Plato and Aristotle were ancient Greek philosophers who critically explored various issues, such as science, ethics, and politics. Many of Plato’s works managed to survive the centuries; however, they were not as influential as Aristotle’s works. In particular, his works of logical reasoning and science played a central role in Greek philosophy (Kraut, 2018). Both philosophers’ works have significant historical value despite considering modern times as less theoretically valuable. The link between Aristotle and Plato is most apparent regarding their views on ethics. Plato’s views on ethics were aligned to those of Socrates’, and he believed that knowledge is virtue, in and of itself (Plato, 2008). It meant that knowing good involved doing the good. A person who knows the right thing to do will automatically be influenced to ensure that he does the right thing. It implied that teaching a person right from wrong could help teach virtue.
Aristotle’s views on ethics differ from those of Plato and Socrates. According to Aristotle, it was not sufficient to know what is right, as a person had to choose to act in a proper way (Kraut, 2018). It implied that such a person had to develop a habit of doing good. Understanding ethics placed Aristotle’s ideas on a practical plane, which is not the same with Plato and Socrates, who espoused ethics theoretically. For Plato and Socrates, the primary virtue is wisdom, as it allows for the unification of all virtues. On the other hand, Aristotle believed that wisdom was virtuous; however, it was not automatic to achieve virtue. It did not unify other virtues, as suggested by Plato and Socrates. Aristotle believed that a person who wanted to achieve wisdom had to put effort. Additionally, without choosing to think and act wisely, it would be challenging to achieve other virtues (Kraut, 2018). Plato and Aristotle had different views on ethics. The paper examines the position of Plato and Aristotle in ethics through descriptive and critical discussions to identify differences in their thoughts.
Description of Plato’s and Aristotle’s Positions on Ethics
For Aristotle and Plato, just like most ancient ethicists, the central issue in ethics is related to happiness. For these ethicists, happiness does not refer to the pleasant state of mind that many people understand but is a life of human flourishing or a good human life. According to them, happiness was acquired through virtue (Raymond, 2013). Therefore, ancient ethicists relied on three related questions to present their views on ethics: What does a flourishing or good life entail? What are the required virtues to achieve this life? How can a person acquire these virtues? By answering these questions, ancient ethicists presented their thoughts on ethics.
In his early dialogues, Plato explored the nature of different conventional virtues, such as temperance, piety, and courage. Additionally, he explored more general questions regarding the need to teach virtue. Plato’s teacher, Socrates, was portrayed in conversation with occasional celebrities and experts regarding virtue, exposing these individuals’ inadequacy regarding their definitions of virtue (Plato, 2008). While Socrates fails to provide his definitions due to his claims for ignorance, he suggests that virtue exists as a kind of knowledge, and the involvement in virtuous action involves having such knowledge. According to Aristotle, this view on virtue is held by historical Socrates.
In his later dialogue, The Republic, Plato appears to convey his views on ethics, with the Socrates character developing a theory of justice to denote a condition of the soul. According to the work, the complete virtuous person or the just is the individual who has managed to place his soul in harmony due to the three parts; appetite, spirit, and reason (Plato, 1998). These help the person to desire what is good and ideal for it to act within proper limits. As part of the soul, reason helps understand and desire the human good. Additionally, it allows for an understanding of the general good. According to The Republic, acquiring such an understanding of the form of the good involves years of training and various disciplines, dialectic included. Plato concludes that only philosophers can be considered entirely virtuous (Plato, 1998).
Aristotle differs from Plato on happiness. According to him, happiness does not refer to a mere condition of the soul; instead, it is a kind of right activity. He held that the good human life consisted primarily of activities that are considered human, particularly reasoning. It meant that the good life encompassed the soul’s rational activity under the guidance of virtues. According to Aristotle, it was necessary to recognize intellectual virtues, understanding and chiefly wisdom (Aristotle, 2003). Also, it was essential to recognize moral or practical virtues in the form of temperance and courage. He conceived moral or practical virtues as a mean between two extremes. In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle presented his thoughts on happiness. He held that happiness denotes an individual’s practice of philosophical contemplation, and this person needs to have cultivated all moral and intellectual virtues over a significant part of his lifetime (Aristotle, 2003). In Eudemian Ethics, happiness denotes the exercise of moral virtues in the political sphere, and it involves the presupposition of both moral and intellectual virtues.
Critical Discussions of Plato’s and Aristotle’s Views on Ethics
Notably, Aristotle engages in a project similar to Plato’s in The Republic. A significant central point that Plato relays regarding ethics is the crucial need of establishing a hierarchical ordering of the soul’s main elements (Plato, 1998). Plato demonstrates the interpretation of traditional virtues to help in fostering or expressing proper relationship between the psyche’s less rational elements and reason. Aristotle has a similar approach, as demonstrated by his function argument. According to him, the good of a person can be found in the dominance of reason (Aristotle, 2003). Detailed studies of specific virtues demonstrate that a proper ordering of the soul is necessary for each virtue. For Aristotle, it is necessary to arrive at conclusions just like Pluto, however, this should be achieved without relying upon Platonic metaphysics, which is the basis of his argument in The Republic. Aristotle does not believe that Plato’s forms exist; particularly, the form of the good. According to him, studying Mathematics and the sciences to become entirely virtuous does not make sense (Aristotle, 2003). He rejects this and the idea that it is necessary to view all branches of knowledge as a whole. Notably, Aristotle’s ethical theory’ reliance upon more fully developed philosophical distinctions does not mean that he proposes the need of engaging in a specialized study of Mathematics, changing or eternal objects, or the natural world among students of ethics (Kraut, 2018). He believes that it is essential to make ethics an autonomous field. Doing this will quickly show that a complete understanding of good does not encompass any form of expertise in a specific field.
Another contrast between Aristotle and Pluto regarding ethics exists that should be emphasized. In Book II of The Republic, “The best type of good is desirable in itself and for the sake of results” (Plato, 1998, 357d-358a). Here, Plato argues that it is necessary to place justice in the same category. However, since it is generally accepted that good is desired for its consequences, Plato devotes most of his time trying to establish that justice is supposed to be sought for its own sake, a very controversial point. Aristotle contrasts this through his analogy of A and B. According to him, if A is desirable for the sake of B, then B should be considered better than A (1094a14–16) (Aristotle, 2003). For Aristotle, the highest kind of good needs to be the most undesirable for the sake of anything else. He believes that showing that A is the ultimate end involves showing that all other goods are considered as instruments focused on promoting A in one way or another. It can be argued that it would not serve Aristotle purpose of considering virtuous activity as isolated from other goods (Price, 2015). Therefore, he must discuss wealth, honor, friendship, and pleasure to demonstrate how these goods can be considered resources focused on serving the higher goal of virtuous activity. It appears that Aristotle vindicates the centrality of virtue in a good and well-lived life by demonstrating that a virtuous person will not manage to exist without honor, friends, pleasure, and wealth in the ordinary course of things (Scott, 2018). For Aristotle, virtuous activity plays a significant role in making life happy. It does this by serving as the goal for which lesser goods are sought after and not by guaranteeing happiness at all times.
It can be argued that Aristotle’s methodology in ethics considers the connections associated with obtaining virtue and other goods than Plato’s methodology. Due to this, Aristotle stresses the need for satisfaction with conclusions focused on holding only for the most part (1094b11–22) (Aristotle, 2003). An understanding of Aristotle’s methodology in ethics reveals that isolation, poverty, and dishonor are impediments to virtue and happiness. However, there may be exceptional circumstances that do not act as impediments. The existence of exceptions does not undermine the fact that living well requires sufficient resources to pursue virtue in the course of life.
In conclusion, Aristotle has different views from Plato regarding ethics. According to Aristotle, it was not sufficient to know what is right, as a person had to choose to act appropriately. It implied that such a person had to develop a habit of doing good. Understanding ethics placed Aristotle’s ideas on a practical plane, which is not the same with Plato and Socrates, who espoused ethics theoretically. For Plato and Socrates, the primary virtue is wisdom, as it allows for the unification of all virtues. On the other hand, Aristotle believed that wisdom was virtuous; however, it was not automatic to achieve virtue. It did not unify other virtues, as suggested by Plato and Socrates. The significant contrast between the philosophers is on the understanding of good. According to Plato, the best type of good is desirable in itself and for the sake of results. For him, justice should be placed in this category of good and should be sought for its own sake. Aristotle contrasts this through his analogy of A and B. For Aristotle, the highest kind of good needs to be the most undesirable for the sake of anything else. Therefore, Plato and Aristotle have different views regarding ethics, particularly their understanding of good.
References
Aristotle. (2003). The Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle (D.P. Chase, Trans.). The Project Gutenberg. https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/8438/pg8438-images.html
Kraut, R. (2018). Aristotle’s ethics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-ethics/
Plato. (2008). Gorgias (B. Jowett, Trans.). The Project Gutenberg. https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1672/pg1672-images.html
Plato. (1998). The Republic (B. Jowett, Trans.). The Project Gutenberg. https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1497/pg1497-images.html
Price, A. W. (2015). Virtue and reason in Plato and Aristotle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Raymond, C. C. (2013). Shame and virtue in Plato and Aristotle. Austin, Tex.: University of Texas.
Scott, D. (2018). Levels of argument: A comparative study of Plato’s “Republic” and Aristotle’s “Nicomachean ethics”. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
