Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Aristotle's own claim that virtue is choiceworthy for its own sake is undermined if its full value requires an observing friend.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Being choiceworthy for its own sake need not mean being valuable only in isolation; virtues can be intrinsic goods within human relationships.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Friendship's role may be constitutive of flourishing rather than merely instrumental—the observing friend completes virtue, not adds to it.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Aristotle's claim about intrinsic choiceworthiness addresses why we value virtue, not whether its expression requires social contexts to be meaningful.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
If virtue's value depends on external recognition, it becomes instrumentally valuable rather than intrinsically choiceworthy for its own sake.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Aristotle defines eudaimonia as self-sufficient; requiring an observer contradicts this core requirement of human flourishing.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
A virtue that needs witnesses to be fully valuable is vulnerable to loss of worth when unobserved, making it unstable as an ultimate good.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.