The irrational soul has two aspects:
It is not that the two ideas are a million miles apart, but even Roget would be unlikely to slam them together in his little book of synonyms. Aristotle says that every virtue falls between to extremes which are excesses of qualities that also go to make up that virtue.
So, if you think of courage, for example, it falls between cowardice and foolhardiness. In one case you have an exaggerated regard for your own life despite being seen as a coward and the likely humiliation that will bring and in the other you are too prepared to throw your life away and therefore not giving your life its proper value.
There are bits of this that I found much more annoying this time around than I did when I read it years ago 30 years ago, now — yuck… how did that happen? For instance, I found a lot of his discussions about women particularly annoying this time around. People will tell you that one of the problems with Aristotle and Plato is the fact that they could never conceive of a society in which there were no slaves — but one of the advantages of Plato is that he did think women could, and probably should, be educated.
Aristotle clearly does not — but the point I would really like to make is that he notices when women rule due to their wealth and power, but not when men do the same. Given so many more men rule at all and so many of them rule due to the access their position gives them — it seems an odd thing for someone like Aristotle not to notice.
Because this is quite a practical ethics, he spends a lot of time talking about the sorts of things people ought to have in their lives to make them happy — and this is why so much of the book is devoted to friendship. I think I could mount a case for saying that Aristotle is arguing against having a lover.
Now, I want to end by quoting a longer bit from Book X page Nature's contribution is clearly not in our power, but it can be found in those who are truly fortunate as the result of some divine dispensation. Argument and teaching, presumably, are not powerful in every case, but the soul of the student must be prepared beforehand in its habits, with a view to its enjoying and hating in a noble way, like soil that is to nourish seed.
For if someone were to live by his feelings he would not listen to an argument to dissuade him, nor could he even understand it. How can we persuade a person in a state like this to change his ways?
And, in general, feelings seem to yield not to argument but to force. There must, therefore, somehow be a pre-existing character with some affinity for virtue through its fondness for what is noble and dislike of what is disgraceful. For this reason, their upbringing and pursuits should be regulated by laws, because they will not find them painful once they have become accustomed to them.
Okay, so, he starts off by saying that nature is the main thing to ensure that one is capable of learning — but it is interesting that this alone is not enough.
Nature is essential, but left on its own will not get you very far. The other is teaching, but teaching too may not help unless you have been prepared to hear the lesson — something Gramsci talks about at some length saying working class children need to be given discipline that they are unfamiliar with if they are to have any hope of succeeding in education.
What is stressed here is the development of habits and dispositions and that these are what allows the other two nature and teaching to be given any chance of success.
Rather, even a mangy rabbit caught through the effort of the hunt will be worth more to the hunter than a dozen plump ones handed over without effort at the start of the day.Keywords: Aristotle, eudaimonia, happiness, ethics, normativity, ethical naturalism, function argument Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the .
Subjects Covered in The Nicomachean Ethics. Book I, Chap. Nature of Ethics and methods of studying Ethics. Book I, Chap. Discussion of Happiness and the good as the ends of human life.
Book II, Chap. Discussion of Moral Virtue. Book II, Chap. The Doctrine of the Mean. Book III, Chap. Moral purpose and moral responsibility. Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle Translated by W.
|See a Problem?||But a certain difference is found among ends; some are activities, others are products apart from the activities that produce them. Where there are ends apart from the actions, it is the nature of the products to be better than the activities.|
|Øyvind Rabbås, Eyjólfur K. Emilsson, Hallvard Fossheim, and Miira Tuominen||The Nicomachean Ethics is very often abbreviated "NE", or "EN", and books and chapters are generally referred to by Roman and Arabic numerals, respectively, along with corresponding Bekker numbers.|
|Aristotle's Ethics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)||Though written more than 2, years ago, it offers the modern reader many valuable insights into human needs and conduct.|
|Nicomachean Ethics - Wikipedia||Preliminaries Aristotle wrote two ethical treatises: In any case, these two works cover more or less the same ground:|
D. Ross Batoche Books Kitchener BOOK I 1 Every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly view from the fact that . May 01, · Book VII of the Nicomachean Ethics is identical to Book VI of the Eudemian Ethics; for unknown reasons, the editor of the former decided to include within it both the treatment of pleasure that is unique to that work (X.1–5) and the study that is common to both treatises (VII–14).
The two accounts are broadly similar. Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics Questions and Answers. The Question and Answer section for Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics is a great resource to ask questions, find answers, and discuss the novel. A summary of Book I in Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics.
Learn exactly what happened in this chapter, scene, or section of Nicomachean Ethics and what it means. Perfect for acing essays, tests, and quizzes, as well as for writing lesson plans. An Easier Way to Study Hard. Sponsored.