aristotle final revision

8/3/2019 Aristotle Final Revision

1/9

ARIST OT L E 'S N ICHOMACHE AN ET HICS 1

Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics

(Name)

(University)

(Course)

(Tutor)

(Date)
http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1


2/9


Now the virtues, as we say, are voluntary. For in fact we are

ourselves in a way jointly responsible for our states of character,

and the sort of character we have determines the sort of end we lay

down. Hence the vices will also be voluntary, since the same is

true of them. (EN III, 5, 1114b22-25).

In the Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle has argued that all individuals aspire to achieve

good through their deeds however, their choices are limited by their abilities to decipher between

the apparent good and good deeds. He has also asserted that when passing judgment over an

individuals actions, it is important to consider whether their actions were voluntary, involuntary

or non voluntary. Book III of this text, which is the focus of discussion here refutes assertions

made earlier by Socrates that evil deeds of men are never based on voluntary or contemplated

actions; but result through no intentional fault of any individual. Aristotle has argued that even

when a deed whose outcome is detrimental to an individuals surroundings is committed without

the malafide intent, the individual should still be held liable with limited recourse for pardon on

the grounds of ignorance or any other similar defense. (THESIS STATEMENT)

Aristotle was a disciple of Plato and the last of the great philosophers of Ancient Greece.

Although he wrote many books, very few of these have been preserved till the present age.

Aristotles Nichomachean Ethics was likely dedicated to his son, and is considered a

contradiction of the earlier works of Plato and Socrates. While his predecessors had remained

fixated with looking beyond the obvious and drawing similarities between seemingly disparate
http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1http://www.google.com.ph/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=imD&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&ei=8TC9Toa6DqiciAfl_s3wBA&ved=0CBUQvgUoAA&q=Aristotle%27s+Nichomachean+Ethics&nfpr=1


3/9


and diverse phenomenon in nature, Aristotle may be considered an empiricist who largely relied

on first-hand knowledge and direct observations to build his arguments. Before him, Socrates

had proposed the asymmetry thesis for responsibility which contended that good deeds or virtues

among people are derived from the conscious decisions on their part to do good deeds. But, vices

present among individuals are not voluntary and the bad deeds that an individual may commit

are a result of exogenous factors that force such happenings without the endorsement of that

individual.

In book three of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle refutes Socrates assertion that virtue

is voluntary while vice is involuntary. Instead, he argued that both good and evil deeds of men

may be voluntary or involuntary; hence the underlying virtues should be considered when

passing judgment on deeds, regardless of whether an individuals actions appear intentional or

involuntary (ENIII, 1, 1109b, 30-35). To him, humans are rational animals and, as a

consequence, the main aim of the life of an individual is to realize the full potential of rationality.

It follows that the moral education of humans is essential so that they may be trained to suppress

their animalistic and primal urges in favor of upholding rationality. Aristotle further contends

that all human activity is aimed at attaining happiness. If the actions of any individual are not

aimed at achieving this greater good, he will not feel fulfillment, happiness and satiation, which

are crucial for the well being of all humans (ENIII, 2, 1104b, 10-17).

The philosopher views virtues and vices in a continuum instead of as a separate and

unrelated phenomenon. In other words, Aristotle contends that all virtues have corresponding

vices. For example, patience is a virtuous disposition to anger, as courage is to fear. He further

contends that whether a persons actions are voluntary or involuntary should be gauged in


4/9


context of the motivating factors behind any action. So, if a person ends up falling on anothers

property and damaging it because a third person had pushed him, then the former cannot be held

responsible for damaging the others property as he had no control over the occurrence.

However, Aristotle also gives a converse example where a person commits a crime on the

directives of another who has the power to harm the formers family if he does not comply with

the directives to commit the bad deed. Even though the person has been driven towards vice by

another, Aristotle asserts that since he has the ability to go through with the crime or not, the vice

would be a voluntary act on his part, despite the fact that he is committing it in fear of the harm

that may come to his family if he does not do it.

As another example, consider a person whose actions cause harm to another, without the

formers knowledge of the negative implications of his deed on others. Even though this act

caused harm to another, since that person did not cause anguish to the other on purpose, this vice

cannot be considered a voluntary act. In fact, Aristotles assessment of virtue and vice places

supreme importance on the intentions behind the actions of any individual. The best measure of

moral character is choice, since it is only in cases where an individual has freedom to choose

whether or not to commit an action that the true nature of the individual becomes apparent

(ENIII, 5, 1113b, 25-30). He goes on to elaborate that an individual deliberates over any

intended choice, only when he has the capacity to choose and the outcome is not immediately

clear in terms of its negative and positive repercussions for the individual as well as for others.

While deliberating over the likely effects of any action, a truly virtuous individual will be able to

pick the choice which aims for good, while those with a relatively lower moral standing will only

aim for the apparent good.


5/9


Put simply, Aristotles account of voluntary action is characterized by deliberation which

precedes choice which is aimed at achieving desirable consequences. Deliberation is concerned

with things that happen in a certain way for the most part, but in which the event is obscure, and

with things in which it is indeterminate (ENIII, 3, 1112b, 8-12). To explain the rationale behind

his arguments, Aristotle cites the prevalent practice of that time, whereby legislators frequently

doubled the punishment for any crime, if the accused was drunk at the time when the crime was

committed. Even though such an individual can argue that his drunken state had impaired his

ability to decipher between virtues and vice, he is still liable for his actions because the drunken

state which caused this ignorance, or lack of better judgment, was induced voluntarily by him.

He extends a similar reasoning towards any individual whose vices are a consequence of

a general disregard or lack of care. Although such a person does not mean to cause harm to

others or to commit vice, and since his lifestyle is reckless and unconcerned about the

ramifications of his actions, it is argued that any negative outcome due to his actions are

voluntary. This is because that person has made the conscious choice to lead a lackadaisical life

without much concern for virtue or vice. Aristotle considers such an attitude to be the vice of the

soul. He distinguishes that, similarly, the vice of the body is also only those bad aspects about a

persons physique that could have been better had that person made an active effort to improve

on them (ENIII, 5, 1114a, 24-31). He explains that if a person is blind from birth, that person

will naturally receive pity from others. But a person who loses his vision because of excessive

consumption of intoxicants should and will be looked upon with disdain by others because this

person has brought such a condition upon himself by choosing to continuously harm himself. in

fact we are ourselves in a way jointly responsible for out states of character, and the sort of

character we have determines the sort of end we lay down (ENIII, 5, 1114b, 21-25)


6/9


Aristotle has not provided a conclusive definition of what may constitute moral behavior

or benchmarks to gauge human behavior against. Instead, he has highlighted those cases where a

person should not be held accountable for the repercussions of his actions. While ignorance of

any negative ramifications is considered a defense for vice by Aristotle, its implementation is

limited to those cases where a person can claim that it was not his responsibility to be thoroughly

informed about the likely outcome of the relevant action.

It is interesting to note that Aristotle seems to agree with Socrates to the extent that both

philosophers believe that people always aim to do good and the evil that men do is not a direct

aim of any rational being. However, the difference emerges in Aristotles explanation as to why

people end up committing bad deeds. He believes that those who have a low moral standing, or

have not been educated to the desired level in terms of virtue and conscientiousness, end up

doing things that they consider to be good, but are, in fact, bad. The reason that Aristotle has

stopped short of identifying exactly what constitutes best practices for rational beings is, in part,

his own argument that different people perceive good and evil in different ways ( ENIII, 5,

1114b, 1-5). As a consequence, their decisions and actions are also driven by differing

motivations. So, while those who have attained a high level of moral consciousness are able to

pick the virtuous option from among different choices, those who are not as morally strong are

unable to pick out the good and are, instead, distracted by the apparent good which they falsely

assume to be the best choice from the given alternatives.

In summation, the crux of Aristotles argument is that humans are rational beings who

aspire to achieve the best possible outcome from their actions. However an individuals ability to

recognize and pick the most virtuous alternative depends on his moral stature and this differs


7/9


based on a persons upbringing, knowledge and previous interactions. While the most virtuous

people are able to identify the good, others will only be able to identify the apparent good

which they assume to be the best moral alternative. Moreover, Aristotle has argued that while

individuals cannot be held liable for vices committed in ignorance, this defense only applies

where that individual had no reasonable duty to address such ignorance. The philosopher has

contended that individuals should only be praised or commended for those virtues which they

adopt voluntarily, while those vices that are adopted involuntarily should be overlooked or

pardoned. Aristotles arguments are quite comprehensive and convincing. In fact, his assertion

that judgment over any action should consider the intent and motivation behind that act has

become a basis in meting out justice in modern societies. For this reason, when sentencing a

criminal charged of any crime, judges routinely consider the circumstances surrounding the

crime as well as the influences on the person who has committed it. Moreover, the concept of the

tort law is based on the Aristotelian concept that those charged with providing any public service

or with maintaining control over any process or event have a duty to exercise reasonable care

and, if any negligence of this due care leads harm to any other party, the responsible party or

individual can be held liable for that harm.

However, some aspects of Aristotles writings deserve more scrutiny, given the inherent

contradictions. Firstly, Aristotle has set the tone of his argument by claiming that the most

morally desirable state for a rational being is when they perform virtuous acts as an end in

themselves. So a brave soldier is courageous because he values this virtue. But later on, the

philosopher gives the example of a soldier who displays courage when fighting off the enemy so

that he can save his compatriots. Obviously, the ends in this case are not the achievements of the

virtue of courage. Instead courage is a means that is used to achieve the end of saving the lives of


8/9


ones compatriots. Moving on, Aristotle has also steered clear of any discussion of just how

much free will an individual enjoys and what proportion of ones decisions can be considered to

have been driven by other metaphysical occurrences. However, this omission can be overlooked

since Aristotle is primarily concerned with simply delineating those actions for which individuals

can be held accountable from those actions which can be considered involuntary.


9/9


Resources

Aristotle, and Terence Irwin. Nicomachean Ethics. Indianapolis, Ind. [u.a.:

Hackett, 2006. Print.

aristotle final revision

Documents