This content is from Wikipedia. We do not consider this content professional or citable. Please use your discretion when relying on it. GradeSaver also offers a professionally written study guide by one of our staff editors.

Aristotle's ethics

Aristotle wrote several works on ethics: the Nicomachean Ethics, the Eudemian Ethics, and, less probably, the Magna Moralia. All are concerned with the question of virtue.^[1] Of these, the Nicomachean Ethics has received the most scholarly attention. The ten books which comprise it are based on notes from his lectures at the Lyceum and may have been edited by or dedicated to Aristotle's son, Nicomachus.

Aristotle believed that ethical knowledge is not precise knowledge, like logic and mathematics, but general knowledge like knowledge of nutrition and exercise. Also, as it is a practical discipline rather than a theoretical one; he thought that in order to become "good", one could not simply study what virtue is; one must actually be virtuous. Analogously, in order to become good at a sport like football, one does not simply study but also practices. Aristotle first establishes what was virtuous. He began by determining that everything was done with some goal in mind and that goal is 'good.' The ultimate goal he called the Highest Good: happiness (Gk. eudaimonia - sometimes translated as "living well").

Aristotle contended that happiness could not be found only in pleasure or only in fame and honor. He finally finds happiness "by ascertaining the specific function of man". But what is this function that will bring happiness? To determine this, Aristotle analyzed the soul and found it to have three parts: the Nutritive Soul (plants, animals and humans), the Perceptive Soul (animals and humans) and the Rational Soul (humans only). Thus, a human's function is to do what makes it human, to be good at what sets it apart from everything else: the ability to reason or logos. A person that does this is the happiest because he is fulfilling his purpose or nature as found in the rational soul. Depending on how well he did this, Aristotle said humans belonged to one of four categories: the virtuous, the continent, the incontinent and the vicious.

Aristotle believed that every ethical virtue is an intermediate condition between excess and deficiency. This does not mean Aristotle believed in moral relativism, however. He set certain emotions (e.g., hate, envy, jealousy, spite, etc.) and certain actions (e.g., adultery, theft, murder, etc.) as always wrong, regardless of the situation or the circumstances.

In the Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle often focused on finding the mean between two extremes of any particular subject; whether it be justice, courage, wealth and so forth. For example, courage is a mean between two feelings (fear and confidence) and an action (the courageous act). Too much fear or too little confidence leads to cowardice, and too little fear or too much confidence can lead to rash, foolish choices. Aristotle says that finding this middle ground is essential to reaching eudemonia, the ultimate form of godlike consciousness. This middle ground is often referred to as The Golden Mean.

Aristotle also wrote about his thoughts on the concept of justice in the Nicomachean Ethics. In these chapters, Aristotle defined justice in two parts, general justice and particular justice. General justice is Aristotle’s form of universal justice that can only exist in a perfect society. Particular justice is where punishment is given out for a particular crime or act of injustice. This is where Aristotle says an educated judge is needed to apply just decisions regarding any particular case. This is where we get the concept of the scales of justice, the blindfolded judge symbolizing blind justice, balancing the scales, weighing all the evidence and deliberating each particular case individually. Homonymy is an important theme in Aristotle’s justice because one form of justice can apply to one, while another would be best suited for a different person/case. Aristotle says that developing good habits can make a good human being and that practicing the use of The Golden Mean when applicable to virtues will allow a human being to live a healthy, happy life.

The highest good

In order to do this, Aristotle had to first establish the so called virtuous. He began by determining that everything was done with some goal in mind and that goal is 'good':

Every skill and every inquiry, and similarly, every action and choice of action, is thought to have some good as its object. This is why the good has rightly been defined as the object of all endeavor. (NE 1.1)

But, if action A is done with the goal B, the goal B would also have a goal, goal C. Goal C would also have a goal and this would continue until something stopped the infinite regress. This was the Highest Good.

Now, if there is some object of activities that we want for its own sake (and others only because of that), and if it is not true that everything is chosen for something else - in which case there will be an infinite regress that will nullify all our striving - it is plain that this must be the good, the highest good. Would not knowing it have a great influence on our way of living? Would we not be better at doing what we should, like archers with a target to aim at? (NE 1.2)

Aristotle said the Highest Good must have three characteristics:

• desirable for its own sake
• not desirable for the sake of some other good
• all other ‘goods’ desirable for its sake

Aristotle resolves this Highest Good in eudaemonia, which is usually translated as "happiness," but could also be "well-being" or "flourishing." "What is the highest good in all matters of action? As to the name, there is almost complete agreement; for uneducated and educated alike call it happiness, and make happiness identical with the good life and successful living. They disagree, however, about the meaning of happiness." (NE 1.4)

Happiness and the function of humanity

Aristotle contended that happiness could not be found only in pleasure, as "it would be absurd if the end were amusement and if trouble and hardship throughout life would all be for the sake of amusing oneself." He also surmised that it was not in only fame and honor, as "it seems to be more superficial than what we are looking for, since it rests in the man who gives the honor rather than in him who receives it." He finally finds happiness "by ascertaining the specific function of man. In the case of flute players, sculptors, and all craftsmen - indeed all who have some function and activity - 'good' and 'excellent' reside in their function. Now the same will be true of man, if he has a peculiar function to himself."

But what is this function that will bring happiness? To determine this, Aristotle analyzed the nature of the soul. Aristotle saw the soul as existing in three parts, each of which had a specific function:

• Nutritive Soul (vegetative soul) - found in plants, animals and human beings; responsible for growth and reproduction
• Perceptive Soul (sensitive soul) - found in animals and man; responsible for perception via the senses
• Rational Soul - found in humans only; responsible for thinking

Aristotle claims a human's function is to do what makes it human, to be good at what sets it apart from everything else: the ability to reason or Nous. Or, as Aristotle concludes, "The function of man is activity of soul in accordance with reason, or at least not without reason." He identifies two different ways in which the soul can engage: reasoning (both practical and theoretical) and following reasoning. A person that does this is the happiest because they are fulfilling their purpose or nature as found in the rational soul.

(The wise person will) be more than human. A man will not live like that by virtue of his humanness, but by virtue of some divine thing within him. His activity is as superior to the activity of the other virtues as this divine thing is to his composite character. Now if mind is divine in comparison with man, the life of the mind is divine in comparison with mere human life. We should not follow popular advice and, being human, have only mortal thoughts, but should become immortal and do everything toward living the best in us. (NE 10.7)

In other words, the thinker is not only the 'best' person, but is also most like God.

Developing ethics

Contrary to the teachings of Plato his student, Aristotle, firmly believed that all human beings are born with the potential to become ethically virtuous and practically wise. To achieve these goals, they must go through two stages:

1. Develop proper habits during childhood.
2. Combine ethical virtue with practical wisdom once reason is fully developed.

Moderation

Aristotle believed that every ethical virtue is an intermediate condition between excess and deficiency. For example, fear isn't bad in and of itself, it is just bad when felt to excess or deficiency. A courageous person judges that some dangers are worth facing and others not, the level of fear is appropriate to the circumstances. The coward flees at every danger, although the circumstances do not merit it. The rash person disregards all fear and dives into every danger no matter the consequences. Aristotle identifies the virtue as being the 'mean' of the situation. Thus, there is no way to form a strict set of rules that would solve every practical problem. "The virtuous person sees the truth in each case, being as it were a standard and measure of them."

This does not mean Aristotle believed in moral relativism, however. He set certain emotions (e.g., hate, envy, jealousy, spite, etc.) and certain actions (e.g., adultery, theft, murder, etc.) as being always wrong, regardless of the situation or the circumstances.

Types of people

Depending on the level to which a person is able to use his or her Nous in accordance with reason, they may fall into one of four categories:

• Virtuous - those that truly enjoy doing what is right and do so without moral dilemma
• Continent - does the virtuous thing most of the time, but must overcome conflict
• Incontinent - faces the same moral conflict, but usually chooses the vicious ("full of vice") thing
• Vicious - sees little value in virtue and doesn't attempt it