Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Socrates and Aristotle are among the most famous ancient philosophers who may be described as founders of Western philosophy. Their opinions concerning ethics and way of life do not coincide, and that is why both of them should be analyzed in order to figure out where the truth lies. Socrates sees the purpose of life as a combination of personal and spiritual, and people should develop both spiritual and personal skills to become truly wise (Triverdi, 2021). Socrates sees virtue to be either theoretical knowledge and science or practical knowledge. Thus, according to Socratess philosophy, a wise person cannot be non-virtuous. Socrates, however, does not pay attention to the irrational part of the mind, but it contributes to his philosophy, as he strongly believed that knowledge is the only way for people to control and influence their choices.
When speaking about Aristotles philosophy, it is necessary to stress the main differences between his opinion on virtues and one Socrates had. Unlike Socrates, Aristotle believed that theoretical knowledge of virtue does not make a person virtuous because virtue is not only knowledge but the practical application of the latter as well (Aristotle, n.d.). Aristotle sees virtue not as the equivalent of knowledge but as a part of it. Unlike Socrates, Aristotle equates virtue to both rational and irrational parts of the human soul. Thus, natural virtue as it is does not presume any critical thinking, but it is committed after careful reasoning. Apart from that, Aristotle strongly tied virtue to happiness, stating that the latter is impossible without the former.
After analyzing Socratess and Aristotles concepts of virtue, it seems reasonable to point out that Aristotles philosophy is more precise than Socratess. Though the irrational part of the human soul cannot be controlled by the mind as well as the external circumstances cannot be, it is unreasonable to completely exclude it from the focus of attention. It is imprudent not to try to learn more about the irrational part of the soul, at least, because it is impossible to fully understand human nature not knowing anything about it.
Another Aristotles idea that claims that virtue is not theoretical knowledge but its application on practice is also more substantial and real than Socratess postulates. The thing here is that people may be perfectly informed about what virtue is and how it may be achieved, but, at the same time, never apply this knowledge. Knowing that something is good without performing the action does not make a person good by default.
At the same time, the way how Socrates sees knowledge may be worthy of attention because his postulate that it helps people affect their decisions and choices is, actually, true. The more people know about the world and about themselves, the fewer mistakes they make throughout their lives because a vast majority of errors are caused either by ignorance or by an unwillingness to learn. To conclude, it is necessary to mention that it is hard to choose whose philosophy is more applicable to living a full life Aristotles or Socratess. Both theories have reasonable parts and may give people food for thought. However, it is necessary to remember that it is not only the rational part of the human soul that matters but the irrational one as well. That is why people should take care not only about their consciousness but about subconscious minds as well.
References
Aristotle (n.d.). Pursuit of happiness. Web.
Trivedi, S. (2021). Meaning of life Socrates. Good Question. Web.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.