Aristotle’s Ethics Virtue Ethics:

For Aristotle, the highest good in all matters of action is happiness. But man is most happy when he is man in the best way So happiness is achieved when man is functioning well as man.

But man’s function is: Activity of soul in conformity with reason, or at least not without reason. (NE 1.7) But human life is not limited to purely intellectual pursuits. Thus, man’s function is: Activity of soul in conformity with excellence; and if there is more than one excellence, it will be

the best and most complete of these. (NE 1.7) Thus, happiness comes in acting virtuously.

Virtues Happiness comes in acting virtuously:

Virtue: A virtue is a kind of excellence of character. Virtue and Function: A virtue is “the state of character which makes a man good and which

makes him do his own work well.” A virtue is a state in which a man functions properly…

“every virtue or excellence both brings into good condition the thing of which it is the excellence and makes the work of that thing be done well…the excellence of the horse makes a horse both good in itself and good at running and at carrying its rider…” (NE )

More on virtue: It is for our virtues and vices that we are praised and blamed. Not capacities we have by nature. We develop virtues and vices through experience. We become just be doing just acts (NE 2.1) We can learn the virtues so “there should be some direction from a very early age, as Plato says,

with a view of taking pleasure in, and being pained by, the right things. (NE 2.3)…To have a virtue is to have developed a habit of choosing and behaving in ways appropriate…

Examples of VirtuesSome of the virtues include: Courage. When one is fearful or confident Temperance (regarding indulgence in pain and pleasure)Liberality (regarding giving and taking $)Pride (regarding one’s honor and dishonor)Good tempered (with regard to anger).The Doctrine of the meanExcess and Defect: It is in the nature of things to be destroyed by excess or defect.“Both excessive and defective exercise destroys the strength, and similarly drink or food which is above or below a certain amount destroys the health, while that which is proportionate both produces and increases and preserves it. So too is it, then, in the case of temperance and courage and the other virtues. The man who runs away from everything in fear, and faces up to nothing, becomes a coward; the man who is absolutely fearless, and will walk into anything, becomes rash. It is the same with the man who gets enjoyment from all the pleasures, abstaining from none: he is immoderate; whereas he who avoids all pleasures, like a boor, is a man of no sensitivity…” (NE 2.2)

Intermediate: Every virtue is an intermediate between some excess and defect. So acting virtuously is acting according to the mean. Never too much excess, nor too much defect with regard to a state of character.“an intermediate between excess and defect…that which is equidistant from each of the extremes…neither too much nor too little.” “For instance, if ten is many and two is few, six is the intermediate…” () The mean is relative

Relative: But the mean isn’t always the same for everyone. The mean is always relative to the individual and her circumstances. For “if ten pounds are too much for a particular person to eat and two too little, it does not follow that the trainer will order six pounds; for this is also perhaps too much for the person who is to take it, or too little…” ()“In feeling fear, confidence, desire, anger, pity, and in general pleasure and pain, one can feel too much or too little; and both extremes are wrong. The mean and good is feeling at the right time, about the right things, in relation to the right people, and for the right reason…” (NE 2.6)

The mean is relative to the circumstances… The mean is relativeSo the mean is relative to the individual and her circumstances.For example, bravery lies on a mean between extremes of fear and confidence.Too much fear and not enough confidence è cowards.Too much confidence and too little fear è reckless.But the brave act doesn’t lie precisely in the middle of extremes. This depends on the circumstances.For example:I walk upon someone getting muggedI have no training in self defenseA navy seal walks upon someone getting mugged

The Doctrine of the Mean:

ExamplesSo every virtue is the mean between some excess and some defect. For example:Anger: You can have too much anger (wrathfulness) or too little (subservience).Virtuous action lies between the extremes, depends on circumstances…Temperance the mean between self indulgence and insensibleness (with respect to divulging in pains and pleasures).Liberality the mean between prodigal-ness and mean-ness (with respect to giving and taking $).Truthfulness: the mean between boastfulness and mock-modesty (with respect to truth)Virtue Ethics: a principle for actionWe can think of Virtue Ethics as offering us a principle for action:A Principle for Action: some action X is the right thing to do if and only if X is what a virtuous person would do in those circumstances.A virtuous person lives by or according to the virtues.But what would a virtuous person do?You must try to think like Jesus would …

So you might just ask a virtuous person…A second possible principle for action: the doctrine of the meanThe virtuous agentThe Virtuous agent: For Aristotle, being a virtuous agent isn’t just doing the virtuous thing. To be just it isn’t sufficient to just act justly.Acting for the sake of virtue: one must get pleasure in acting justly for it to count as a just act at all.“…the man who does not rejoice in noble actions is not even good; since no one would call a man just who did not enjoy acting justly, nor any man liberal who did not enjoy liberal actions…If this is so, virtuous actions must be in themselves pleasant…” () The second requirementAnother requirement: And being a virtuous agent is more than merely doing the virtuous thing and gaining pleasure in her doing the virtuous thing.Resisting the appetitive soul: to be virtuous, one’s appetitive soul, that part of the soul which brings about desires and impulses that pull one away from acting rationally, mustn't lead one away from doing the virtuous thing.“For we praise the rational principle of the continent man and of the incontinent, and the part of their soul that has such a principle, since it urges them aright and towards the best objects; but there is found in them also another element naturally opposed to the rational principle, which fights against and resists that principle.” ()The virtuous agent is neither continent nor incontinent. The continent man: does the virtuous thing, although he had some impulse or desire to do otherwise.The incontinent man: doesn’t do the virtuous thing just because he follows the appetitive soulDesiring virtue: the virtuous agent desires only to perform the virtuous act

Plato’s Work Our chief source of information on Plato comes from Plato himself. We still have all the works attributed to him by ancient scholars, the most important of which are the philosophical dialogues.These include the Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Theaetetus, Timaeus, Gorgias, Protagoras, Meno, and the Republic.We probably have more biographical information about Plato than on any other ancient philosopher – much of it from Diogenes Laertius’s Life of Plato.And it’s likely that no single work of Western philosophy has been read by as many people as Plato’s Republic.Plato’s Disillusionment Plato became discouraged by the “mob” – represented by the jury at Socrates’ trial – whom he thought were irrational and dangerous.He also became discouraged by the “elite” – represented by the nobles who formed the Thirty – whom he thought were cruel, greedy, and self-centered.As a result, he felt that justice, and the avenging of Socrates’ death, would have to come through philosophy rather than political action. To this end, he sought to develop an ideal form of government which avoided both extremes.The Academy After the revolt of the Thirty and execution of Socrates, Plato left Athens and wandered for nearly twelve years. He studied with Euclid.

He traveled to Egypt where he studied mathematics and mysticism, both of which influenced his later philosophy.At about age forty, after finishing most of his writings, he founded his Academy (c.388 B.C.E.), named after the Greek hero, Academos. It was a philosophical retreat, isolated from the turmoil of Athenian politics.His chief function was probably as teacher and administrator. Here Plato spent the next forty years, lecturing “without notes” until he died. Plato’s Epistemology Plato was determined to show that skepticism and relativism of the Sophists was mistaken.He also aimed to reconcile the claims of Heraclitus (“change alone is unchanging”) and Parmenides (“change is an illusion”).He did both by dividing knowledge from belief. Beliefs are gotten through the senses and are about physical change (becoming). Knowledge is gotten through reason and is about what is always the same (being). Beliefs are about appearances, while Knowledge is about reality, about how things really are.The Theory of Forms In Plato’s metaphysics, the level of being consists of timeless essences or entities called Forms. Such a metaphysics is sometimes called transcendental, because it asserts that there is a plane of existence that transcends, or goes beyond, our ordinary perception of things.The Greek root for form (eidos) is sometimes translated as idea or concept. A form, then. is a purely mental entity, but one that is independent of all minds (in other words, its reality does not depend on the minds that think it). And although the forms actually exist, they are not physical objects. Their reality is purely ideal or conceptual.Why Plato Needed the Forms Plato wanted the theory of Forms to provide a rational explanation of how knowledge is possible. Since we do have knowledge (e.g., mathematics and geometry), how does it happen, and what is its object?He also wanted a way of identifying those who are wise and those who are not – in other words, a means of determining when something was actual knowledge versus when something was simply a matter of opinion.As he says in the Timaeus, “That which is apprehended by reason is always in the same state, but that which is conceived by opinion is always in a process of becoming and never really is.” The Divided Line Plato used the concept of the divided line to illustrate the relationship of knowledge to opinion, of appearance to reality.He claimed there are levels of awareness – from imagination to perception to reasoning to understanding – and that one can move from the lowest to the highest by thinking in terms of a hierarchy of Forms. Plato’s Divided Line The Form of the Good At the top of this divided line is “the Form of Forms,” the Form of the Good. This Form cannot be observed with the senses, but known only by pure thought.Comprehension of the Good is unlike other forms of knowing, in that it is holistic, rather than partial.Plato compares the Good to the Sun in order to give an idea to those at a lower level of awareness: just as the Sun enables vision, so the Good enables understanding and intelligibility. This “Simile of the Sun” occurs in a passage from the Republic in which Plato (as Socrates) contemplates their likeness as sources of seeing and “seeing.”

The Allegory of the Cave In Book VII of the Republic, Plato tells a tale to illustrate the idea of the divided line.At the beginning, prisoners are shackled to images and mythical accounts, and then one breaks free to find that the images are being produced by perceptible objects.The shift from perception to reason is then illustrated by someone leaving the cave entirely (Plato, thanks to Socrates). That person then realizes that they have been in a “cave” all along, and that what they had taken to be most real is simply the limitations of their senses. If they use their minds, they are able to “see” that there is much more to the world than meets the eye.The Rule of the Wise The person who makes the ascent out of the cave, from illusion to enlightenment, is wise. They can return to the cave – to inform the others of their predicament – but they should not expect to be understood when they return.Plato believes that these people – who have escaped the cave of opinion, who think in terms of the Forms – should be the rulers of the state, for they better than anyone are able to rule for the sake of the whole community. Hence, Plato’s fundamental vision is deliberately hierarchical and aristocratic rather than egalitarian and democratic.The Search for Justice This “rule of the wise” is the idea behind Plato’s ideal state, the Republic.Plato argued that a reciprocal relationship exists between the individual and the kind of society he or she lives in. He claimed there was a dynamic relation, so that a good society makes it easier to produce good people, and good people make it easier to produce a good society.And if the wise are in charge of ordering things, that reciprocal relationship is more likely to occur. Function and Happiness The Republic contrasts two views of morality: the instrumental and the functionalist.In the instrumental theory of morality, right and wrong are treated as means to, or instruments for, getting something else (in other words, being good for some ulterior motive).In the functionalist theory of morality, happiness is the result of living a fully functional life (in other words, being good is part of functioning well). The Parts of the Soul Plato felt that there were three parts of the human soul: appetite, spirit, and reason.Our appetites cause us to move in order to get things we want, such as food and mates.Our spirit drives us to achieve things, to do better (than others) in school, at work, etc.Our reason guides our appetites and spirit, like a charioteer does the horses that pull the chariot, so that things don’t get out of control. Reason is the only part of the soul capable of fulfilling this function, because it is the only part that is capable of “knowing.”The Cardinal Virtues Plato identifies four “cardinal virtues” that are necessary for a happy individual. They are:

Temperance – self-control or moderation.Courage – necessary for one’s protection.Wisdom – necessary for training and guiding.Justice – balanced functioning of the whole.

All of these virtues are also necessary for a good society, so Plato decides that the ideal state should be comprised of people who exhibit such virtues. The Republic

Just as there are three parts to the human soul, so there should be three parts to the ideal state.There should be workers who provide for our basic needs for food and shelter.There should be warriors who protect us – as the military does from foreigners and the police do from neighbors.And there should be guardians who watch over us and order things for our collective welfare. This job would go to the wise and able leaders, to those Plato called “philosopher-kings.”Societies and Individuals In Plato’s ideal state, justice results from individuals acting well in relation to each other, just as a happy individual results from the parts of its soul functioning well together.Plato believes that it is in each individual’s own best interest to act well – even when it might seem better to do whatever they can get away with. Here Plato is thinking of long-term happiness, of the state we have to live in after we have done whatever we could get away with (think back to his dialogue between Socrates and Thrasymachus). The Tyranny of Excess Just as individuals can let their appetites and spirit get the best of them, “tyrannizing” their lives, so states can be controlled by individuals who rule for their own sake – tyrants. For this reason, Plato thought tyranny the worst form of government.Overindulging wouldn’t be beneficial for an individual’s overall well-being. Likewise, Plato thought that letting the unwise, the “masses,” run things was hardly any better for society as a whole. Utopia The utopia that Plato envisioned would avoid such problems (by ensuring that people performed duties dictated by their natural abilities, just as the parts of the soul were controlled to perform their proper functions). The Republic, then, is the form of government best suited to human happiness.