Understanding Metaphysics, Ethics, and Morality: Aristotle vs. Epicurus
Metaphysics: Aristotle’s Perspective
Metaphysics: Aristotle defines philosophy as the study of first principles (that which is fundamental) and causes (found in its forms and processes).
According to Aristotle, there is no science except of the universal (speculative science), being as a being and its essential attributes. Wisdom relates to knowledge as art relates to experience. Wisdom understands the causes of why, which differs from experiential knowledge, a concept with a restricted scope.
For Aristotle, philosophy (metaphysics) is equivalent to substance, which differs from accident. Accident is defined as that which can change (color, shape, texture, and size), and metaphysics studies these changes. He defines substance as something intelligible, which, in its purest form, could only be God (the First Mover). He also defines it as something sensible, subject to changes, which is potential. This potential leads to an act (as presented to us already completed) in four cases: material (matter), formal (work), efficient (project), and final (purpose).
Vaz Ferreira’s View on Metaphysics and Science
Vaz Ferreira: Vaz Ferreira is a positivist who recognizes the value of metaphysics, unlike other positivist philosophers. He believes that any true scientist should value metaphysics, otherwise, they risk making significant errors.
A scientist who is completely ignorant of philosophy might see their expression as a direct reflection of reality. However, if they possess some talent, they will sense the difficulties and inadequacy of that explanation. If philosophy had taught them the non-transcendent (not going to excel and thus have no further consequences) and purely practical nature of such symbols, they could achieve better scientific purposes, such as practical inventions and prevention. A deeper understanding of philosophy would help them navigate obstacles and understand that symbols are nothing more than that.
Science is like an iceberg, solid and seemingly unshakeable, upon which we build. This image of science as a building emphasizes the accumulation of knowledge. However, we must remember that part of the iceberg remains submerged. Even if the ice thaws and is reheated, it becomes water again. In other words, metaphysical science solidifies certainties, axioms, and propositions of science, essentially freezing what are, in philosophical terms, always open problems, unfinished and in continuous development.
The relationship between science and philosophy, metaphysics in traditional terms, differs from the positivist ideal of a science that abandons philosophy and limits itself to rational scientific knowledge. A lack of metaphysics, or an excess of it, can be detrimental. Good metaphysics acts as a preservative, linking science and philosophy, while bad metaphysics creates a barrier between them. The science that fears noble metaphysics becomes a victim of unconscious and shameful metaphysics, a parasite lost in the clouds.
Ethics: Epicurus vs. Aristotle
Epicurus’s Ethics
Epicurus: Epicurus believed that happiness is the total absence of disturbance, a condition for an interior steady state.
- Ataraxia is the state of one who fears neither the gods nor death.
- He sees friendship as the greatest pleasure that can benefit humans. Happiness is considered by pleasure.
Aristotle’s Ethics
Aristotle: Aristotle sought to define good and its meaning for humans.
- Aristotle believed that striving for good is a natural human tendency. However, this good is not primarily something located in an ideal horizon.
- Good begins as a goal in human existence.
Ethics and Morality
Ethics
Ethics: Ethics is theoretical and general. It is the branch of philosophy that deals with human action, intending to discuss the value of standards as well as their foundations. Ethics is the discipline that studies morality, researching and reflecting on moral principles without creating them. It strives to be objective and rational, like science.
Morality
Morality: Morality is a set of accepted standards based on free consent and rationality. It has two policy levels (standards) and factual levels (facts). It is individual and practical. Moral action has the following structure: reason, motive, and awareness of the end result.