forward in his 1993 paper "Aristotle and Anarchism." Thereafter, the paper returns to Barnes' essay and examines each numbered point. By combining his own arguments with Keyt's insights, the author of the paper refutes Barnes' position.
From the Paper
"This contention against slavery, Keyt suggests, "contains the seeds of philosophical anarchism," since its conclusion infers about slavery that no difference exists by nature between master and slave, and the rule of master over slave depends on force. The same can apply in the political arena: no difference exists by nature between ruler and subject, and political rule depends on force. Hence, "a wholesale challenge of political authority is but a short step from the wholesale challenge of slavery" (138). The main idea behind philosophical anarchism is that coercion is unjust, and "the rejection of political authority ... is not a first principle of the theory (of anarchism) but a corollary of its view about coercion and force" (138)."
| |
|
Plato and Aristotle, 2005.
This paper compares political theories in Plato's "The Republic" and Aristotle's "Politics".
4,320 words (approx. 17.3 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 114.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, although Plato and Aristotle's views on society and its role were fairly distinct, they had an identical purpose, to create a dignified living for communities. The author points out that concepts of Aristotle are different from those of Plato because Aristotle is an empiricist - he appreciates the relevance of immediate examination to find out the truth; whereas, Plato feels that simple logical conclusion can confirm the ultimate authenticity. The paper relates that, employing Socrates as an illusory narrator, Plato regards the character and the importance of justice as they are observed in the composition of society in general and in the character of an individual human being. Aristotle, disciple of Plato, broadened the concept of virtue by reasoning that righteous behavior should take up some midway between extreme conduct and conduct that lacks.
From the Paper
"Concurrently, forgiveness is usually considered as a significant virtue - a society in which there is complete lack of forgiveness will be a society that is oppressive, there is a dearth of freedom and would be devoid of the three fundamental ethics of compassion. That is strange; nevertheless, since forgiveness basically needs that justice not be performed. It has to be understood at this point that forgiveness is not an issue of showing sympathy or behaving well, even though these virtues might result in the likelihood of expressing increased forgiveness. Forgiveness even is not equal to empathy or compassion. The thing forgiveness involves is that certain things less than justice is one. In situations where a criminal who has been convicted begs for forgiveness, in that case he is requesting that a lenient penalty be given compared to what is slated for. While a Christian proscribes before God for forgiveness, she is requesting Him for a lesser penalty than He has in store for her."
| |
|
Aristotle and Modern Psychology, 2001.
Aristotle's worldview & model for human behavior; the soul. Freud's criticism of Aristotle.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 6 sources, $ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Introduction
Psychology, as we think of it, was not a preoccupation of most people until very recently. As Malina (1981) pointed out in his discussion of the pre-Christian worldview, personality at that time was flattened out, viewed as more dyadic than layered. It was also not separate from the body. The emphasis was external, rather than internal, with a focus on shame, honor, family, clan, and hierarchy, rather than on one's own internal functioning.
However, there was a conception of psychology, although quite different from that of modern psychology. As with so many things in the intellectual lineage of the Western world, this conception is associated with the thought of Aristotle.
Aristotle's viewpoint.."
|
|
|
