Compare and contrast Plato and Aristotle on the acquisition of ethical understanding.

Authors Avatar

Compare and contrast Plato and Aristotle on the acquisition of ethical understanding.

        

It is almost impossible to have a universal definition of what ethics is, the only way to really observe it is in practise; how does ethics shape our lives and how is it acquired? Ethics applies to both us and the people around us and so is both politically important and important to the individual. Plato and Aristotle had contrasting opinions on both what ethics is, how it is useful and who can obtain it. I have chosen to focus on justice when considering the acquisition of ethics as I think that the two philosophers treat justice in increasingly different ways and that its relation to ethics as a subject allows an easier definition of ethics itself and the acquisition of it.

Plato founded his Academy in Athens in 387 BC. It was an institution devoted to research and instruction in philosophy and the sciences and Plato taught there until his death in 347 BC. Plato had been disappointed for a long time over the way that politics was used as a instrument to gain power through corrupt means, rather than an education both for the politician themselves and for the people. To remedy this he believed that the men he taught would become statesmen, having had the moral education necessary to improve the political leadership in Greece. It was through his disillusionment with his own country’s politics that he became to realise how important ethics was in both governing a state and also becoming a good person.

In 367 BC, Aristotle became a student at Plato’s Academy in Athens. At this point the Academy was highly involved in politics and this influenced Aristotle’s views and life. Aristotle eventually became a teacher at the academy and for some time strongly supported Plato’s views. Towards the end of his twenty years at the Academy his position became difficult to hold due to the political problems at the time and Aristotle found politics to be constantly hindering him in doing the things that he thought right and best for himself and those around him. Aristotle stood to be head of the Academy after Speusippus died but found himself to be an unpopular choice. In 335 BC he founded his own school, the Lyceum and began to make distinctions from Plato’s work including the fact that philosophers should not be kings but advisers.

Our interpretation of ethical understanding depends on the way that Aristotle and Plato choose to treat the issue and what their focus is. Plato’s concern in ‘The Republic’ is to create an ideal state. He demonstrated some of the earliest utilitarian ideas, showing how individuals should use their talents and abilities for the greater good. Aristotle however, showed his focus to be the greatest happiness for the individual and ultimately, Eudemonia, which can be attained through living virtuously. Here, ethical understanding can be attained by practising virtuous actions, to make these actions easier and more pleasant to choose. Plato however, would see ethics simply as acquired through knowledge rather than practise. Plato’s theory of the forms sited the ‘Good’ as the ‘greatest object of study,’ and the only source of knowledge that could possibly contribute to a true acquisition of ethics and the ability to use those ethical judgements.

Plato alerted us that there is a difference between the world we live in, the world of the particulars, and the world of the unchanging and true forms. For instance, in the world of the particulars, someone could identify something that they think is beautiful. This is their own opinion and by no means knowledge. A philosopher, however, would be able to acknowledge the form of beauty itself. An example is given in Phaedo, which illustrates not only the difference between the forms and particulars but shows how objects in our world try to be like their perfect forms and are still found lacking: ‘The instance taken there is the mathematical relation of equality, and the contrast is drawn between the absolute equality we think of in mathematics and the rough, approximate equality which is what we have to be content with in dealing with objects with our senses.’ It is clear then that empirical reasoning appears to be unsound for dealing with knowledge or ethics in Plato’s opinion. The fact that the forms can only be accessed by the philosopher means that a philosopher is therefore the only person who can acquire and use ethics, and also the only person who should be able to govern the ideal state. Similarly, Mill would argue for the greater good as did Plato. Mill argued for the Greatest Happiness Principle. This holds that actions are ‘right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.’ Although, like both Plato and Aristotle, Mill is careful not to define happiness as simply pleasure but sites that feeling pleasure for the right things is bringing the person closer to happiness as they are able to make good judgement, similar to Aristotle.

Join now!

The simile of the cave also expressed the way that ordinary people view things. Plato asked us to think of people who have been in the same position for their whole lives, tied and bound so that they can only see the back wall of the cave. The people have been there since birth and therefore do not question that what they can see may not be real. Behind them is a wall where people are carrying things, the flickering fire casts shadows onto the wall in front of them, and this is their reality. Plato was making a ...

This is a preview of the whole essay