A History of Philosophy | 14 Aristotle's Ethics
What this covers
A History of Philosophy | 14 Aristotle's Ethics
Source description (no synthesized summary yet).
This asset isn't compiled yet
You're seeing its claims, ranked. Compile it to build the argument threads, weight them, and check each claim against your library — the full view.
The good for humans is proper functioning or complete life in accordance with reason and virtue, where virtue is simply proper functioning or excellence (arete) in actualizing one's distinctively human potential.
“it follows that the good is proper functioning or as he puts it a complete life in accordance with reason and um in a parallel statement in accordance with virtue because virtue is simply proper functioning”
Proper functioning and virtue are acquired through habit formation, specifically through repeated deliberation and choice: one must repeatedly decide and choose based on reasoned deliberation about ends and means until it becomes a settled mental habit, because one instance of virtuous action does not make one virtuous any more than one day makes a summer.
“well if this is proper functioning uh how do we acquire proper functions how do we actualize this capacity for functioning as humans we have the capacity the potential how is it going to be actualized and and uh here there um develops um Aristotle's emphasis on habit and habit formation because um a settled disposition is um what a recent book called a habit of the heart”
Humans are by nature social or societal beings (in Greek, 'phusai')—this is not a random fact but follows from their essential nature and telos; humans do not function properly in isolation and are only fully human within society, so a solitary individual would be not fully human.
“he defines the human being not only as a rational being but as a social being a societal being uh By Nature we are social beings he says and that what in Translation is um a phrase by Nature in Greek it's just the word fusai one word by nature of course is loaded with significance of all his theology everything in nature has its final cause its tellos its end you see by virtue of its nature its Essence its form by Nature humans are social beings it's of our very essence to be social beings we're not functioning a right except as societal beings we don't function a right in isolation Aristotle could never have written Robinson cruso you see”
Some people suffer from akrasia (weakness of will)—they lack the self-discipline or temperance needed to make deliberate choices and stick by them, and therefore cannot develop virtuous habits through the normal deliberative process; such people, like young children, must be ruled by other people's reason until they develop sufficient self-control.
“he sees that there are some people who are going to have trouble with that because um that sort of habit formation takes self-discipline or if you like self-control the virtue of temperance how do you get Temperance if you don't have it already and it takes Temperance to get Temperance you see the circular problem that they suffer from what he calls accia um weakness of will they don't have the stick to itness the inner resolve to be able to make the decision and stick by it weakness of well so in the case of people then who are unable to rule themselves by reason like young children and others whom he said by Nature should be slaves um they have to be ruled by other people's reason you see”
Pleasure is not an end to be pursued but a byproduct or side effect of actualizing other ends; one may be so preoccupied with evaluating a meal's worth that one fails to enjoy it, whereas pleasure is found in the fulfilling activity itself, not as a primary end in itself.
“his um moral psychology um is um that pleasure is not an end to be pursued it's more of a byproduct a side effect of actualizing certain other ends you see you can be so intent on wondering what you're spending on that delicious meal out is worth it that when it's all over you're not sure you enjoyed it you see now it's in the fulfilling activity as such that the pleasure is found not in the end it's as an end in itself it's a French benefit”
Both government and the arts contribute to the improvement of the soul; Aristotle, following Plato, sees government's function as having to do with the good rather than with power, and defines government in terms of the human telos (end).
“the other two things then that we have to pick up on in this uh this whole business of moral development has to do with the function of um um government in the place of the Arts because um Plato saw both of these as contribut in to the Improvement of the Soul so does Aristotle in fact it's characteristic of political Theory all the way through until we get to people like Maia valy Renaissance that the function of government has to do with the good rather than with power with the good um so Aristotle then looks at government in terms of the human tus you see”
Good tragedy produces catharsis—a purging of emotions, particularly fear and pity, which easily get out of balance and rob us of courage; the emotional release in witnessing tragedy cleanses the emotional life so one is freed from excessive emotions and can live more in accordance with reason.
“a good tragedy must be such as to produce catharsis particularly of the emotions of fear and pity which can so easily get out of balance and robs of our courage you see uh catharsis is a purging of the emotions so that in a good tragedy pity is around Ed fear is aroused and those emotions then are released in the outcome of the tragedy and the emotional life is it is as it were cleansed and we're able to therefore freed from those emotions for a while live a life more in accordance with reason”
Poetry is more scientific than history: history merely narrates particulars and chronicles events, while poetry captures something universal and is therefore closer to science (theoretical thinking about universal principles).
“he finds um poetry which is a form of art uh poetry more scientific than history now that strikes you as an odity because we don't think that way but in his day he saw a hist history is just um narrating particulars chronicling not much more telling stories whereas poetry in as much as it captures something Universal you see is closer to what he calls science which is theoretical thinking thinking in terms of universal principles”
Aristotle's philosophy in every area is theological—there are certain natural ends which represent the proper functioning of things, and developing an ethic requires understanding the human soul and its proper functions: the nutritive function of the vegetative soul, the sensory and conscious functions of the animal soul, and the rational function of the rational soul which distinguishes humans.
“Aristotle's philosophy in every area is theological one that is to say there are certain natural ends which represent the proper functioning of um whatever things we're talking about consequently in order to develop an ethic what Aristotle does is to talk about the human soul and what are its proper functions and that involves distinguishing between the nutritive function for instance of what he calls the vegetative Soul the sensitive sensory functions Consciousness feeling of the animal Soul the rational function of the um rational Soul which of course is the distinguishing thing that differentiates the human species among all other things”
Virtue has to do with the whole life including both outward behavior and inner disposition, motivation, intention, and attitude; a virtuous person has inner direction rather than simply responding to external stimuli, and this inner functioning disposes one to proper external functioning.
“keep in mind then that virtue has to do with um the whole life both the outward Behaviour and the inner disposition motivation intention attitude in fact um in talking of virtue the usual way is to talk of Virtues as moral dispositions um a disposition is what disposes you to certain kinds of behaviors you see so it it's the the in functioning which disposes one uh to proper external functioning uh in in other words a virtuous person is inner directed rather than simply responding to external stimuli in aired out of the well out of the heart um the New Testament phrases in a directed”
A just society is one that is rationally ordered for the common good; the good of the individual is properly ordered toward the common good, just as a virtuous individual's emotions are properly ordered; the state writ large is analogous to the human being in miniature.
“what is a just Society a just Society is one which is rationally ordered for the common good which is rationally ordered for the common good yeah what is a good individual one whose emotions are properly ordered for the common good I mean for his good for the good so the state in that sense is the individual at large has to be properly ordered for the common good”
Pleasure is not the same as happiness (eudaimonia); pleasure is an emotion or feeling that may be had in excess or deficiency, is intermittent and contingent on external events, and comes in many kinds of varying moral worth, so pleasure cannot be the highest good if pleasures are evaluated by some other standard.
“what is the place of pleasure in the moral life and he addresses that in a couple of places in his nicam Marian ethics um he's explicit that um pleasure is not the same as happiness happiness of course is proper functioning well-being uh pleasure is more of an emotion a Feeling you see which might be had in excess or in deficiency towards the wrong things at the wrong time and so on and so forth um the trouble with Pleasures are that they are intermittent they're contingent on external events largely beyond their control there are many different kinds of Pleasures uh that are are of various moral worth so pleasure cannot be the highest good if we evaluate Pleasures by some other standard if Pleasures are of varing moral worth uh after all there is pleasure in going out on the town and there is pleasure in Reading Aristotle the two things are a varying moral worth”
For Socrates and Plato, knowing the good may appear to guarantee doing the good, but this is not the complete story: there are moral prerequisites for knowledge (you must develop self-control and courage before you're ready to learn dialectic needed for knowing eternal truth), and even with knowledge, the wayward passions (like Plato's wayward horse) can upset the chariot and cause one to fail to do the good.
“if you read Plato's Republic as of course you're going to aren't you one of these rainy days um as you read Plato's Republic um where you you find he's um talking about Preparing People to rule with reason preparing philosopher Kings wise people rule by reason um it turns out that there are moral prerequisites for knowledge now if there are moral prerequisites for no knowing how can knowing be the thing which makes doing the good possible do you get it um it's not until you have learned self-control and gained courage that you're ready to learn dialectic which is necessary for knowing Eternal truth you see so there are emotional and moral prerequisites for being able to know you see um now does that mean that if you know the good you automatically do the good well not if you take the fadus myth seriously you can be soaring a loft with your chariot and the Wayward horse can upset the whole Contraption and you flub it you don't do the good you see”
Deliberation seeks the mean (the golden mean) between extremes: a virtue represents the proper functioning of some aspect of the human soul, and proper functioning occurs neither in excess nor in deficiency but in balance—hitting the rational mean that properly orders the emotional life.
“the deliberation is such that um we seek a mean between the ex between extremes that is to say um if a virtue is a proper functioning of some aspect of the human soul some aspect of Personality then a given personality characteristic personality trait uh might be in excess too much out of balance that way or might be in deficiency too little so what you want is that um Quality of Life uh that is neither in excess nor in deficiency but hits the mean the rational mean the balance so the role of deliberation is to find the balance”
Aristotle's approach to political theory differs from Plato's: Plato, seeking a transcendent ideal that exists only in the heaven of the forms, found all existing political forms unsuitable and proposed a single ideal form (philosopher kings); Aristotle, holding that forms exist only in particulars and can be imperfectly actualized in various ways, is open to alternative political constitutions.
“the parallel to Plato begins to Peter out because you recall that um Plato repudiated existing forms of government as unsuited unjust unstable um aristocracy democracy tyranny oligarchy none of them work he therefore set up one and only one kind of political ideal under the rule of philosopher Kings you see now now that I suspect is because Plato's ideal was an ideal that exists only in the transcendant heaven of Plato's forms yes see uh for Aristotle um the forms only exist in the world of particulars particulars imperfectly actualize the forms so there might be various competing imperfect actualizations of the ideal state State you get it so Aristotle's open to Alternative political constitutions alternative kinds of things”
Aristotle is less concerned with finding the ideal structure of a just society and more concerned with proper functioning within any kind of society: the family, education, economic institutions like slavery and exchange; he focuses on proper functioning toward the common good across these domains.
“he's not interested in what would be the ideal structure of a just Society he's rather concerned about the proper functioning within any kind of society of family of Education of um The Economic Institutions like um in his day slavery and exchange things of that sort um proper functioning in terms of the common good”
Because Aristotle's conception of the good is a complete life in accordance with reason, the education he advocates is liberal education—touching all areas of life rather than specialized or vocational training.
“in as much as his conception of the good is for a complete life in accordance with reason the kind of education he wants is what we would call a liberal education for a complete life in accordance with reason you see touching all areas of life”
Art is representational—it imitates life, characters, emotions, and actions—not imitation of transcendent forms as Plato held; through particular representations, art helps audiences see the universal and say 'aren't we all like that,' capturing something universal within particulars.
“for Plato you see um art should imitate the form the Transcendent form so Arts that imitate particulars individuals even individuals like Socrates are twice removed from reality because the individual is just it himself a copy of the form um but as far as Aristotle concerned art is not imitation of form but uh IM ation of life or is it's um often translated and to distinguish it from Plato this term is good um art as representational yes but representation of Life of characters their emotions fancy imitating their emotions representing their emotions that's the very thing Plato warned against in giving of public readings and recitations imitating other people's emotions you see a representation of characters their emotions their actions because you can only see the universal within the kind of particular you see and so art helps you then to uh to bring into to focus that cumulative experience so that you say of a character well um represented yes aren't we all like that aren't we all like that you see”
Aristotle has not lost the transcendent moral imperative that Plato had; rather, he is not a pragmatist (where morality is instrumental for temporary objectives with no intrinsic good), but maintains that living a complete life in accordance with reason and virtue is intrinsically good.
“pragmatism is the view that um we um we regard moral beliefs and values as simply instruments for achieving uh temporary objectives um uh for pragmatism it's always short range objectives um that we're after um rather than anything any overall good do is insistent there is no intrinsic good everything is instrumental now that's not Aristotle for Aristotle there is intrinsic good you see functioning properly as a human being is intrinsically good you see his notion of the highest good the Supreme good is first that it must be intrinsically good not just instrumental”
Aristotle maintains ethical absolutism without transcendent Platonic forms: the good (living a complete life in accordance with reason and virtue, pursuing the virtues) is absolutely what one ought to do because even though forms are within particulars rather than transcendent, forms are still universal principles, and universals (not transcendence) are what ground ethical absolutism.
“what is absolutely good you see is living a complete life in accordance with reason with virtue you see the virtues are good you ought to pursue the virtues it is unequivocal about that um why because even though the forms are within particulars the forms are still Universal principles you see you don't have to have transcendant universals to have universals as long as you have universals see the the opposite of what is relative is what is universal you see Aristotle has that now if what you're saying is oh but he doesn't give us a whole set of absolute rules to live by no but he gives us absolute virtues to embody”
Aristotle's entire political theory, aesthetics, ethics, and educational theory tend to follow from his underlying metaphysics; understanding how he gets straight the metaphysics explains how his epistemology follows and then how political thought, aesthetics, ethics, and educational theory flow from these foundations.
“the way in which his underlying metaphysic produces the results you remember the diagram we um played with with Plato get straight the metaphysics the epistemology is of course a corollary of that how you know depends on what it is you're talking about knowing you see and from that uh political thought Aesthetics ethics educational theory and everything else uh tends to follow and Aristotle is another of these classic cases”
The vegetative soul's proper functioning has physical health as its end; the animal soul's sensory and emotional functions achieve proper functioning (moral virtues) when appetites, desires, and emotions are in balance; the rational soul achieves proper functioning through intellectual virtues, which include practical wisdom and contemplative wisdom.
“if we're talking of the vegetative Soul vegetative life okay there the uh basic functions are nutrition and reproduction and good functioning in uh those regards have as their end physical health okay physical health is the good now on the other hand uh there is the um animal soul and in this regard his attention is particularly on the sensitive sensory functions that is to say particularly conscious feelings emotions appetites the itive Dimension and um it's the proper functioning here um produces what he labels as the moral virtues moral virtues in which the appetites the desires and emotions are in Balance you see well of course you have as well the rational soul with its functions of thought and speech doing art and here what um you want as proper functions is the intellectual virtues virtues of intellect and the virtues of intellect he distinguishes to one is practical reason uh I take it back um practical wisdom and the other is contemplative wisdom”
Proper emotional functioning requires feeling emotions at the right times, with reference to the right objects, towards the right people, with the right motive, and in the right way—for example, anger should be felt appropriately, hunger should arise at appropriate times with proper direction, illustrating how the mean applies to the emotional life.
“the sensitive life feelings appetites they those feelings may be felt too much or too little excess deficiency what we need is rather to feel uh whatever we do desire at the right times with reference to the right objects towards the right people with the right motive and in the right way now that's balance you'll see and that's what you're looking for in deliberation to feel for instance anger at the right time with reference to the right objects towards the right people with the right motive and in the right way okay okay to feel um hungry to feel hungry to feel hunger to be driven by it at right times with so on and so on and so forth”
Aristotle's ethic is teleological (end-oriented) rather than rule-oriented: one must be end-oriented primarily; ethics is not about following a set of absolute rules (a concern of 18th century theory) but about pursuing ultimate ends and the virtues that achieve them.
“if an ethic is a teleological ethic you have to be end oriented primarily you see frankly I think that's where a Biblical ethic is I think it's end oriented you see um you know biblical morality talks of christlikeness as the goal you say yeah but the Ten Commandments yes uh indeed but the essence is Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and soul and strength and thy neighbor as thyself you see that's what they're about they're simply saying what that love means when applied to living a complete life yes see it means you'll pursue God's purposes in those various areas of of moral responsibility”
Plato is not talking about detached, value-free knowledge when he says knowing the good enables doing it; rather, he means a knowledge that involves loving the truth, and if one really loves the truth, one will do what it requires—but not in the sense of detached objective impersonal awareness.
“Plato isn't talking about a kind of knowledge which is detached and value free he's talking about loving the truth remember and it may be that if you really love the truth you'll do what it requires but not knowing in the sense of detached objective impersonal awareness uh”
Much contemporary political thinking in the United States is more Platonic than Aristotelian: it tends to assume there is only one possible form of just society (the American form) rather than recognizing there might be a variety of viable alternatives.
“it seems to me that a lot of our thinking in this country about politics is more platonic than it is Aristotelian in the sense that we tend to think there is only one possible form of a just Society namely one just like the American um rather than recognizing there might be a variety of viable Alternatives you see”
Aristotle has a transcendent being (God) and ties the good to the ordered unity which God's very being maintains and upholds; the highest contemplation is contemplation of the one who unceasingly contemplates his own contemplating (God), though Aristotle pursues this without going to the otherworldly direction that later mysticism does.
“does he have any Transcendent being yes he's God and so the good is ultimately tied to the kind of ordered Unity which the very being of God um maintains upholds I didn't mention perhaps I should have done that when he's talking of contemplative wisdom um the highest contemplation is contemplation of the one who unceasingly contemplates his own contemplating you contemplating God in that sense so he has that platonic note but without going to the otherworldly direction that later mysticism goes to that Plato didn't but later mysticism does”
Specific virtues exemplify the mean: courage is the mean between cowardice (deficiency) and foolhardiness (excess); generosity (the virtue of giving) is the mean between miserliness/stinginess (deficiency) and profligacy/prodigality (excess of throwing money around unwisely).
“all the various virtues that he talks about the virtue of Courage for instance um the excess of that kind of characteristic would be fool hardiness deficiency cowardice the virtue of generosity you know a giving attitude towards people the ex the deficiency would be misin stinginess the excess pracy throwing it around unwisely”
The concept of balance and proportion as the rational and just—the proper order of things—extends back to Presocratic philosophy, showing that Aristotle's doctrine of the mean is not novel but rather a classical return to a fundamental insight.
“remember that way back to the presocratic the notion of what is rational what is just what is the proper order of things is always in terms of balance and proportion balance in proportion okay so um he he develops it in that direction”
Students often wrongly conclude Aristotle is a relativist because he talks of finding the golden mean rather than pinpointing exactly what one ought to do; but 'find the golden mean' is precisely pinpointing what one ought to do—use the gifts God has given you and make up your own mind in light of all the input you have.
“I sometimes find that um in an introductory class where you know we have a one-day shot on Aristotle um introductory students will often say um oh Aristotle is a relativist you see um I how do they get to that conclusion well because he talks of finding the golden mean rather than pinpointing exactly what you ought to do you see but to say find the golden mean is pinpointing exactly what you ought to do namely um translating it into Christian language use the gifts that God has given you and make up your own mind in the light of all the input you got”