Schopenhauer Vs Kant

Words: 581
Pages: 3
Open Document
Doing the discussion post for Aristotle, Kant, and Schopenhauer’s fundamental ethical positions all seem to very different in different ways. Aristotle ethical position was that one is not good or bad by nature, but rather one becomes good or virtuous by habituation, and that once habituated to a life of virtue, one will then live a self-sufficiently happy and fulfilling life.
I think that people can't be born "bad seeds" because I think it is all on how you're raised and what your beliefs are. As mentioned in the text, “At any rate, fellow voyagers and fellow soldiers are called friends, and so are members of other communities” (Aristotle, 129). People are here to show you the right path and show you what is bad from good. I truly believe that you grow up how you're raised. Yes, people will believe whatever they want but normally people believe what their parents believe. Parents teach you your rights and wrong but it all depends on if you listen to them or not. Things obviously do change with people’s beliefs and they can get into bad things but that is …show more content…
He believes that traits like beauty, wit, intelligence, courage, and wealth are not unconditional goals. In the text. “Everything in nature works according to laws” (Kant, 23). The world is surrounded with laws and people are trying to accommodate those laws with their everyday life to bring them happiness. So doing good and listening to the laws are important. By doing good, that doesn’t mean you will reach the goal of happiness. According to Kant, by doing good acts in order to become happy will not bring a person the right happiness they’re looking for. As mentioned in the text, “A good will is good not because of what it effects or accomplishes, nor because of its fitness to attain some prosed end” (Kant, 7). What he is trying to say is that a good is not an accomplishment because an accomplishment is a goal that you set for
Show More

Related Documents: Schopenhauer Vs Kant

Philosophy Final Review Essay

makes an action practically rational? Should I skip class, because I am doing well. Kant asked what makes an action good or what makes an action practically rational what to do, what action is need for some goal. According to Kan'ts moral philosophy, it is defined as the capacity of a rational being to act according to principles (i.e., according to the conception of laws). Unlike the ethical intuitionism Kant never held that practical reason intuits the rightness of particular actions or moral…

Words 4122 - Pages 17