It is completely natural for humans to wonder why we were placed on our wonderful earth. What does it mean to be these lucky people called humans? Do we really have a human nature of our own? Are there really living beings who find something in this world to call our life's purpose? And if so, how can we achieve this? Is it happiness or simply the desire to survive that moves us forward? These are just some of the types of questions that philosophers have wrestled with for centuries. Some argue that human nature is real and essential to living a happy and fulfilling life, while others reject this idea altogether. However, despite the completely opposing positions that philosophers can take towards human nature, it is not uncommon to find surprising similarities between those who support it and those who do not. One of the greatest examples would be Aristotle and his books on Nicomachean Ethics and Sartre with his writings Existentialism is a Humanism. When it comes to these two philosophers in particular, it would seem at first glance that they are nothing alike. Aristotle is a strong believer in human nature and its ability to give humans a fulfilling life, and Sartre who completely rejects human nature for the idea that we as humans essentially just go through life and make choices. That said, I would now like to discuss the individual views and arguments that both men have regarding their views on human nature, its relationship to purpose, free will, and politics, and show that 'within these, Aristotle and Sartre give us the ability to see, that perhaps with some certainty, we are in fact responsible for...... middle of paper ... for their situation, and it seemed unfair to me. So, it seems much more appealing for Sartre to show that humans can create their own lives, rather than letting it be arranged for them on a deeper level. Ultimately, although both philosophers had a huge impact on the idea of ​​human nature and answering questions like "What does it mean to be a human?" Is there really a human nature? I may personally find Sartre more attractive in the end, but as this article has hopefully shown, everyone has some capacity to make their own choices, and with that in mind, he he may have come to a completely different opinion. and Martin Ostwald. Nicomachean Ethics. New York London: Macmillan Collier Macmillan, 1962. Print. Sartre, Jean-Paul and Philip Mairet. Existentialism and humanism. London: Methuen, 1948. Print.