Metaphysics

Read “Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics (Books VIII to X).pdf,” answer the following:(note: answer two promts in different paragraph, only use attached files as reference”

Aristotle considers justice to be “complete” virtue or human excellence; indeed, he claims that in it is comprehended the whole of virtue. In other words, what virtue is in regards to oneself, justice is in regards to everyone else. Justice and virtue are but two sides of the same coin, as it were: the former concerns the whole society (how we relate to each other), whereas the latter concerns the organization of our own individual soul (the proper state of being of our own person — in how we act, and in how we express and engage our emotions … the manner in which we relate to ourselves). We can call this an “organic” or holistic conception of justice and human virtue: it looks at how the parts relate to the whole, and understands that the well-being of the whole is dependent on how the parts are related.
How do you think this “organic” or holistic conception of justice would change our approach to justice today? Do you think that Aristotle’s conception of justice is even relevant today?

Read “Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics (Books V to VII)” answer the following:
In the part of the Nicomachean Ethics where Aristotle takes up the question of friendship, Aristotle is seems perfectly accepting of those friendships based purely on convenience or mutual advantage — where each has befriended the other only on account of some mutual advantage that each gets from the other, so that when that advantage no longer obtains, the friendship ends. For example, let’s say that you start a small business, and one of your customers shows real talent for the business, and you offer them a role in your company — which they accept. Over the next few years, you grow to like and respect each other, but realize that, beyond the business, you really don’t have much in common. Let’s say that your company is bought out by another, and you decide to go your own way with the profit from the sale, thus ending your business dealings.
Now, the motivating cause of your friendship is gone — the business that brought you together as friends with your former employee doesn’t exist — and so, since you really don’t have much in common with this friend beyond the business itself, the friendship would seem to have come to an end. But, the dilemma is that this former employee wants to remain friends, whereas you really aren’t motivated to do so. Aristotle is clear that the friendship is justified in coming to an end, and especially so given that you feel no connection to this person beyond the business. What, though, would be the best way to end the friendship, following Aristotle’s principles of ethical conduct? Would you feel guilty or remorseful that you ended the friendship? How should you deal with these (lingering) emotions in an Aristotelian way?

Last Completed Projects