Aristotle vs. Martin Luther King Jr essays

Aristotle vs. Martin Luther King Jr essays For a common person, it is a big enough task to determine what is true for themselves and their surroundings. However, to truly live a good life, they must choose a path based on self-knowledge and truth. Since no one path is better than the other, it is important to follow different paths and assess each step of the journey to seek truth and self-awareness. If the individual does not feel a connection between that truth and the self, they should consider a different path. Through instincts and reasoning are guides for the common people to achieve the good life. However, philosophers like Aristotle and a more contemporary Martin Luther King Jr must be aware of the deepest possible meanings of all known truths and not simply just choose one path since each path offers different thoughts. Despite the fact that Aristotle and Martin Luther King Jrs lived during different periods, their ideas and teachings towards achieving a good life are quite comparable, but of course, along with some differences. For the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, a person achieved the good life the best possible life for mankind in accordance with his nature- only as part of a political state. He believed that all existing things have a purpose and that their purpose constitutes their good. He is not concerned with individual good but with the good for all humans. He named this good eudaimonia, which is translated as happiness. This word includes both the notion of behaving well and the notion of faring well, meaning being a good person and doing well in life. Like the Greek analogy, happiness is the goodness of persons soul as health is the goodness of a persons body . In Politics, Aristotle suggests that the aim of government is to aid its citizens in the realization of the good life. He stressed that the need for human beings to live in societies in order to become self-fulfilled is something not possi...