Abstract

In this dissertation I have brought together the work of Sophocles and Aristotle with a view to examining a variety of topics in the area of moral philosophy and moral psychology. This is the primary work of the thesis. The second purpose of the dissertation, which is a corollary of the first, is to demonstrate the importance of using both literature and philosophy in the education of the moral person. I employ the tragedian and the philosopher in the consideration of the relationship of nature to virtue, the role of the moral exemplar, the centrality of the emotions to moral education, the nature of choice and responsibility and the central place of friendship to the moral life. It is my contention that the ancient anthropology of Sophocles and Aristotle is superior to more recent developments in moral philosophy, especially those stemming from Kant. Their anthropology is superior because they demonstrate an appreciation of the entire person as rational, emotional and desiderative and recognize the need for the integration of all of these elements in order that human agency may be excellent. In addition, they show an understanding of the concrete nature of ethics in their concern for the development of the virtues of character. Finally, they realize both the developmental and social character of becoming a moral person in their appreciation of the central role that both the moral educator and friends play in our coming to be persons of good character. Moral philosophy in the Kantian tradition shows little appreciation of the role that the emotions play in becoming a moral agent inasmuch as it is solely pre-occupied with reason. It shows little comprehension of the developmental and social character of growth in the moral life in its rejection of moral exemplars as a reliable guide in understanding our duties. Finally, it shows that it does not recognize the concrete character of ethics in its pre-occupation with the delineation of abstract rules over concern for the development of excellent character. ;As a corollary to this richer moral anthropology which takes into account the human person in both her rational and emotional/desiderative aspects, I have argued that we need to appeal to both literature and philosophy in our analysis of the moral agent. We need literature for its power to depict the immediacy of a situation and its emotional evocativeness. On the other hand, we need philosophy for its ability to furnish a unifying and explanatory logos to the phenomena that are presented by the artist. In this way, both philosophy and literature can work together in helping us to understand the nature of excellent moral agency and to actually become effective moral agents