Aristotle's Ethics PDF

Aristotle’s Ethics Aristotle was known to be Plato’s pupil. He regarded happiness as the goal of human existence. Aristotle, born 384 BCE, Stagira, Chalcidice, Greece – died 322, Chalcis, Euboea), ancient Greek philosopher and scientist, one of the greatest intellectual figures of Western history. H...

Aristotle’s Ethics Aristotle was known to be Plato’s pupil. He regarded happiness as the goal of human existence. Aristotle, born 384 BCE, Stagira, Chalcidice, Greece – died 322, Chalcis, Euboea), ancient Greek philosopher and scientist, one of the greatest intellectual figures of Western history. He was the author of a philosophicaland scientific system that became the framework and vehicle for both Christian Scholasticism and medieval Islamic philosophy. Even after the intellectual revolutions of the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment, Aristotelian concepts remained embedded in Western thinking. (Adapted from Amadio, A. and Kenny, A., n.d.) Aristotle’s Moral Philosophy For Aristotle, moral virtues are habits of action that conform to the golden mean, the principle of moderation, and they must be flexible because of differences among people and conditioning factors. Aristotle’s great contribution to ethics can be sourced from three different versions of his moral philosophy: the less well known Eudemian Ethics (Ethica Eudemia), Nicomachean Ethics (Ethika Nikomacheia) his best-known work on ethics, and Great Ethics (Magna Moralia ). The first two works were said to be his notes for lecturing, and the third was presumably the notes of his lectures made by one of his students. The Nicomachean ethics was generally regarded by scholars as the Ethics of Aristotle. The Eudemian ethics and Great Ethics have never been studied by more than a handful of scholars. a. Telos Aristotle believed that everything has a telos (Greek term for end, purpose, or goal) In his teleological view, he raised the question to what end, purpose or goal do different things aim constantly. The philosopher went as far as saying that telos can encompass all forms of human activity (Baggini, 2016). Aristotle explained that the telos of the blacksmith is the production of a sword, while that of the swordsman's, which uses the weapon as a tool, is to kill or incapacitate an enemy (Grayling, 2019). On the other hand, the telos of these occupations are merely part of the purpose of a ruler, who must oversee the direction and well-being of a state (Grayling, 2019). This maybe further illustrated in the way one can say that the telos of education is man’s development; the telos of work is the nourishment and fulfillment of humankind; and the telos of acts of human sexuality in marriage is twofold: procreation and the expression of mutual love and enrichment of the couple. Within this teleological view, there are telos that are subordinate to other telos since all activities have their own particular ends. For Aristotle, these subordinate telos can become the means to achieve more fundamental telos (Baggini, 2016). In arranging things in classes, Aristotle categorized men as “rational animals,” which signifies that their end, purpose or goal is rational. To put it simply, our responsibility is to bring into reality our full potential as rational animals. If we are not fully rational, we are distancing ourselves from our authentic essence. This teleological view gives Aristotle’s Ethics a clear sense of direction. Our goal in life is to achieve our true nature, and this true nature consists essentially of rationality. The purpose of a moral education, then, is to teach us how we may become perfectly rational and immune to the temptations of our lower animalistic parts. (Nicomachean Ethics, n.d.) 85 b. Eudaimonia and arete When Aristotle raised his question, “what is the ultimate purpose of human existence? He believed that an important goal should be to pursue “that which is always desirable in itself and never for the sake of something else” (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018). Aristotle thought that everything has a purpose and, according to that purpose, man must decide whether things are good or bad. He thought that the ultimate end and purpose of mankind is Eudaimonia. Eudaimonia is often translated as happiness, however it was also understood as welfare, flourishing, or well-being. Eudaimonia is believed to be attained through the exercise of virtue, practical wisdom, and rationality. Aristotle claimed that it is innate in man to seek happiness. The nature and purpose of human action tend towards happiness, which Aristotle termed as eudaimonia (Soccio, 2007). Aristotle argued that what distinguishes man from animal is his rationality. He asserted that pleasure alone cannot result in happiness because animals are driven by the pursuit of pleasure and according to Aristotle man has greater capacities than animals (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018). Aristotle’s theorized: the function of man is to live a certain kind of life, and this activity implies a rational principle, and the function of a good man is the good and noble performance of these, and if any action is well performed it is performed in accord with the appropriate excellence: if this is the case, then happiness turns out to be an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue (Aristotle, 2004). For him, happiness is not pleasure, nor is it virtue, rather it is the exercise of virtue (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018). The idea of virtue (arête) is of paramount importance to Aristotle’s philosophy of happiness. Arete fundamentally means "excellence" of any kind but is also understood as "moral virtue”. It is tied to the idea of man living up to his full potential. It expresses a conscious striving towards being the best one can be. Man is excellent when he demonstrates his unique telos or purpose. Since rationality is man’s unique, defining quality, he manifests arete (excellence) if he correctly uses his reason, principally in relation with moral choice. Man’s happiness is the perfection of his essence. His happiness is contingent on the exercise of his reason. The exercise of man’s rationality is the supreme good. Aristotle maintained that in aiming for happiness, the most essential element is to have a complete virtue or good moral character (Pursuit of Happiness, 2008). Happiness involves, through the course of an entire life, choosing the ‘greater good’ not necessarily that which brings immediate, short term pleasure (Pursuit of Happiness, 2008). Every human act must always aim at its proper end. Pleasure, though it has value cannot be considered as the ultimate end or good for which every man must aim. Happiness is not void of pleasures, however, pleasures are an intrinsic effect, not the appropriate aim. Since pleasure is linked to the irrational part of the soul, happiness should not be associated with pleasure. Pleasure, wealth, honor, fame and success are not the goals of life because these would not lead man to eudaimonia (the highest or fullest happiness). The highest and fullest happiness, according to Aristotle, comes from a life of reason and contemplation-not a life of inactivity or imbalance but a rationally ordered life in which intellectual, physical, and social needs are all met under the governance of reason and moderation (Soccio, 2007). Happiness cannot be achieved until the end of one's life, hence it is a goal and not a temporary state. (Pursuit of Happiness, 2008). Man develops virtue or good moral character through habit and practice rather than through instruction and reasoning. By practicing generosity, justice, friendship, honesty, courage, justice, patience, temperance, modesty and other virtues man acquires an honorable and moral character. If man continuously and consistently hones virtuous habits, he will be able to make the right choice when faced with moral challenges. To achieve a virtuous life in the best manner, man must live with the polis (city) or society which Aristotle called a political association. Every man needs a social life. No man would choose to live without others because by nature man is social animal destined to live with others. The goodness or badness of all human acts depends on its effect on others. c. The Golden Mean Aristotle differentiated intellectual virtues from moral virtues. The former are exercised in the process of thinking while the latter are exercised through action. He thought that a moral virtue as a character trait should be practiced habitually. A person who is gentle should be constantly gentle, not just gentle occasionally. For a moral virtue to be deeply-rooted in one’s personality one must keep on exercising it so it becomes habitual. It must be performed without fail or without any doubt or hesitation. Hence, to become genuinely gentle one must keep doing gentleness until gentleness comes naturally and effortlessly and becomes one’s second nature. Aristotle believed that every moral virtue is a mean which rests between two extremes states. The golden mean or golden middle way is the desirable middle between two extremes, one of excess and the other of deficiency (Aristotle, 2004). Moral goodness means a balance between these two extreme vices. However, moral virtue does not lie exactly at the center of two vices. According to Aristotle, any action that is done or indulged excessively or insufficiently would go out of bounds and would become unreasonable and improper to the nature of the human being (Reyes, 1989). The golden mean is some sort of sliding scale or yardstick for deciding what is virtuous. It is concerned with development of good character. Virtue is achieved and preserved by avoiding these two extremes. A person should choose what lies between the two much and the not enough. Every human act that comes from the golden middle way should be ruled by reason, which commands the desires and passion into a balanced whole. Each moral virtue is a kind of moderation as it is directed toward a moderate amount or the mean between two corresponding vices, one of excess and one of deficiency. In his Nicomachean Ethics, he presented some moral virtues: Excess (vice) Mean (virtue) Deficiency (vice) Rashness Courage Cowardice Licentiousness Temperance Insensibility Prodigality Liberality Illiberality Vulgarity Magnificence Pettiness The table of virtues above shows only an approximation and applies differently to different people. It is not designed as a set of exact rules. Aristotle believed that a genuinely virtuous person will have no need of rules because he will consistently act properly. For Aristotle, virtue is an all-or-nothing affair. We cannot pick and choose our virtues: we cannot decide that we will be courageous and temperate but choose not to be magnificent. Nor can we call people properly virtuous if they fail to exhibit all of the virtues. Though Aristotle lists a number of virtues, he sees them all as coming from the same source. A virtuous person is someone who is naturally disposed to exhibit all the virtues, and a naturally virtuous disposition exhibits all the virtues equally (Pedemonte, 2014). Aristotle’s golden mean was not intended as a one-size-fits-all method. The middle way that he advised people to follow is relative. Since it is subjective, what he considered was the mean that is good for a particular person. There is no universal mean or middle way that is applicable to every situation and to every single person. The golden mean or golden middle way is meant to assist a person in living a virtuous life. It requires a long moral training. Moreover, it must be noted that not every action has a middle way. Adultery, spite, envy and such are bad, whether they are done a little or much, just as temperance and courage are forever good (Aristotle, 2004). It is indeed challenging to attain the mean but Aristotle admonished those who are trying hard to achieve it: What is necessary first in aiming at the mean is to avoid that extreme which is the more opposed to the mean. Since of the two extremes one is a more serious error than the other, and since hitting the mean accurately is hard, the second-best thing… is to take the lesser of the evils (Aristotle, 2004). d. Phronesis Aristotle believed that to be virtuous one must find the mean of a virtue, i.e., the desirable middle between two extremes, one of excess and the other of deficiency. Achieving this balance is arduous. To assist a person in his search for the mean he must determine the proper path in a certain situation, and according to Aristotle this requires phronesis. The Greek term phronesis is commonly translated as prudence or practical wisdom. Phronesis is an intellectual virtue rather than a moral virtue because we learn it through instruction and not practice, but it is very closely connected to the moral virtues. Without phronesis, it would be 88 impossible to practice the moral virtues properly. A person who has all the right moral virtues knows what ends to pursue, but without phronesis, that person will not know how to set about pursuing the right ends. Contrary to modern assumptions, Aristotle is telling us that having one’s heart in the right place is not good enough: being a good person requires a kind of practical intelligence as well as a good disposition. (Nicomachean Ethics, n.d.) Phronesis guides man in his deliberate moral choice in order to act rightly. It is of central importance in the formation of virtuous character and in living a good life. Phronesis is not achieved through formal education or training. It is not intellectual value gained by finishing a degree in a school rather it is a moral and intellectual virtue rooted innately in man. Phronesis or the natural ability to form sound judgments and decisions throughout life can be acquired by anybody even without educational background. It is obtained and developed through social interaction and real life experiences. The ability to determine what is worth doing requires constant practice. For Aristotle, “the end of a practice is some ethically worthwhile good that is internal to, and inseparable from, the practice and only exists in the practice itself” (Carr, 2005). Practical wisdom can be acquired through experience. Practical wisdom can be likened to a skill like cooking. One can’t just read a cookbook expect to become a master cook or a chef. One actually has to get into a kitchen and start working with different ingredients to make a particular dish. So it is with practical wisdom. One becomes more and more practically wise the more decisions one makes. Knowledge of the wise things to do is not adequate, one must actually do it to become adept at it through experience. According to Aristotle, practical reasoning is not a methodological, rule-governed skill that can first be taught in theory and then applied in practice (Carr, 2005). It evolves through self-understanding honed by correct reasoning and experience. Phronesis as practical wisdom guides a person to learn and determine the good to be desired and evil to be avoided in order to behave rightly in society. Bradshaw (2009) thought that practical wisdom is the ability to do the right thing, at the right time, for the right reason. Phronesis requires the power to rationally and carefully think of actions which results into desired effects. A person acquires phronesis as he advances to maturity and moves away from rules and subsequently permits him to adjust to a more autonomous, person-centered and virtue-centered morality. Phronesis is the path to true happiness and excellence.