Therefore, these supreme self-duties are the reason why moral ethics exist, and without our duties to oneself there would be no other duties, nor would we, as a species, survive at all.
How does Aristotle define a final end? In certain aspects, all three of these philosophers also grappled with understanding, discovering, and logically explaining the power of the mind to shape whole truths.
Each cause, and each cause's cause, and each additional ascending cause must itself have a cause. Hume discusses a capacious catalogue of particular virtues and vices. References and Further Reading 1. However, they offer different conceptions of freedom, different ways of reconciling it with necessity, and different ways of understanding why this reconciliation matters for morality.
Mill instead questions the very idea of a hedonistic calculus and argues that one must distinguish between mental and bodily pleasure by giving more weight to mental pleasures. Like Hume, Kant takes virtue to be central to human morality. Even if people were in complete agreement regarding their moral feelings, the universality of these feelings would be a contingent matter, and thus an inadequate ground for the unconditionally binding moral law.