Kantianism and Aristotelian are examples of theories that define the nature of thought or idea. Kantianism dictates that the mind is set to allow immediate interpretation of data presented to it on time against inclinations. Differences between the two philosophies are based on attractiveness, tension and the truth defined by each of them. A philanthropist and training baseball pitcher represent Kantian philosophy. Aristotelian philosophy may be well defined through analysis of natural baseball pitchers.
There exists an exclusive difference between the two forms of philosophies. An outstanding example of an action influenced by the Aristotelian theory is that of a baseball pitcher who is naturally skilled at throwing a ball. The pitcher does not need to think so much about where to throw the ball since it is already in mind the right position to throw the ball. On the other hand, the pitcher who is practicing how to throw the ball will need time to learn the skills of making the most outstanding throws during a competition. This is an explanation why minds capture elements or issues faster through extensive practice than if an element in an individual is inborn.
There are elements that make each of these philosophies identical among different people. Kantians dictate that the mind will always follow the immediate force of action that it develops. This element of following his thoughts is already developed as a duty. However virtuous another element would be, it may not be applicable to Kantians. For example, a philanthropist who is used to give money finds satisfaction by doing it. He is glued to his purpose that giving money is despicable and is just a duty. Duties are usually maintained by individuals who extend them, and they are used to them. In most cases, individuals who are aware of their duties follow a strict line which does not call for perfection. The uniqueness about Aristotelians is that an individual will always extend an action following an element that is inborn (Yu, 2004). A baseball pitcher who is naturally skilled with excellent throws depends on the inner skill of throwing the ball. This uniqueness may not be defined by the case of a training pitcher. This is because the individual is trained to acquire a skill. There is extensive difference between a training baseball pitcher and skilled baseball pitcher. The art of skill will always outshine training regardless of the effort. Therefore, the possession of skill or ability and process of training brings exclusive difference between Aristotle and Kantianism philosophies. As Aristotelian philosophy defines the ability as an attachment to duty, Kantianism defends skills development as a process through training.
However, it is wise to understand that there exists a substantial difference between virtue and duty in terms of timeliness of delivery. Virtue in delivery of service as a characteristic for Aristotelians does not mainly incline to time. A philanthropist who is used to giving money does not wait for a given time so that he may give money to people. He will always give money whenever a chance arises (Ross, 2000). On the other hand, a training baseball pitcher has to wait for a throwing chance to show up. This is a confirmation that a virtue may be used at any time and at any place, but a duty has to be done at a given time. Therefore, Kantians carry their duties at a given time while Aristotelians may carry out their activities anytime.
Also, the two philosophies may be extremely critical in defining morality. This is definitely because of the appropriateness or reliability of behavior. This is an indication of the connection between actions and mind responsiveness. Duties and virtues are extremely fundamental in defining morality for individuals (Kant, 2013). As dictated earlier Kantians are defined by duty and they have to be inclined to truthfulness of purpose in the implementation of their duties. Truth and satisfaction in execution of duty are excellent definition of morality. A training baseball pitcher is subject to excellent moral behavior with continuous training as he may be out to protect his prowess in throwing the ball. This means that his action may be positively influential to individuals willing to extend such duties. Nevertheless, the philanthropist who is used to give money may do it because it is his duty. Therefore, Kantians have a chance to improve their morality through training while Aristotelians may remain glued to the same form of behavior following possession of a talent.
Moreover, reliability may be used for further definition of the two philosophies. This may be evaluated on the probable improvements that may be influenced on individuals based on the uniqueness of habits. Virtues are usually inbuilt and improving them means a change of habits or ways of doing things. This is a representation of Aristotelian line of thought. On the other hand, the duties may be fixed for some time, but they may be changed with time. This means that when a duty is undertaken severally it becomes perfect, and with time, improvement may be witnessed in the execution of a given duty (Ross, 2000). As a representation of Kantians’ philosophical thoughts, the training baseball pitcher is entrusted the duty of ensuring perfect throws during plays in the future. Continuous practice of throwing the ball guarantees improvement in future requirements to make determinant throws. Therefore, through continuous training or practice of habits, Kantians may become more reliable than naturally blessed individuals. Carnations will acquire new skills while in the line of duty while Aristotelians may remain at the same level as they seek to maintain their virtues.
However, understanding the two philosophical perspectives is paramount in handling various elements that take place in society. They are fundamental in explaining why certain activities follow a given route while others choose a different route (Ross, 2000). People behave differently as they possess unique skills and abilities which may not help them in defining their actions either as duties or virtues (Kant, 2013). The Kantian philosophy defines moral agents as people who behave according to their line of duty without considering inclinations. On the other hand, Aristotelians believe that moral agents depend on virtues and not self control. These are crucial platforms that define how people behave in the common social world. Philanthropists understand that it is their role to provide to the public. However, for skilled baseball pitchers their generosity is guaranteed by the availability of a chance to make throws. Therefore, training baseball pitchers have to develop their skills to match a situation that will require them in the future.
People will always be out for certain behaviors based on their responsibilities. Consistent existence in a given field exposes an individual to a given duty for a long time. This means that the individual will do the same thing for an extremely long time exclusive improvement is guaranteed. However, differences between the two philosophies may be based on the attractiveness, and tension evasion of each of them.
The Aristotelian philosophy encourages the virtues in the development of habits, which is a core element in the definition of excellent ability. Also, philanthropists have to sustain a duty of giving throughout their lives despite the challenges ahead. Their commitment to their duty is ample representation of Kantianism philosophical thought. Also, Kantianism is a process of development through which individuals develop skills. Habits are daily ways of conduct that an individual may possess. Habits are usually developed and not inborn like talents as shown by the talented baseball pitcher. The process of development is usually significant as it assists in defeating challenges on the way to become the most outstanding. The learning process is always attractive and informative. This makes Kantianism, the most attractive philosophy compared to Aristotelian philosophy.
Kantians and Aristotelian philosophical thoughts are extremely fundamental in the definition of a moral agent based on time length. Morality may be defined on extensive exposure to certain habits and execution of certain virtues. Extent of involvement in certain activities defines the prowess on the given field. This is the element that dictates excellent development of character in an individual. Duties and virtues are vital elements in defining excellence as required in any field. Kantian philosophy revolves around duty and not emotions or end goals. On the other hand, Aristotelian philosophy is a dictation of undergoing a given process to achieve a given goal.
Works Cited
Kant, Immanuel. On the Metaphysics of Morals and Ethics. Lanham: Start Publishing LLC, 2013. Print.
Ross, W. D.. Nicomachean ethics. Raleigh, N.C.: Alex Catalogue, 2000. Print.
Yu, Tianlong. In the name of morality: character education and political control. New York: P. Lang, 2004. Print.
