There have been efforts made by philosophers to reconcile the thoughts on determinism and voluntarism. Psychology being a science of human behavior does not have scientific laws to prove the presence of fate/destiny or choice. But that does not mean that the controversy ends, but it widens, since, some of the behavior is unpredictable and some behavior is voluntary. Therefore, a mid-way approach to the free will and determinism can prove to end the debate and solve the issue. For example, the illness, stress, and happiness are not choices, but they just really ‘happen’, whereas, the free will lets us achieve our goals and targets for a better life as a
The concept of virtue ethics by the philosopher Aristotle looks at how we should not look at the right and wrong actions we do by following guidelines, but look at us as human beings becoming virtuous people, through doing virtuous things. The statement of the weaknesses of virtue ethics outweighing the strengths is to an extent true, in particular when you look at the limitations of virtue ethics when claiming the doctrine of mean. Firstly by looking at the aim if virtue ethics we can gain an insight to the whole concept, Aristotle claimed that in life our aim is to reach fulfilment of happiness, which he called eudemonia. To achieve eudemonia you have to practice virtues and achieve these virtues, through education, emulation and experience. So we learn the virtue by copying someone who is a role model or mentor to confirm our virtue is right and finally practice and experience said virtue.
Stimuli that is rewarding produces positive feelings in us, and stimuli that is punishing produces negative feelings. As some of the stimuli are other people it follows that some people make us happy, while others do not. According to the principles of operant conditioning, we are likely to repeat any behaviour that leads to a desirable outcome and avoid behaviour that leads to an undesirable outcome. This theory suggests that we enter into relationships because the presence of some individuals in directly associated with reinforcement – they produce a positive feeling for us – which makes them more attractive to us. As well as being attracted to someone who directly makes us happy, we also like people who we associate with a pleasant experience.
“Outline Aristotle’s theory of Virtue Ethics” Virtue Ethics originates from the Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle who focused not on deontological values of actions being intrinsically right or wrong based on their intention, but on how to develop one’s character to meet the demands of what one would describe as virtuous. Central to the theory is the idea of practising qualities and virtues that are established as ‘good’. Virtue ethics is agent-centred as opposed to act-centred and Aristotle maintains that our final aim, as human beings, is to achieve ultimate happiness, which he calls eudaimonia and describes as human flourishing. The Greek word for virtue, arête, means excellence, and so a virtuous character is one with excellent qualities who continually and undeniably continue to make perfect moral decisions. A virtue is defined as a perfect quality that is habitually carried out by an individual which requires practise and dedication so that one may blossom into a virtuous character, “excellence is not an act but a habit.” For Aristotle, something is ‘good’ if it fulfils its purpose: a good knife is one this is sharps and cuts well.
Therefore, the presence of an individual produces positive reinforcement as they have a more attractive appeal. This theory also suggests that we are attracted to people if we meet them whilst we’re in a good mood, an example being at a party. As a result, previously neutral stimuli become positively valued as they are associated with the pleasant event, therefore meaning that we learn to like people through classical conditioning. Griffit and Guay (1969) conducted a study to investigate how the reward/need satisfaction theory works and how well it is acceptable. Participants were evaluated on a creative task by an experimenter.
Although the idea of social justice based in a social contract is mentioned in Plato's Republic and was known even earlier, the Republic's conception of individual justice is distinctively virtue ethical. To be sure, Plato understands individual justice on analogy with justice “writ large” in the state, but he views the state, or republic, as a kind of organism or beehive, and the justice of individuals is not thought of as primarily involving conformity to just institutions and laws. Rather, the just individual is someone whose soul is guided by a vision of the Good, someone in whom reason governs passion and ambition through such a vision. When, but only when, this is the case, is the soul harmonious, strong, beautiful, and healthy, and individual justice precisely consists in such a state of the soul. Actions are then just if they sustain or are consonant with such harmony.
For Aristotle, Plato was a realist and Protagoras was a relativist. Essentially, he regards both theories as equally defective. J.D.G Evans attempts to analyze why Aristotle deems these theories inadequate and what position is left for Aristotle to take if both of the alternatives are defective. Repeatedly, Aristotle begins his accounts by criticizing the “answers of his predecessors” and, while there appears to be legitimate reasons to discredit them, he fails to provide an adequate alternate. The following passage from Eudemian Ethics (1235b 13-18) allows us to better comprehend Aristotle’s impression of philosophy, which in turn leads to a better understanding of how he reviews and resolves the aforementioned problem: We must adopt a line of argument which will both best explain to us the views held about these matters and will resolve the difficulties and contradictions; and we shall achieve this if we show that the conflicting views are held with good reason.
a) Explain the Platonic Concept of ‘Forms’ Plato believed that behind every concept or object in the visible world there is an unseen reality which he calls its ‘Form’. These Forms exist in the world of the Forms separate from the visible world. Within the world of the Forms the pattern or the objects and concepts for the material world exist in a state of unchanging perfection. Plato was more interested in the Forms of concepts such as good, truth and justice, than he was in the Forms of material objects. The meaning of the word beauty would correspond to some external reality (Plato called it the Ideal Form).
Whenever pleasure is present, as long as it is there, there is neither pain of body nor of mind, nor both at once. I have to disagree with this statement. Epicurus seems to see pleasure and painful as something too much interrelated or I could say it seems like a negative relationship, because in reality it is not always has to be this way. We could feel both pleasure and painful at the same time. I do think we should take a look on how we measure the pleasure and the painful itself.
It could be suggested that hypnosis is a relaxed state of consciousness brought about from a varied set of skilled techniques, imparted by a therapist that allow the subject to enhance their concentration and increase responsiveness to suggestibility, in order to make the psychological or physiological changes to their thought patterns or actions for a positive outcome. From a psychological perspective it has been shown that positive feelings and thoughts arouse the left hemisphere of the brain. These thoughts activate the parasympathetic system leading to deeper calmer breathing; the heartbeat slows, blood vessels dilate, circulation improves, the skin warms. The energy that is released is used to recover from physical exertion or the repairing of