Project Gutenberg #8438
The Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle
Aristotle
340 BCEAristotle's ethical treatise, prepared introduction plus Books I-X from Project Gutenberg plaintext.
Project Gutenberg #8438 Public domain in the United States Cover source Local typographic cover created for MojiMori from public-domain source metadata
193
words at B2 or above
A1
A2
B1
B2
C1
C2
C2+
highlighted
at or above your level
AI Summary
Chapter 7 — Book VI Central question How does reason guide action, and what are the intellectual virtues? Main argument Aristotle divides the rational soul and identifies the excellences that belong to it:...
operation; but men deliberate a long time, and
it is a common saying that one should execute speedily what has been
resolved upon in deliberation, but deliberate slowly.
Quick perception of causes[35] again is a different faculty from good
counsel, for it is a species of Happy Conjecture. Nor is Good Counsel
Opinion of any kind.
Well then, since he who deliberates ill goes wrong, and he who
deliberates well does so rightly, it is clear that Good Counsel is
rightness of some kind, but not of Knowledge nor of Opinion: for
Knowledge cannot be called right because it cannot be wrong, and
Rightness of Opinion is Truth: and again, all which is the object of
opinion is definitely marked out.[36]
Still, however, Good Counsel is not independent of Reason, Does it
remain then that it is a rightness of Intellectual Operation simply,
because this does not amount to an assertion; and the objection to
Opinion was that it is not a process of enquiry but already a definite
assertion; whereas whosoever deliberates, whether well or ill, is
engaged in enquiry and calculation.
Well, Good Counsel is a Rightness of deliberation, and so the first
question must regard the nature and objects of deliberation. Now
remember Rightness is an equivocal term; we plainly do not mean
Rightness of any kind whatever; the ἀκρατὴς, for instance, or the bad
man, will obtain by his calculation what he sets before him as an
object, and so he may be said to have deliberated _rightly_ in one
sense, but will have attained a great evil. Whereas to have deliberated
well is thought to be a good, because Good Counsel is Rightness of
deliberation of such a nature as is apt to attain good.
But even this again you may get by false reasoning, and hit upon the
right effect though not through right means,[37] your middle term being
fallacious: and so neither will this be yet Good Counsel in consequence
of which you get what you ought but not through proper means.
Again, one man may hit on a thing after long deliberation, another
quickly. And so that before described will not be yet Good Counsel, but
the Rightness must be with reference to what is expedient; and you must
have a proper end in view, pursue it in a right manner and right time.
Once more. One may deliberate well either generally or towards some
particular End.[38] Good counsel in the general then is that which goes
right towards that which is the End in a general way of consideration;
in particular, that which does so towards some particular End.
Since then deliberating well is a quality of men possessed of Practical
Wisdom, Good Counsel must be “Rightness in respect of what conduces to
a given End, of which[39] Practical Wisdom is the true conception.”
Chapter X.
There is too the faculty of Judiciousness, and also its absence, in
virtue of which we call men Judicious or the contrary.
Now Judiciousness is neither entirely identical with Knowledge or
Opinion (for then all would have been Judicious), nor is it any one
specific science, as medical science whose object matter is things
wholesome; or geometry whose object matter is magnitude: for it has not
for its object things which always exist and are immutable, nor of
those things which come into being just any which may chance; but those
in respect of which a man might doubt and deliberate.
And so it has the same object matter as Practical Wisdom; yet the two
faculties are not identical, because Practical Wisdom has the capacity
for commanding and taking the initiative, for its End is “what one
should do or not do:” but Judiciousness is only apt to decide upon
suggestions (though we do in Greek put “well” on to the faculty and its
concrete noun, these really mean exactly the same as the plain words),
and Judiciousness is neither the having Practical Wisdom, nor attaining
it: but just as learning is termed συνιέναι when a man uses his
knowledge, so judiciousness consists in employing the Opinionative
faculty in judging concerning those things which come within the
province of Practical Wisdom, when another enunciates them; and not
judging merely, but judging well (for εὐ and καλῶς mean exactly the
same thing). And the Greek name of this faculty is derived from the use
of the term συνιέναι in learning: μανθάνειν and συνιέναι being often
used as synonymous.
The faculty called γνώμη,[40] in right of which we call men εὐγνώμονες,
or say they have γνώμη, is “the right judgment of the equitable man.” A
proof of which is that we most commonly say that the equitable man has
a tendency to make allowance, and the making allowance in certain cases
is equitable. And συγγνώμη (the word denoting allowance) is right γνώμη
having a capacity of making equitable decisions, By “right” I mean that
of the Truthful man.
Chapter XI.
Now all these mental states[41] tend to the same object, as indeed
common language leads us to expect: I mean, we speak of γνώμη,
Judiciousness, Practical Wisdom, and Practical Intuition, attributing
the possession of γνώμη and Practical Intuition to the same Individuals
whom we denominate Practically-Wise and Judicious: because all these
faculties are employed upon the extremes,[42] i.e. on particular
details; and in right of his aptitude for deciding on the matters which
come within the province of the Practically-Wise, a man is Judicious
and possessed of good γνώμη; i.e. he is disposed to make allowance, for
considerations of equity are entertained by all good men alike in
transactions with their fellows.
And all matters of Moral Action belong to the class of particulars,
otherwise called extremes: for the man of Practical Wisdom must know
them, and Judiciousness and γνώμη are concerned with matters of Moral
Actions, which are extremes.
Intuition, moreover, takes in the extremes at both ends:[43] I mean,
the first and last terms must be taken in not by reasoning but by
Intuition [so that Intuition comes to be of two kinds], and that which
belongs to strict demonstrative reasonings takes in immutable, i.e.
Necessary, first terms; while that which is employed in practical
matters takes in the extreme, the Contingent, and the minor
Premiss:[44] for the minor Premisses are the source of the Final Cause,
Universals being made up out of Particulars.[45] To take in these, of
course, we must have Sense, i.e. in other words Practical Intuition.
And for this reason these are thought to be simply gifts of nature; and
whereas no man is thought to be Scientific by nature, men are thought
to have γνώμη, and Judiciousness, and Practical Intuition: a proof of
which is that we think these faculties are a consequence even of
particular ages, and this given age has Practical Intuition and γνώμη,
we say, as if under the notion that nature is the cause. And thus
Intuition is both the beginning and end, because the proofs are based
upon the one kind of extremes and concern the other.
And so[46] one should attend to the undemonstrable dicta and opinions
of the skilful, the old and the Practically-Wise, no less than to those
which are based on strict reasoning, because they see aright, having
gained their power of moral vision from experience.
Chapter XII.
Well, we have now stated the nature and objects of Practical Wisdom and
Science respectively, and that they belong each to a different part of
the Soul. But I can conceive a person questioning their utility.
“Science,” he would say, “concerns itself with none of the causes of
human happiness (for it has nothing to do with producing anything):
Practical Wisdom has this recommendation, I grant, but where is the
need of it, since its province is those things which are just and
honourable, and good for man, and these are the things which the good
man as such does; but we are not a bit the more apt to do them because
we know them, since the Moral Virtues are Habits; just as we are not
more apt to be healthy or in good condition from mere knowledge of what
relates to these (I mean,[47] of course, things so called not from
their producing health, etc., but from their evidencing it in a
particular subject), for we are not more apt to be healthy and in good
condition merely from knowing the art of medicine or training.
“If it be urged that _knowing what is_ good does not by itself make a
Practically-Wise man but _becoming_ good; still this Wisdom will be no
use either to those that are good, and so have it already, or to those
who have it not; because it will make no difference to them whether
they have it themselves or put themselves under the guidance of others
who have; and we might be contented to be in respect of this as in
respect of health: for though we wish to be healthy still we do not set
about learning the art of healing.
“Furthermore, it would seem to be strange that, though lower in the
scale than Science, it is to be its master; which it is, because
whatever produces results takes the rule and directs in each matter.”
This then is what we are to talk about, for these are the only points
now raised.
Now first we say that being respectively Excellences of different parts
of the Soul they must be choice-worthy, even on the supposition that
they neither of them produce results.
In the next place we say that they _do_ produce results; that Science
makes Happiness, not as the medical art but as healthiness makes
health:[48] because, being a part of Virtue in its most extensive
sense, it makes a man happy by being possessed and by working.
Next, Man’s work _as Man_ is accomplished by virtue of Practical Wisdom
and Moral Virtue, the latter giving the right aim and direction, the
former the right means to its attainment;[49] but of the fourth part of
the Soul, the mere nutritive principle, there is no such Excellence,
because nothing is in its power to do or leave undone.[50]
As to our not being more apt to do what is noble and just by reason of
possessing Practical Wisdom, we must begin a little higher up,[51]
taking this for our starting-point. As we say that men may do things in
themselves just and yet not be just men; for instance, when men do what
the laws require of them, either against their will, or by reason of
ignorance or something else, at all events not for the sake of the
things themselves; and yet they do what they ought and all that the
good man should do; so it seems that to be a good man one must do each
act in a particular frame of mind, I mean from Moral Choice and for the
sake of the things themselves which are done. Now it is Virtue which
makes the Moral Choice right, but whatever is naturally required to
carry out that Choice comes under the province not of Virtue but of a
different faculty. We must halt, as it were, awhile, and speak more
clearly on these points.
There is then a certain faculty, commonly named Cleverness, of such a
nature as to be able to do and attain whatever conduces to _any_ given
purpose: now if that purpose be a good one the faculty is praiseworthy;
if otherwise, it goes by a name which, denoting strictly the ability,
implies the willingness to do _anything_; we accordingly call the
Practically-Wise Clever, and also those who can and will do
anything.[52]
Now Practical Wisdom is not identical with Cleverness, nor is it
without this power of adapting means to ends: but this Eye of the Soul
(as we may call it) does not attain its proper state without goodness,
as we have said before and as is quite plain, because