Monday, October 3, 2016
The Case of Goodness
Aristotle states that "good" has as many senses as "being" in section 6, and because of that, it cannot be something universally present in all cases. When I first read this, I thought about how "good" can correspond to God. If God is equally three parts in one, then all parts are considered good. Therefore, because the Holy Spirit lives within us, good does lie within as well. This is not, however, all that "good" needs to be defined as to prove Aristotle's statement false. He claimed that "good" is not universally present in all forms. Goodness appears universally in one form, but that form refers to God and not humanity. Paul reminds us that no man is good, thus eliminated one case of goodness. Since one case has been nullified, then that proves Aristotle's point that goodness cannot appear everywhere in all cases. To me it seems that Aristotle was on to the fact that goodness can only exist where God is.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is an interesting take on the passage. It is definitely something to think about.
ReplyDeleteThat is a good argument. I wonder if Aristotle really was led to that fact. Even if he was not, he could have thought that there was a higher power than the Greek gods who is good and goodness can only be found where he is. It is a very thought-provoking idea.
ReplyDeleteAristotle is definitely hinting towards God regardless of whether or not he realizes it. All of the "good" things he mentions are temporary, earthly things, and it seems like he sees that what we understand as "good" is just a hint towards what actually is "good" (being God).
ReplyDelete