Difference in Metaphysics Between Aristotle and Kant

What is the central difference between metaphysics as Kant conceives it, and metaphysics as Aristotle conceives it? Argue in support of one or the other view. Metaphysics is usually taken to involve both questions of what is existence and what types of things exist; in order to answer either questions, one will find itself using and investigating the concepts of being. Aristotle proposed the first of these investigations which he called ‘first philosophy’, also known as ‘the science of being’ however overtime his writings came to be best known as ‘Metaphysics’ in which he studied being qua being with a central theme of how substance may be defined as a category of being. Kant who is a nominalist criticized both Aristotelian and therefore†¦show more content†¦Although book Epsilon is rather brief, it shows a return to the science of being qua being and also passes some remarks on truth. â€Å"If there any immovable substances, then the science which deals with them must be prior, and it must be primary philosophy† (Loux, 2006, p14). This shows that the immoveable substances are diviniti es. Book Zeta appears to restrict our subject matter in a rather different way: ‘the question which, both now and in the past, is continually posed and continually puzzled over is this: what is being? That is to say, what is substance?’ This question defines the nature of Aristotle’s inquiries, at least for a large part of the Metaphysics, and it thus offers a fourth account of the study or science of metaphysics.â€Å"The science of first principles, the study of being qua being, theology, the investigation into substance – four compatible descriptions of the same discipline? Perhaps there is no one discipline which can be identified as Aristotelian Metaphysics? And perhaps this thought should not disturb us: we need only recall that the metaphysics was composed by Andronicus rather than by Aristotle. But the four descriptions do have at least one thing in common: they are dark and obscure† (Ross, 1996, p174). Books Zeta, Eta and Theta, together form the central part of the Metaphysics, with a focus on their general topic ‘substance’: its classification and relation to matter and forms, to actuality andShow MoreRelated Ethical and Philosophical Questions about Value and Obligation977 Words   |  4 PagesEthical and Philosophical Questions about Value and Obligation I Recall the distinction between metaethics and normative ethics. Normative ethics deals with substantial ethical issues, such as, What is intrinsically good? What are our moral obligations? Metaethics deals with philosophical issues about ethics: What is value or moral obligation? Are there ethical facts? What sort of objectivity is possible in ethics? How can we have ethical knowledge? Recall, also, the fundamentalRead MoreKant And Aristotle s Views On Ethics And Morals1480 Words   |  6 PagesStrom Philosophy 300 Class Section 1200 Recitation-Tuesday 10am 2/11/2015 What Is The Highest Good? Immanuel Kant and Aristotle are two of the most prominent philosophers on ethics and morals. Each has their own idea about human life and what the highest good is. It has even been said that in his Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals Kant disproves Aristotle’s view. In order to prove that Kant successfully disproves Aristotle’s theory, we must first understand both theories. After a successful understandingRead MoreThe Law Of Non Contradiction1581 Words   |  7 Pagessaid of one A must be held for the second A . It is a proposition that is either true or false, and a cornerstone notion for Kant in relation to god and morality. Also, known as the Law of non-contradiction. Concerning the Law of Identity, Leibniz reasoned that it could only be satisfied as a law in the abstract. Or, what could be said in the realm of metaphysics, or a different ontology. He concludes that because nothing in our sensory experience satisfies that law. If nothing in our sensoryRead MoreEssay On Virtue And Virtue1345 Words   |  6 PagesAristotle and Kant are both poignant philosophers of their times, each with different views. While they both make arguments on the topic of moral motivations, they have drastically different interpretations of morality. Aristotle believes that virtue is the key to happiness and Kant argues that motivation does not make an action moral. These arguments show just two of the many interpretations of morality, and while they are very different, share some commonalities. The arguments illustrated by bothRead MoreHow Should One Live914 Words   |  4 Pagesconstitutes a moral one. Kant differs; morality is rational and the categorical imperative it to be abided by to live as such. Aristotle is the main proponent in the field of virtue ethics, culminating in the seminal work on the Subject; Nicomachean Ethics (NE). NE recognises a life well lived is a virtuous one, Eudemonia be-came the ultimate goal. Eudemonia is the culmination of an entire life lived well, in the pursuit of virtue and excellence (Taylor, 1955). Aristotle viewed ethics as a practicalRead MoreComparing The Theories Of Aristotle And Kants Theory Of Ethics884 Words   |  4 PagesIn this paper, I will compare the theories of Aristotle and Kant on the basis of ethics. I will be examining Aristotle’s theory of virtue in which his focus is â€Å"What is a Good Life† and Kant’s theory of deontological ethics in which the moral worth of an action lies in the duty upon which moral actions are engendered. To begin, Aristotles moral theory (theory of virtue) focuses on questions about what is good? His focus is What is the good life? What does it mean to be a good person? (KemerlingRead MoreThe Aristotle And Immanuel Kant1655 Words   |  7 Pages The philosophers Aristotle and Immanuel Kant express the sources of virtuous and dutiful actions in a similar, yet different way. Both philosophers agree that an action has moral worth, when it is preformed for its own sake. However, the difference contains a more significant meaning. Aristotle believes that pleasure can be included when preforming an action; while Kant believes that a duty is preforming the right action without the need of inclinations. In this paper, I will present a similarityRead MorePhilosophical Analysis of Aristotle883 Words   |  4 Pages Philosophical analysis of Aristotle Many theorists consider Aristotle to be the first person to use the term â€Å"ethics† in naming the field of study that had already been subject to develop by his predecessors Socrates and Plato. Philosophical ethics attempts in offering the rational response to the questions regarding how the human beings live. Aristotle used to be regarding politics and ethics as two related but very separate field of study because ethicsRead MoreMoral Behavior: Aquinas and Aristotle vs. Kant1356 Words   |  6 PagesMoral Behavior: Aquinas and Aristotle vs. Kant When comparing between the philosophies of St. Thomas Aquinas/Aristotle and those of Immanuel Kant when regarding moral behavior, there are some very fundamental differences. On one hand, you have Kant’s autonomous perspective on behavior morality, in which you give the law to yourself. On the other hand, you have the heteronomy views of Aristotle and Aquinas which concludes that one can measure their conduct against an external force. Kant’sRead MoreSocrates Plato Aristotle and Immanuel Kant Views on Happiness Government Religion and Objectivity2508 Words   |  11 Pageshappiness, or better yet, where happiness exists is a question that has been pondered by many great thinkers. Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, Plato and Socrates had quite a bit to say on the subject. All of these well-known philosophers have a road map to happiness, religion, passion and objectivity. Yet, their theories differ ultimately in how to go about attaining each of them. For both Plato and Aristotle the good appears to be happiness. For Plato, this is where his interpretation of the meaning of Eudaimonism