Aristotle's Doctrine of the Mean
When we consider the questions of how we ought to live our lives, we often seek for some schematic that we can employ to help us categorize actions or qualities as good, bad, or indifferent. Such a means of organization would indeed make it easier to determine what the right thing to do is. Aristotle once attempted to formulate a similar plan. His ethics used a scheme by which characteristics could be measured and the right amount attained. Such an account is known as the doctrine of the mean. Aristotle’s doctrine is meant to illuminate the nature of eudaimonia, which can be briefly defined as succeeding or flourishing, the key to which is arête.
To better understand where ethics fit into
…show more content…
the mean relative to us, this being determined by a rational principle, and by that principle by which the man of practical wisdom would determine it” (Aristotle 106). We see here that virtue not only lies in a mean but is determined by a man with practical wisdom. But what is the mean relative to? Aristotle goes on to say, “Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect” (Aristotle 106). The vice of excess is having too much of a characteristic, the vice of defect is having too little of the same.
Before we venture further it would be most helpful to consider one of Aristotle’s examples to better understand this doctrine. Since ethics is practical, he provides us with individual examples. The first is the virtue of courage. “With regards to fear and confidence courage is the mean” (Aristotle 107). We see that courage, being the mean is the virtue. If one were to have too much he would be foolhardy and rash. One with too little is fearful and cowardly.
This however leads to an interesting question, what does one exceed in or fall short in? Is it that he has too much or too little courage? Some examination will show that this is not possible. It is not possible to have too much of the right amount, or to be too close the mean. This means that there must be something else that one can exceed or fall short of. This is a character trait. For our example, the trait is spirit. Having the right amount of spirit is
Aristotle and Plato both said that there are four "natural virtues": Justice, Prudence, Temperance, and Fortitude. These values are all necessary to achieve human flourishing. Another key part of Aristotle’s ethic is what he referred to as ‘The Golden Mean’. He believed that a virtue can not necessarily be viewed as a virtue when it is used in excess. For example, courage is a virtue, but in excess it becomes rashness, a vice rather than a virtue. Moreover, when there is a lack of a certain virtue, this is also considered a vice. Aristotle's ethic is based primarily on balance. There cannot be too much excess or too little of the virtue. Thus, he said: "The mean [i.e. the balance] is successful and commendable. Virtue then is a state of deliberate moral purpose consisting in a mean that is relative to ourselves, the mean being determined by reason, or as a prudent man would determine it.”
Wealth causes people to ask the question “How much is too much?” Aristotle believed a person could have too much wealth. He believes it is more important to buy leisure time than inanimate objects. Too much wealth leads a person away from happiness according to Aristotle. Honor is something some people have great amounts of, while others have very little. It is good to be honored and respected in life. Some people, such as political leaders and even actors and actresses are honored more than others. Being overly honored can also cause people to be unhappy since most honored people have people who despise and resent them. Aristotle came to the conclusion that it is far better to be honorable than honored. This brings up the final quality of happiness, EXCELLENCE. This quality is key for human’s pursuit of happiness. Aristotle believes in personal happiness and when defining virtue itself, he used the word “excellence.”
the mean relative to us, this being determined by a rational principle… which the man of practical wisdom would determine it.” (Nic.2.6.1107a1-4). Aristotle is saying that each person differs in how they must act to achieve the mean because everybody has their own intermediate through his doctrine of the mean. Bergman’s approach is slightly different as his service-learning idea sparks a response rather than an uninfluenced action. Bergman states that this reaction happens as “the students are expressing disequilibrium or dissonance between what they thought they knew and what they are finding to be true, and their emotional reactions to that dissonance.” (CSL 85). Many of Bergman’s idea are parallel with those of Aristotle’s besides their differences among the initiative action and reaction. Bergman’s reaction idea gives students a source to base their actions off, whereas Aristotle’s belief is that humans should perform an action in the sake of goodness in itself and not that of any other motives. Aristotle’s proactive actions provoke a greater good compared to Bergman’s reactive
“But virtue, like Nature itself, is more accurate and better than any art; virtue therefore will aim at the mean; - I speak of moral virtue, as it’s moral virtue which is concerned with emotions and actions, and it is these which admit of excess and deficiency and the mean. Thus it is possible to go too far, or not go far enough, in respect of fear, courage, desire, anger, pity and pleasure and pain generally, and the excess and the deficiency are alike wrong; but to experience these emotions at the right times and on the right occasions and towards the right person and for the right causes and in the right manner is the mean of the supreme good, which is characteristic of virtue.” (Aristotle)
In this essay we will discuss and analyze Aristotle’s Doctrine of the Mean. This topic area can be found in Book II, page 888, 6—15, through 890, 25. The purpose for Aristotle touching on this subject matter was to discern the states of character which are virtuous from those which are not. By this, I mean he is attempting to categorize which virtues are causal of a human “to be in a good state and to perform their functions well”(888—15). In order to keep this paper orderly and comprehensible, we will work in chronological order through Aristotle’s variety of premises and conclusions which lead to his main idea which is ––––––––––––.
Aristotle’s idea of Virtue Ethics was influenced by his belief that all things and all humans have a purpose (a telos). For him a complete explanation of something has to include its final cause or purpose which essentially is to realise its potential. Virtue Ethics itself is concerned with the characteristics of a person rather than how a person behaves and it is this he outlined in his book Nicomachean Ethics. A ‘’virtue’’ are qualities that lead to a good life e.g. courage and honesty. Aristotle explains for a person to adopt these qualities into their own lives is to maximise their potential to achieve a happy life and he goes
Ethics of virtue is good that which conforms to the Golden Mean (University of Phoenix, 2005). The ethics of virtue
Ethics is the moral criteria that we as human beings have. They are the rules of the game that are supposed to guide us through our decision making in life and how to behave to one another as part of a society. However, there are different perspectives on how this criteria should be used, and when and whom they apply to. I will focus on the three most influential moral theories: virtue ethics, deontology, and utilitarianism. Although there are many great names of philosophers that fall in those theories, I will be discussing Aristotle, Kant, and Mill’s perspective, respectively.
He said was also important to understand the acts performed towards virtue, because it directly related to the character of the resulting morals. Aristotle felt that fear and pain influenced ethics, as people would avoid that which he/she was scared of and/or that would cause pain. He believe friendships to be vital in order to be a good person, and that it required “reciprocal and explicit goodwill”. Aristotle taught that friendships were uncommon, but could be achieved requiring time to build familiarity and trust. He claimed that this perfect virtue must be achieved and maintained for the lifetime.
Aristotle was one of the earliest writers to ground morality in nature, and specifically in human nature. For Aristotle, virtue was an excellence of some sort. According to Aristotle, there are two types of virtues: intellectual virtues and moral virtues. Intellectual virtues are excellences of the mind, such as the ability to understand, reason, and judge well. These traits can be learned from teachers. Moral virtues on the other hand, dispose us to act well. These virtues cannot be taught, and they are learned by repetition. Aristotle’s list of virtues includes courage, temperance, justice, pride, and magnanimity. However Aristotle is probably most well known for his position that virtue is a mean between extremes. For example courage is to be understood as a mean between the two extremes of deficiency and excess. Too little courage is cowardice, and too much is foolhardiness.
Moral virtue is acquired through the habituation of good acts which constantly aim for a mean between excess and deficiency in each circumstance. It is the choice of moral virtue through our acts, which allows us to satisfy a major requirement for happiness. Virtue, for Aristotle is a state in which reason helps us decide to do good acts. This is a part of our natural function as human beings, since reason is our distinguishing characteristic and good is the always the object of “correct reason.” The habituation of good acts, then, is what leads us to states of virtue in our lives. Since action always implies either pleasure or pain, it is our job to maintain the appropriate amount of each in the things that we do.
The previous passage shows then that the appetites or desires of corrupted people should not be taken into account while discussing the moral quality of an individuals’ actions. Aristotle’s definition of mean, which is having certain feelings “at the right times, about the right things, towards the right people, for the right end, and in the right way”, clearly states that there is only one right answer to any moral dilemma faced by an
Aristotle found that there are two kinds of virtues of the soul. First, there are virtues of thought, such as wisdom. Next, there are virtues of character, such as generosity. The main focus of his virtue ethics lies in the virtues of character. Aristotle assumed that these virtues are learned through habit. For example, whereas intellectual virtue may arise from reading a book, the adoption of virtuous character is inherited solely by practice. Therefore, it is through a person's upbringing that moral virtues are cultivated, and it is through the habit of thinking virtuously that one can excel towards happiness.
Virtue is, by definition, the excellent performance of an object’s function (Nic. Ethics, 1097b25-30). A thing’s function is determined by eliminating every ability that isn’t exclusive to what it is to be that thing (Nic. Ethics, 1097b30-1098a5). For example, a
In books one and two of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle lays a foundation for and explains reasoning behind his theory of moral virtue. Aristotle does this to give understanding of what it means to be morally virtuous, and how to achieve it. I believe Aristotle’s theory, in the face of objections regarding the relativity of virtue, is sufficient to achieve an understanding to what it means to be morally virtuous and how to act in a morally virtuous manner.