Just Individuals example essay topic

In these sessions, I have gained a better understanding of Aristotle and Plato's ideas and theories. Particularly, I have a specific interest in Aristotle and the notion of the two extremes and to aim towards the "gray or middle of the road". I also have an interest in Plato's theory regarding the just and unjust and the repercussions of their actions. Aristotle is trying to achieve that single point in which life is the best of both worlds. He attempts to define an obtainable median point in life. This idea sounds more like the resume of a public official.

I believe that is why Aristotle says that the ultimate virtue is that of political science. The public officials' job is to represent the masses. It is not to take sides or to have a left or right side mentality. A couple of weeks ago when we were learning about this in the lectures, I thought I would do my own research or investigation on this matter. Lately in some everyday life experiences, I have found that those who choose to take sides or be very "strong willed" with little or no justification for their point of views live very stress-filled lives. I, too, find myself in that situation at times.

Then, on the other hand, those who live the fullest and try make the best of any given situation tend to experience a more just and morally consistent life. The aim is to better serve the people that encompass their lives. The just individuals I have observed seem to have a lot more satisfaction, and, much to my surprise, they tended to be the ones with the most respect and knowledge. This seemed consistent with what Aristotle was saying.

The one question that I have is why do people choose to live that way? Do they not see the benefits of patience? How does Aristotle address these issues? Secondly, we must alter our expectations according to the field of study". [W] e must not expect the same degree of accuracy in every department of study, but only so much precision as corresponds with the nature of the particular subject... ".

(St erba, 59-60). This statement fascinates me. The area of study I am in is Mechanical Engineering Technology. That quote from the text could not be more prevalent in Engineering today. When performing engineering equations, the degree of accuracy cannot be carried out longer than that in which the data was recorded.

If one does, the end result would most likely be an error due to rounding. This, too, also applies to the initial data recorded. We must be sure that this information is correct, as this will lead to failure or an error in the final point or answer. With regards to Plato, I find that in The Republic, when discussing the just and unjust, we find ourselves between two evils.

In the text, it asks what do we determine to be better, doing unjust things with no repercussions or to just things. In some way or another, we find ourselves at a cross road when faced with certain circumstances. Do we react unjust or just? What is it inside of us that tells us not to do the wrong and do the right thing or vice versa? I do believe a mass majority of us do not choose the unjust because we fear what might happen. I do believe that there is something inside us that encourages us to do the right thing.

Let me add that, if knowing full and well that we will not serve any repercussion of our acts, why do we then still choose just actions? I think that it falls into a certain character or moral fabric of that person. Would that not then be the ultimate virtue? If not, then, why? I think that this would take precedence over the just and unjust.

It is the inner most feeling in that individual that is the ultimate virtue. Its what you and I feel is just or unjust. It just so happens that the masses feel one way or the other. Ultimately, it's the individual that is the virtue. Sometimes what motivates a decision is what makes us happy or gives us happiness. What precedes this notion is what I am talking about.

It falls into a more personal and intimate notion of that individual. That cannot be summed up into the restricted categories of just or unjust. I once was told by a professor at IPFW that "philosophy is the study of knowledge". I try to obtain as much as I can from the lectures and the text, but more often I think about how the set of ideas and ideals that these philosophers wrote about impact my life and the world we live in. As a whole, that is why I think we do philosophy... to ask the question why? , to gain a better understanding of what makes the world turn, and to seek out our own virtue, truth, or purpose. In conclusion, to recap what Aristotle was saying about the two extremes, I believe that the motive behind that discussion is to improve upon our standard of living.

It is to gain more out of life and what it has to offer.