Compare the conceptions of the good that we find in Plato and in Aristotle.

Compare the conceptions of the good that we find in Plato and in Aristotle. What difficulties arise in applying Plato’s apparently non-naturalist conception of ‘good’ to moral judgment about character and action? How does Plato deal with those difficulties? What is the conceptual role of “eudaimonia” in Aristotle’s ethical theory? How is eudaimonia related to the “nature” of persons and to the good for persons? In what ways are moral virtue and physical health/fitness similar? The key to structuring paper #1 is NOT to list everything that Plato wrote and then what Aristotle wrote. Rather, the right approach is to identify the main ideas that drive the development of each philosophy and then to who how the MAIN ideas explain the specific differences and similarities. But what are the MAIN ideas? That is where this prompt comes in. The driving force behind Plato’s understanding of moral knowledge is his broader view of knowledge. His broader view of knowledge that is revealed in the Parable of the Cave and the Divided-Line? The Divided-Line associates belief with what is transitory and knowledge with what is eternal. Paradigmatic forms are mathematical, but there are other forms, including moral forms, like the form of the good. That form enables us to distinguish good from evil; right from wrong. But how? Aristotle, on the other hand, denies that forms exist independently of objects that exemplify them. In other words, he rejects the divided line. But how then does Aristotle think that we should determine whether or not something is good? He relies upon his conception of definition that derives from his study of taxonomy. According to Aristotle, each thing has a nature or a substantial form that determines exactly what that thing is. That determination is expressed in the form of a species/difference/genus-definition. In the case of people, we are including within the species of rational entities within the genus of animals. The difference between a human being (a person) and other animals is what differentiates us from them, which is that we are rational; on other words, that we are capable of reasoned deliberation, about what to do and what to believe. Now, the project that we are engaging is to describe the moral teachings of Plato and Aristotle and explain how their overall approach explains the similarities and differences between them. So, what are some topics that might be useful addressed? 1. How are the moral virtues (as opposed to the intellectual virtues) to be identified and how are they related to each other? 2. What differences are there in the application of the virtues in making rational judgments about what is good and judgments about what is evil; about what is right and what is wrong? 3. What role do desires play in a good life? 4. How does each philosopher understand the concepts of pleasure and pain, and how are they related to virtues and vices? 5. What view does each philosopher take of well-being, happiness, and misery? 6. Does each philosophy give a satisfactory articulation and defense of the ideal: “In concordiam mentis et corporis.”