Sociology theory: Aristotle’s Good Man

  1. Sociological theory: The theory of my topic (Good citizen Vs Good man) is Aristotle’s theory on Goof man.
  2. Description of Theory: Theory is described as good citizen cannot have single absolute excellence but the good man is so called in virtue of a single absolute excellence because, a good man is good everywhere in the world but good citizen might be good for a specific region and for specific people.
  3. :       “There cannot be a single absolute excellence of the good citizen. But the good man is so called in virtue of a single absolute excellence. It is thus clear that it is possible to be a good citizen without possessing the excellence which is the quality of a good man (Develin, 1973).
  4. :      Robert Develin wrote about the greatest scholar Aristotle’s good man and said that according to the Aristotle there good man is differ from the good citizen as he described in his article “The Good man and Good Citizen in Aristotle’s Politics” this article was issues in “Phronesis” in 1973.
  5. Major points of my topic:  The major points of my topic are:
  6. The major point of this topic is the associated with the virtue and ethics.

According to the concept of the Good man, Aristotle differentiates the difference in between the law and ethics and stated that a law can be good for a specific place whereas the ethics are universally defined that are acceptable everywhere in the world.

  1. Definition of Good citizen varies from Place to place

It is believed that the definition of a good citizen varies from place to place. In this regards Aristotle talks about the good citizen as “the goodness of an upright citizen is relative to the city of which is a citizen.” In this explanation, Aristotle said that a good citizen serves his nation well as a patriotic person. In addition Aristotle said that good citizen show patriotism which is based on his loyalty to the mother land. Therefore, Aristotle argued that a good citizen completely depend on the regime. Such as he stated that a good citizen in the regime of Hitler was not a good citizen everywhere as he was loyal to his mother land but his act cannot be justified and ethical anywhere else than the Hitler’s city (Develin, 1973).

  1. )  Good man is defined in same manners regardless the limitation of place.

On the other hand, Aristotle said that “the goodness of a good man is absolute” regardless the regime a good person is good everywhere. Further he stated that the both the good citizen and good man can be identical but in case if a person is a good citizen of a good regime. Further this can be support through the Plato believe about the good man as “Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly.” (Develin, 1973)

  1. Two specific assumptions: Guided by the theory specific assumptions to analyze my topic include:
  1. Assumption 1: The examples of a good citizen of Hitler Regime well define the concept of a good citizen. Such as a citizen who act accordingly to the Hitler’s command and show his patriotism is a good citizen for the nation but on the other hand, his act cannot be justify therefore, it is right to say that the goodness of a citizen depends on the regime (Develin, 1973).
  2. Assumption 2:

A good man who follows the ethics is good everywhere in the world. Such as a good man always follow the law even when he knows that no one is watching him and he has the chance to act illegally and no one will punish him but instead of it, he does not commit any illegal act as he know that it is wrong to do. This justifies that “Goodness of a good man us absoluter.” (Develin, 1973)

Place Your Order Now!

No matter what type of essay you need, we’ll get it written,
so let’s get started.

Menu