Hughes Chapter 1+2

8/8/2019 Hughes Chapter 1+2

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/hughes-chapter-12 1/10

Note on the text

For hesakeof havingone standard ystemwhich all scholars se,refeLenceso any work of Aristotleare alwaysgivenaccordingo the.oage.olumnand ine n Bekker'sBerlinEditionof 1831. his editionilas th€ greatadvantagehat eachreferences quite unique.Thus,ll4?bl0 refers o line l0 of the second olumnon page l47 oftsekker. venwith no mentionof the itle of the work,this s unam-biruouslya referenceo theNicomachaean rics, Book VII, chapterl. In this book I have giventhe standard eferences,ut havealsoinciudedhe Bookand chapter f theEthicsas an additional elp oPiacine refelencen its context.

The mnsiations €reare my own. But since t is alwaysusefullc compare ifferent ranslations f any ancientauthor, he readernight $ sh to consult he other ranslations ivenat the startof theBibliography. o make be sense learer haveoccasionallynsertedrn square mckets wordwhichdoesnot occur n the Greek, utcanbededuced

rotn hecontext.

t

s.

Chapter 1

Aristotle's life

and work

An outline of his life and times

Aristotle ameo Athensn 367 BcE at the ageof 17,

to go to university.University' in this casemeant

the Academy,he philosophical chool oundedbythegeat Plato,who himselfhad beena discipleof

Socrates.thenswas /re ultural entle fthe Mediter-

ranean,nd ts citizenswouldhavehad wo reasonsor

not being immediately mpressedby the young

fuistotle.He came rom the far north of Greece,rom

the ity of Stagiran Macedonia; countryboy, hen,

doubtlessacking n cultural efirement. n this, the

Athenianrejudice ould havebeenmisleading. oth

Aristotle's arents ame rom familieswith a long

tradition fthepractice fmedicine, ndhis atherwas

court hysiciano King AmyntasII ofMacedon.Court

circlesn Macedon erenot uncivilized, nd he valuefteyplaced poneducations demonstratedy thevery

fact of their sendingAristotle to Ath€ns. There was,

however, secondeasonAthenianswould havehad

for not welcomingAristotlewith wholly openarms.



ARISTOTLE'S LIFE AND WORK

He llas connectedwith the royal family of Macedon,and Macedon

had military arnbitions. AmyntasJs son Philip II embarked on a pro-

grannreof mil i taristexpansion hich, much o the esentmentfmany

i-. lominent thenians,ed to hi s domination vermuch of Greece, nd

evenlually to th€ subjugation of Athens itseli

Still. for twenty years Aristotle remained at the Academy,

stud)-ing,debaring, writing and teaching. Unfortunately, most of his

ivrirings from that time have been lost, and we are able to do iittle

inore han make educatedguesses boutprecisely what he studied,and

,,r,here is own interests ay. But as those years went by, thepolitical

situat iorbroughtabout by the policiesof Phil ip of Macedon apidJy

worsened.and the climate in Athens becamemore and more nervous

and host i le.Against hi s background, ristot le,whose egal statusn

Athenswas batofa resident l ien, ound himselfregarded it h suspF

ciorr.Final ly he c si s came.Phil ip batteredhe city ofOlynthus,on e

of Athens's loseall ies, nto submission; nd ,a few months ater, n

j,17,Platodied.

Aristot le was thus doubly isolated.Speusippus, nephewof

Plato. ook over as head of the Academy. Would Aristotle havehoped

thathe himselfmight have got the ob ? Did his not gett ing t depend

upon the fact that Speusippuswas a relative of Plato, or on the fact

t l 'rato appointAristot lewould havebeen mpossiblen th eprevail ingpcli t icalcl i :nate?Or was t perhapsha tAristot le'sow n philosophical

rieu's r.veLe y this time somewhat out of tune with the prevailing

tone in the Academy? Whatever the academic reasons may hav€

bccn.A.ristot lehought t prudent, special ly iven he host i lepoli t ical

si i i rat ion.c leaveAthensand he Academy.He went o join a group

of Platonists at Assos, a city on the north Aegean coast of what is

nori Turke],. The local monarch, Hermias, was himself interestedn

phiiosophy. nd he philosophers ncoumged im to fulf i l the Platonic

ideal of becoming a philosopher-king. Aristotle was later to write a

irl,rnn amenting his untimely death (he was murdered) and praising

hi s ersonal quali t ies fo r which he wil l be raisedby the Muses o

inmonali t-r, '.Before that, though, Aristotle had himself manied Pythias,and

ihcy lrere again on the move. Philip II invited him to retum to

\ lrcedonia to become utor o his son Alexander. lexanderaterwa s

to become nown as 'the Great' becauseof his amaztng conquests

whichextendedhe MacedonianEmpire acrosswhat is now Ti:rkey'

Eg)?t, much of WesternAsia, and on into India PerhapsAristotle

hopid to in"ulcat" Plato's ideals n the young heir to the throne' but

in the light of the brutality of some of Alexander's campaigning

tactics, ie may wonderjust how completeAristotle's influenceon his

!

:I

;:..

irI

pupllwas.Alexandereft for his campaignsn the east, rd Aristotleonce

againetumedo Athens,n 334,under he protection f Antipater'

,f,. r.g.n,whom Alexanderhad appointed, nd who was one of

Aristotle'slosestriends.At somepoint duringhis time in Mace-

donia, ristotle's aughter,alledPythias fterher mother'wasbom'

but, ragically,iswiie died,perhapsn childbirth' t wasprobablyo

hap i-ttt oot<ingter his nfantdaughterhat'A'ristotleithermanied'

or ived with (the ancientsources iffer on the point)' Herpyllis

Whateveris egal elationship ith herwas, n his will Aristotlewas

to speak arml!of her devotiono him, and o makecarefulprovi

siono, he,support. healsobecameherrotherof his second hild'

0risimea sonwhomhe calledNicomachus'

Uponhis anival back in Athens,Aristotlefoundedhis own

philosophicatchooln a publicexercise arkcalled he LyceumThe

,tudant,h"r" became nownasperiPatetics'iom thet customof

walking p anddown in Greek,Peripatein) s hey discussedheir

ptrllosoiptricatesearches.ere n his LyceumAristotle aughtand

p*ru"dhi, o*n researchappily or thenexteleven ears t was he

most roductiveeriodof his ife, and he ime of his mostenduring

achievements.nce gain,hough, oliticaldisaster truckAlexander

died uddenly t the youngage of 32 The Athenians t oncesaw

their hanceo rid themsel-v;sfthe Macedonianegent'n a waveof

anti-Macedonianeeling, hey chargedAristotlewith'impiety" the

same atch-all ffencewhich had led to Socrates's xecutronwo

generationsarlier.OnceagainAristotlehad o leave, emarking't is

iuia, nutn" did so'lest the Athenians ommita second in against

philosophy'.e suwivedonly a year n exile,anddiedatthe ageof

nt- \n Jzt,



as the) \\'ere,and why they behaved as they behaved. Aristotle was

convinced hat the explanations were to be found not in some super-

sensibleworld of Platonic Forms, but in the intemal organization of

tle organisms tbemselves. Their patteros of growth, development

and behaliour were directedby an inbuilt purposiveness, ifferent for

eachspecies, he nature of which could be called the 'form' of that

orsanism.and could be discoveredby patient study and inquiry.

i\'loregeneraliv, perhaps he nature of every kind of thing could be

drscoveredn a similar way. This quest or the natures f things -

for thep/rasrsof each kind of thing - is what Aristotle called Pilsics;

and the further underlying truths about explanation in general,uponri hich such nquiries ultimately rested, were what he discussed n his

.\.1etahtsics.3

Here, hen, is the original contriburion which Aristotle believed

he could make towardshandling he questionsha t Platohad raised.

lnstead f looking to an abstmctdiscipl inesuch as mathematicso

provide he ultimate explanation of things, as did the Platonists n the

Academ).,, stotle proposed o study in detail the world around him,

and o dealwith tbe philosophical implicationsof that study n an inte-

grated r'a-v.W}tat,he asks,must be the fundamentalcharacteristics f

a iuorld if inquiry into the naturesof things n that world is to be

possible t al l? Like Plato, hen,Aristot leseeks o know the ult imate

explanaiionsfthings; unl ike Plato,he hinks hatquestions bout lti-

mate explanations must arise out of, rather than dispense with,

rurun,Janeuestionsabout how we are to explain the shapes nd move-

ments and growth of animals, and the regular behaviour of the

inanirnatepads of nature. ln particular, looking at how the different

speciesof organisms are by nafure impelled to pursue what is good

for them, rve can begin to see how values are central o the behaviour

of iiving things. Once we learn to look at ourselvesas animals, and to

understandhow animals function, we can begin to glimpse how

biolocy,with its nbuil t values, an n the case fthinking animals ike

ouriel\ 'es eadon to ethics.

'i'vleta-Ph)rsicsrobabJyelers o an nquirywhich.ofiesaJTermeton Greek)tle direct nquiry nto the natures f things,when he nquirer eeshardeeperoue\rior,snust edealtwith.

Aristotle would have thought it astonishing f thinking animals

like ourselves ad no way of expressing o themselveswhat was good

for them. So, at many points n the Ethics, he startsby considering

what people usually or frequently think about va ous questrons

connected ith norality, on the assumptionhat heir views must either

be right or at least contain some considemblekemel of truth which

would explain why people hold them. But is this assumptiona reason-

able one to make? Might an entire society not be blind to the rights

of women, or accept acist beliefs quite uncritically? Quite in general,

doesAristotle's method not amount to little more than repeating he

prejuilices nd unquestioned ssumptions fhis own culture?Aristotlemight reply to this that he has no intention of merely repeating the

views of the ordinary person,nor of the wise, without criticizing and

assessinghem. If one asks how this criticism is to proceed'Aristotle

would reply that a good first stepwould be to bring into the open any

hidden nconsistenciesn common beliefs, and try to sort those out'

But, he cdtic might press he point, even f that results n a coherent

account,mere coherencedoesn't guarantee nl&. A person might be

consistently ucist or sexist and still be simply mistaken' surely?

Aristotlemight reply to this that even f it is comparativelyeasy o be

consistentwithin a limited area of one's beliefs (say, about the rights

of women), t is much harder o be consistentacrossa wide spectrum

of one'sbeliefs. One would have to integrateethics and psychology,

physiology, sociology and the rest; and once one t es to do this' at

somepoint the hidden inconsistencieswill reappear.Achieving an

overall fit' betweenone's experienceand one's beliefs is not at all

easy;and when it has been achieved, hat is as close as one is ever

likely to come to the truth. This is a very complex issue,and we shall

have o see as we go along whether Aristotle's method seems ikely

to deliver what he is looking for.

For the moment, at least, this much can be said. Like Plato,

Aristotle s concemed o get behindwhat peoplemight happen o thint

in order to assessheir views, to examine heir foundationsand their

justification.Like Plato, Aristotle is concemedwith how individuals

ought o live, and how they ought to contribute o their communities.

He. oo. is concernedwith the natureofmoral virtues, ustice, personal

resoonsibilitv nd moral weakness.Like Plato,he believes hat ethics



AItI:TOTL€'S LIFT ANO WORK

r'nust e rooted n a view of the humansoul.But unlike Plato,his

conception f whata soul s derivesn the irst nstanceiom biology,

ratherhan rom religiousviewsabout he ncamation nd eincama-

ricn of a disembodiedrue self And this difference as profound

irnlrlicationsor morality.

Chapter 2

Style, structure

and aim of

the Ethics

The Nicomachaean thics

TheNicomachaeant}ics is so calledeitherbecause

Aristotle edicatedhework o hisyoung on,or, more

probably, ecauset was Nicomachus imself who

editedhe work andgave t its final form someyears

afterhis father'sdeath.Aristotlealsowrote another

book n moralphilosophy,heEudemian lhics,whichfor the purposes f our present tudywe may leave

to one side.l I shall here be dealing ust with the

Nicomachaeanthics, nd or convenienceshall efer

to it simplyas the Ethicswhen here s no danger f

confusion.We know that Aristotlewrote stylishdialogues

and therworksonphilosophyntendedor thegeneral

rNot only are there the two works: to complicate matters

further, hree of the eight books of the EudemianEthics arc

identicalwith three of the ten books of the Nicomochaean

Et ics. The more widcly held view is that he EudemianEthicswaswritten irst. How to explain he duplicatebooks?Perhaps

lhrecof the books were losl from one of the two works, and

were eplacedby the threep3rallel books rom the other work

(whichprobably w^s the Eudemian trl.J). However, here s



>TYtE, STRUCTURE ANO AIM OF THE ETH'CS

l rubl ic.Unfonunately, nly some fragments f thesehave survived,.

and n any case most of theseprobably date fi'om Aristotle's first stay

in Athenswhen he was working in Plato'sAcademy.The surviving

\rorl(s. in contrast,were not intended for the wider public, and most

of them could not be described as polished literary creations.More

probably. hey contain Aristotle's own notes or lectureshe was giving,

0i topics he was working on. The Ethics most likely dates from the

pcriodafterAristot ieha dretumed o Athensand ounded he Lyceum.

Likc er erlthing else we have from this period, in some places theri,riting is extremely condensed,and would, presumably, have been

er1-.iaincd ore at length in the course of the lecture. In other places,

th esiyie s moreelaborate nd he ext couldhavebeendeliveredmore

oi less s t stands. herear ealsosome nconsistencies.id heperhaps

revise vhathe wanted to say iD some places,but did not get round to

making the conesponding corrections elsewhere? Altematively, it

rright u'ell be that Nicomachus or some ater editor was responsible

lbr alTalrgingwhatevernraterialshad come down to him from Aristotle,

and itredsomebis in as besthe could. vhat ha scomedown o us s

rt leasi ro solrle extent a record of work in progress,and we should

fead t in fiat spirit. lt should encourageus to think about the prob-

lrrrrs as Aristotle hinself was thinking about them. Rather han beingrjaunrrC y a greatman's f inisheddefinit ivework, we might perhaps

thiLrk f th e questjons e night put to a lecturer, r the contribut ions

ri c rri3ht tr1 to rnake o a seminar.-l l rc Ctirics will strike the modem rcader as, i f not exact ly

chaolic. rt cnst athcr ooselywrit ten.Fo r a start , he radit ional ivi-

. ron nto Books'and'chapters ' is lmost erta in ly ot Al istot le 's, nd

$e shouldnot al low it to distEct us.?Sonte opics un over from one

book to anotlrer as fo r example, riendshipstraddles he divrsion

no lgrec-llrentbouthe relative atingof the wo works.Thequestionumson

oncs estinratef thesignificancefthe differencesetweenhe wo woiks,and

\rlrich s moreplausiblyegardedsa revision f theother.A powerful asc or

qucslioninghe comnonview that he Eudemiah thicswas written irst has

bernput by AnthonyKenny09781ihis funher eflectionsr€ o be found n

Kcnnyl992l,Appendix.

I1hilshccn uggesledhata Bookconsistedf theamount ftext whichwould

l ir onro singleol l of papyrus.

l0

STYLE,5TRUCTURE AN D AI M OF THE ETHi C5

betweenooksVIII and X, and hemoralvirtues re reatedn Books

ll and V andV). Within a singlebook, oo, successivehapters ften

seemo hop from onetopic to another lmostwithoutwaming'To

some xtent his is the resultof the editing,but it alsoreflects he

nature fethicsasasubject,omprising s t does everalssues hich

are ooselyelatedo oneanotheratherhan ightly nterlockingStill,

we should ot exaggerate. hethert is Aristotle'sor that of a later

editor,here s at east ome tructure,ndan ntelligible equencef

topics, long he ollowing ines:

I Whatdo we aim at in life? what is it that would make

livingworthwhile? worthwhileife mustsurely nvolve

developing ur specifically umancharacteristicso the

full. How couldwe find out what hoseare?Upon eflec-

tion,we cansee hatwhat smo$ characteristicallyuman

aboutounelves s the way in which thoughtcoloursall

our ives not ust our ntellectual ursuits, ut alsoour

feelings ndemotions, ur choices nd elationships'

II So rve startby consideringhe ways in which thought

influenceshose mits of characterwhich contribute o

living a wonhwhile, ulfllledife. What are hese raits?

How dowe come o possesshcm?And howdo ourchar-

actcrsn turn nfluencehechoices hichwe make n life'

and or whichwe areheld esponsible?

III We need o thinli aboutchoiceand esponsibilifyn more

detail.Are we responsibleor all our behaviour, ndalso

for thecharacter e havedeveloped?

Wc canuse he examplesf individual irtues o illustratehese

points,.,

Miscussion of severalmoreexamples f virtue'

V Thevirtue fjustice which s notquite ike heothers)'

Vl Livinga wonhwhileife requiresot only ha twe havewell-roundedndbalancedharacter,utalso hatwe have

dcvelopcdhe intellectual kills neededo gmsPwhich

choiceswe necd o makeas we go along What s i t to

havea goodmoral udgement?

l1



i . IYt '. S- RUiTURE AN D A]M OF TH E EIHlC5

Vll Horv ca n people esponsiblymake wrong choices? he

connectionbetweengood and bad choicesand virtues and

vices. Pleasureas a possible sourceof temptation

VII! The preceding topics might give the impression that a

wortlrwhile huuran life fright be lived entirely on one's

own. On the contrary humans are naturally inclined

towatds various kinds of friendsltip'

lX N4oreou iiiendship: its justification and its importance'

X Pleasure gain; or surely a worthwhile life must somehow

be fulfiliing and enjoyable? This leads on to a final

discussionof the ingredientsof fulfilled life' both for the

individual. and for the individual as a member ot a com-

n.runity.

So Aristot le's rain of thoughtgoes more or less ik e this: To

lire a ful l i l led l i fe, we need to be guided by errot ionswhich ar e

balrnced, nd by habltsof thoughtwhich enable s o seewhat s and

;s not relevanto our decisions' nd why. In developinghese alanced

rntot ionsan d discemingchoices,we ar e presumably ct ingrespon-

lriblvi so \\ 'e need to know u'hat we can properly be said to be

rcs1. 'tonsibleor . (Digression ere, o eiaborate n th evarious xamples

ol Lralancednd unbalanced csponses hich can be fitted nt o th e

ibor c schenre.) ow much of the foregoingdepends n the notionof

ir disceming hoice: owe need o discuss ow suchchoices remade'

rundwhat kinds of knowledge he y presupposeAgain, obviously

cnough, coplear eotienheld responsibleor wrongchoicesBu t ho w

..n *,n"on. knowingly do what they know they should not do? At

Ihis point.something f a leap:we havediscussedhe quali t ies fthe

gooj indi"ldual,bu t what of th e individual 's elat ionshipso others?

\ ihi Lrother ith such elat ionships,nd ho w do they contributeo a

l ir l f i l led if e fo r rte? Whenwe haveansweredhosequestlons' e can

try to sultl up. Ethics has o say somethingabout the fulfilled life' and

about be kind of communityin rvhich persons eadingsuch a life

nrighthope o funct ionbest. us ta sketchof this as tpoint here'since

aftef the Erllcs conles tlle PoliticJ.

STYLE, STRUCTURE AN D AI M OF TH E ETHlC5

Aristotle's aim in writing the Ethics

Plato'smostambitious ork onmoralitywashisRepablic t included

notsimplydiscussionsbout owan ndividual houldive' but'much

ror. urntitloutty,ntegnted hat view into a comprehensiveicture

of he deal tatePersonal orality,good itizenship' nd hebestway

to organize state ll fit together. ristotle's im n writing heErhics

urndih"Politiurvasno diiferent.He hoped o providean account f

how he goodperson hould ive, and how societyshouldbe struc-

ruredn o'rdero makesuch ivespossibleAdstotledid not believethatall thatwasneededor moraleducation as o give people true

understandingf whatwas goodand nobleandmorallyworthwhile'

Understandirigs not enoughwithoutmotivation'which knowledge

ulon..unnotrouide.SoAristotlesets ut o give anaccount f moral

training s*ell us moral heory.A detailed iscussionf all this can

rait uitil lat"r, n Chapter , but the ollowing wo textswill serve o

giveusa preliminary utlineof whathe s trying o do:

It is well said, hen' hat t is by doing ust acts hat someone

becomesust, and by doing emperate cts hat they become

temperate. ithoutdoing hese, o onewouldhaveanychance

ofbecomingood.But mostpeople onotperformhese ctrons

but uke eiulc in theory, hinking hat hey arebeingpliloso-

phers ndwiii becomeood n hisway'Theybehave bitlike

patients ho istencarefullyo theirdoctors' ut do noneof the

ihing, th.y were old o do.As the atterwill notbe madewell

in tiOy ty sucha nethodof treatment,he formerwill not be

madeelinsoul ysuchnapproach" on'iilllli;*r_,r,

Ourpresentnquiry unlikeour othets)s not aimedat theoret-

ical knowleclge. e arenot conducting ur inquiry n ordeJo

know hedefinition fvirtue,but n order o become ood'other-

wise t wouldnot benefit s at all so we must hinkaboutwhat

concems ctions ndhow we ought o perform hem '01 ,2, I 103b26-31)



5TYLE, STRUCTURE AND AI M OF THE fTHi CS

Aristotle's relace1) :Why do we do anythingat all?

Aristotleellsus hat he lrst hree haptersf theEthics re y wayof being a preface o the work as a whole (1095a12).n these hap-ters. he gives an outline of his approach, ndicates he results which

might be expected,and describes he kind of student for whom his

lectur€s re designed.

Ethicsand poli t icsar econcemedwith what we shouid o. I f we

do something as dist inct rom havesonethinghappen o us,or froma pieceof purely reflex behaviour), we do it for a reason.So Aristotle

itans off his ntroduct ion y making somegeneral bservat ionsn the

reasons a,emight give for doing anything. The observations re ndeedvery general:and hat is because e wants o get back o the most basic

asslunptions nvolved in ethics. We commonly try to think out prob-

lemssuch as 'Should mother come and l ive with us. or would sh e

be betterwhere sh e s?', or 'Can we really blame him for what he

rl id?'and so on . k is nruchmore rarely hat we ask What should be

cloingu ith rry l i fe?', an d even more rarely hat we ask What s the

b.st wa v to l ivel ' Aristot le hinks hat o dealwith the more everyday

problcnrs. e have n the end o deal with the very general, ut very

lundarncltalssues.Wh y do anythingat al l?' s ndeed strange ues-rron:bu t it might providea clue o what s neededn order o answer

lhc others.So, he begins:

rl) Sonret imes e moL:ehings (such as a statue, r a chair),an o

sometimes 'e simply do things (l ike walking, or discussingphilosophy).

(l ) Someof th e things we do, we do for their ow n sake listening

to music,or keepinga promise, or instance).

i-r Sor,relimes,we do something, or make something, or the sake

of somethingelse hat we want (we reada book in order to leam

about Aristotle; we paint a picture in order to enjoy looking at

it: we make CDs in order o eam a living).1-l) Somerimeswe do things both lor their own sake and because

the),al e means o achieving omething lseas well . (W e go fo r

l \ talk bccausewe enjoy walking, and n any case he exercise

is gcrod or our health.)

1. 1

5TYLE,STRUCTUREND AIM OF THE FTHICS

Reasons rehierarchicallyordered:we reada book to leam about

Adstotle;and we want to leam about Aristotle becausewe want to get

a degrce, erhaps;and we want to get a degreebecause . . and so on.

Now, most of the things that we do involve know-how. We need to

leamhow to read, and, indee4 how to read Aristotle; know-how is

needed or making a ship, or a CD. These various bodies of know-

ledge restructured,ust as our reasonsor individual ctions re.

Practical ciences uchas marine engineeringor electronicsare presup-

posedby the scienceof commerce(which

needsships) orthe music

industry which needsCDs), and these n tum have their own aims.

His point is that thesesecond-levelaims explain why the firstlevel

aims arc important to us. He then raises his question: s there some

highest-level ractical science o which all the othersare subordinate?

lf there s, its end will be the highestof all ends, and to understand t

would be to understandhow ever'4hingelse fits together, and why in

the end we do an)4hingat all.

His answer in l, 2) is that there s indeeda plausible candidate

for heposition ofhighest-level practical science politics. To seewhv

he says his, we need o grasp wo points. The first concems he way

in whichAristot le hinksofthe science fpol i t ics.Th e word 'pol i t ics'

doesnot have for him the somewhatambiguous overtones t mighthave or us, where to be a politician might suggestbeing adePt at

wheelingand dcaling, manipulating the levers of power, and so on

Nor doeshe meanwhat we might mean by 'political science',which

is a theoreticel study of how political institutionswork and interact.

Like Plato,Aristotle had a noticn of politics which was at once more

idealisticand more practical. The science of politics consists in

knowinghow to organize he community for the best.3 Politics' is all-

embracing,nvolving all the many ways in which we should interact

with one anothcr n a community. The people whose ask it is to orga-

nize he community are the ones who in the end decide what is to be

I 'Community'.incet is nrportanto rememberhatat hisperiod hepolitical

unitwasa ccrmparaiivelymallcity - a polis andsuchempires s herehad

becnn Greece ere evefihelesshought fas alliancesf individual ities, ven

if therewerca dominant artner asAthens adoncebeen, ndMacedon as

rc DCCOme.)



: . iL i 5TiIU'TURE AN D AI M OF THE ETHICS

t i r0! j t tao d to whom, ho w money s to be spcni,what lawsare to becn3crcd. trat p)ays an d fest ivals o be celebrated, hich types ofbelrir iou r to be encoumged, nd which not. platotoot i t for i ianted,:ud.{risiot le u,ouid no t have disputed, ha t al l thesepract icaldeci_sionshaveas rheirult imatepurpose he wel)-being f th e cit izens, sindiyidu3ls ndas a community. fw e couldunderstandow to achieverhatgoal. hen,saysAristot le,we could se eho w eachactionof eachirrdiyidualmight be gocd fo r that personan d might also conu.ibuteoa f lourishing ommunity.Ethicsan d poli t icsar ealikeconcemedwith

$l]at is most mportant o us; ethics ooking at it f rom the point ofirc.x of the individual.and poli t ics from the point of view of theronrnrunit l , s a whole.Th e Ethics, hen,wil l attempt o answer ues_tiorisabout ,vhat ac hof us shoulddo by showinghow thc answencrinbc found;an d answers an be foundby considcring ha t t is thali: rUlt inlarelyrnponant o us.

Aristotle's reface2) :Realistic xpectations

\\ i i l lhc sludy of ethics el l us exact lywhat we shoulddo in everysrruirrronn which we find ourselves? ertainlynot, says Aristot le.onl)' s()rtrcouevh oha dno knowledge fthe subjectwouldexpect ha t

1.. . . ,1.f , lcrr i lcd larrry.

Ilrc discussion il l be quite suff icient f it attains o a s muchclaf iry as the subject al lows. Detai ledaccuracy s not to belookcd br equally n all discussionsany more than n the variousthlngsu, eca n make.

f l . 3, t094bl - t2)

In talking about what we should do, we must not expect heprccistonha t we might expect n, say,mathematics, r in the phys-icol scicnccs. nly the l l- infonnedwould expect he samedegree fl iqt.rur. nc eagain,Aristot le s heremaking an introductory emark,lLrrNhichhe u il l give hi s detai led easonsater part ly n Book Il, and

panlv n Book VI). Now, it might no t strikeus as oo surprisingo sa ythal ethics or-poii t ics) s no r an exactscience n the way in whichpn\stcj or astronotly are. We might be incl ined o say that moralpi inci l : , les le very dif lerent from scient if ic aws. At least dealtv.

STYLE, STRUCTURE AI{D AIM OT lHE ETHICS

scientific aws have no exceptions,whereasmoral principles, such as

'Youshouldnot tell a lie' surely have all kinds ofexceptions. Someone

might even wish to argue that, whereas he truths of physics should

beaccepted y anyone,different ndividuals or culturesneednot accept

the sameethical principles at all. Despite what he has ust said about

uffeasonable xpectations n ethics, Aristotle would neverthelessat

this oint rge aution ntilwesee ow he nquiryntoethicsumsout. Ethics and politics are indeed different from physics. Aristotle

admitsha t n contrastwith the naturalworld 'noblean d us t act ions,

which arc the subjectmatterof politics, differ and vary so much thatit night appearas f rheydependsimply upon hunan convention ather

thannature' 1094b14-16).So it might seem.But, as we shall s€e,

Aristot le oc snot in fact endorse hat conclusion.While ethicsan d

poli t icsma y be inexactby comparisonwith the physicalsciences,t

doesnot follow that there are no natural limits to what should be

regarded s morally or politically admirable, or that ethics cannot in

anysense e regardedas a scientiflc discipline. We shall have to wait

and ee.

Aristotle'sPreface3) :Suitable tudents

As we saw, Aristotle's aim in w ting the Ethics is not just to teach

peopleheory, t is to help people o becomegood. While in a wa y

thatseems air enough thoughperhaps he emphasis s not one which

wouldalways be found in moml philosophy ecturesnowadays!), one

mightbe forgiven for thinking that there s nevertheless omething of

a paradoxhere. If, by Aristotle's own account, attending a course on

moral hilosophywill not guaranteehat he studentswill end up being

morallygood, then why should reading Aristotle's Ethcs or listening

to his ecturesbe any more effective? t's not enough for him simply

to r4_v hat hjs aim is not just theoreticalbut pmctical. How is that

supposedo work out?

Aristotle would tahe the point. No more than a contemporary

lecturern moral philosophy rvould Aristotle have thought it his busi-

ness o provide the kind of good moral training one might look for

from arcnls r schools. uc h rainingha s o slan n early chi ldhood,

so hat he young personacquires abits of good behaviour.St i l l ,

17



STYLE, TRUCTURE ND AIM OF THE ETHlCS

someonewho hasbeen weil brought up will typically come to wonder

1r'/n they have been trained to behave n this way rather than tbat

InGeed hey might well question whether their upbringing has been

along he right lines at all. Doubtless here were rebellious adolescentr

in Arhe)rs oo. Rather than geting hold of them at once, however,

Aristotle rvould have considered hem as still too young to profit fron

his lectures.The rebellious adolescentsimply does not as yet havr

enough experience of life and its complexities to be able to forn

rrature moral udgements. So Aristotle consideredas prerequisites or

iris course iat people should have been well brought up, and, further

Ihat they should already have had some experienceof life and of the

complex problems which life presentsone with. He remarks hat:

Wlile young men become geometriciansand mathematicians

and very adept at suchsubjects we might includc being marvel.

lous at dealing with computersl, t is commonly believed ha t

a young ma n does not leam pract icalwisdom. ... A young

man has no experience. or i t is length of t ime that gives

expetience.

(VI , 8. I l42al l -15)

t lere is a fonhright descript ion f the krnd of student e does

.\ young rnan is not a suitableperson o take a course on hov

tr-' un a city, for he is inexperienced n the affairs of life (which

are tt e starting point and subject-matterof the course). Besides,

since he tends o be led by his feelings.attending he coursewili

be porntlessand unprofitable, since the aim of the course s nol

knouiedge but action. [t makes no difference whether he is

young in years,or immature in character.The problem is nor a

mafter of time, but a life-style which pursuesone kind of thing

:ftcr another as feelings dictate. To people ike this knowledge

is Ito use, any more than it is to people who lack self-control

But for those whose desires and actions are directed n a well-

ordered way, it would be very helpful to have knowledge about

such opics.

(1 ,3, 1095a2- l )

STYLE,5TRUCIUI{! AI\U

what Aristotle s trying to do, then, s to give his students n

explanationf why theyshouldhavebeenbroughtuP as hey were'

and naccount f how an adult s togo aboutmakinggooddecisions'

H€hopeshatwhathehas o saywill have he racticaleffectof crys-

tallizingor themattitudes ndways of thinkingwhich theyhaveas

yetnotbeen ble oexplain rjustify for themselves'is ectures ere

io providehe inal stag€of a process f moraleducation; r' to be

ror."*r.,,

theywere o give he heoretical acking o a process f

moralrainingwhichhad lreadybeenargely ompleted'n-l doing'

heaimedo-produce

morally houghtfuladultswho would be goodpeople,ndgoodmembers f the community'' '

in tfte chapters hat follow, I shall not adherestrictly to

Aristotle's rderof expositionif indeedt is Aristode's) shall ry

to explainhe key pansof it 6rst' and hen ill in the sufioundings

t"t"r.i *outa sugieit hatagoodplan o followwouldbe o read airly

quicklyhrough-theections f the ext whicharedealtwith in each

ctraoterttnis Uoot,whicharegivenat thestartof each hapter:hen

readhechapter arefully, ollowingup the referenceso the ext as

yougo along.

1819

Hughes Chapter 1+2

Documents

Transcript of Hughes Chapter 1+2