Aristotle Questions

6. Why is virtue a state of character and not a matter of having certain feelings or the capacity for having certain feelings feeling? (NE 1105b20-1106a13)

A virtue is a state due to it being a disposition. We are born with certain feelings or capacities, although we have these by nature. We cannot change these, although a virtue is a state of character because it makes a good thing of its kind and enables it to perform its function well.

7. Why does virtue involve decision (or choice = prohairesis)? (NE 1111b5-10) Why is deciding to do something not (a) having an appetite for it, nor (b) an emotion concerning it, (c) wishing for it nor (d) opining about it? (NE 1111b12-1112a12)

A virtue requires argument by elimination. It has 3 feelings: Feelings, capacities, and states. But they do not have appetites or emotions—they do not involve decision because they are passive

5. The chief or ultimate good for Aristotle must be "final" or the "end of action", it must be "self-sufficient", it must be "complete", and must reside in the "ergon" (characteristic activity or function) of man. (NE 1097a15-1098a20) What does he mean by these things, and what are his arguments?

Aristotle believe that the ultimate good is happiness, as it is the only thing that meets the three means of a highest good. It is an "final" due to making it the end of everything achievable in action. It is an "ultimate end" as it is choice worthy in its own reasons not of what others think. It is "self-sufficient" that all by itself it makes a life choice worthy and does not lack anything. Our "ergon" is common and peculiar to us, and it has to do with the soul which has 3 parts: Nutritive, Sensitive, and Rational. Our ergon can be found by process of elimination as nutrition is shared with plants; feelings and perception is shared with animals; but rationality, the exercise of reason only pertains to use therefore it is our characteristic activity or ergon.

6. Explain why Aristotle denies that actions caused by emotion or appetite are involuntary. (NE 1111a24-1111b4)

Aristotle believes that actions caused by emotion or appetite do not involve decision and these choices that are made are passive.

2. Explain Aristotle's view about whether actions done under "duress"--i.e., those done because of a threat of some kind (e.g., a gun to one's head)--are done voluntarily or not.(NE 1110a-1110b9) Do you think he is right? If you would emend his view, how would you do it?

I think that the terms voluntary and involuntary should be used with reference to the time of action and the situation****

7. What does Aristotle mean in saying that virtue lies in a mean between two extremes? (NE1106a15-1106b35) Why is virtue a disposition to aim at a mean in actions relative to us?

The extremes that virtue lies between are deficiency and excessiveness. These 2 extremes relate to feelings as if we fear too much, we are deficient; although, if we fear nothing, then we are excessive. Virtue is a state that decides consisting in a mean that remains relative to us, that finds the happy medium which is defined by refrence to reason.

10. Can a bad (good) person, on Aristotle's view, deliberately desire something good (bad), and so choose to do the right (wrong) thing? (1113a15-113b2) Why or why not?

Wishing causes the desire for an end. Wishing is directed at what appears good, therefore what is really good is what the wise wishes for. When deliberately desiring something that is implying knowledge of particulars. Therefore, yes they can because they wish for things they believe to be good

1. Aristotle claims that we could not be virtuous by nature since the virtues are formed by habituation. (NE 1103a17-1103b25) What are his arguments?

1st Argument—If a thing arises by nature, then habituation cannot change it; therefore, habituation changes character traits, so character traits do not arise by nature 2nd Argument—If a thing arises by nature, then we must possess it before we can exercise it and cannot acquire it by exercising it; therefore, virtue cannot arise by nature

3. What is the definition of a "forced" action? (NE 1110a1-4, 1110b2-9) Why would anyone think that pleasant actions are "forced", and what are Aristotle's three arguments against such a view? (1110b10-17)

A "forced action" is an act that is compulsory when its origin is from without being of such a nature that the agent who is passive does not contribute anything to it. For example, when a ship's captain is carried somewhere by stress of sea. They would think these are forced due to the plea that these exercises constraint on without making every action compulsory. 3 arguments: (a) Pleasure and nobility between them supply the motives of all actions whatsoever, (b) to act under compulsion and involuntary painful, but the actions aiming at something pleasant or noble are done with pleasure, and (c) it is absurd to blame external things instead of blaming ourselves for falling an easy prey to their attractions or to take the credit of our noble deeds to ourselves while putting the blame for our disgraceful ones upon the temptations of pleasure

8. Why is the good life pleasant? Do you agree that "someone who does not enjoy fine actions is not good; for no one would call him just, e.g., if he did not enjoy doing just actions, or generous if he did not enjoy generous actions, and similarly for the other virtues" (NE 1099a16-18)? Why or why not?

A "good life" is one that exercises function well. A well exercised function is virtuous. When one loves virtue, it pleases you. Therefore a "good life" is pleasant. Someone who does not enjoy fine actions is not just. As a virtuous person loves virtue, and enjoys the act of virtue. If you do not practice acts that are virtuous then you are not a virtuous person, therefore your state of being is not virtuous.

9. Why couldn't a happy life be a matter of fortune? (NE 1099b15-1100a5)

A matter of fortune is not up to us; it happens to us. So it would not be appropriate to think of a happy life in terms of "good luck". A happy life comes with the results of good actions.

3. Why is a young person not suited to the study of ethics? (NE 1095a2-11)

A well-educated man should be the type of man to study ethics. Hence, a young person is not suited to study ethics because he is inexperienced in the actions that occur in life, while ethics discusses these actions that happen in life. Also, a young person tends to follow their passions therefore most of a young person's decisions are based off of emotion rather than judgement or knowledge

4. What is the difference between an action done in ignorance and one caused by ignorance? (NE 1110b25-30) Are these actions voluntary or not voluntary? Explain.

An action caused by ignorance is when someone is ignorant of the particulars of their action and it is involuntary (they did not know). An action done in ignorance is one that is caused by ignorance of a particular and it is voluntary therefore you ignore something you know is bad, but decide to do it anyways. (Drunk driving, blind rage)

1. Explain Aristotle's definition of an "involuntary" action. (NE 1111a22-24) Why do we need to know which actions are voluntary and which not?

An involuntary action is one that is either performed due to force, or ignorance. We need to know which actions are involuntary or voluntary as we blame or praise that which is voluntary, and we pardon or pity what is involuntary.

3. If I do not like to give, but give anyway, Aristotle claims that I am not a virtuous person. Explain what a virtue is, according to him, and why he claims this. Some might argue that quite the opposite is the case, that it is only the person who gives when it hurts that is virtuous. Discuss Aristotle's possible responses.

Aristotle believes that a virtue is a disposition to exercise a function well. He believes that an action is right when a virtuous person does it. When a person struggles with an action then it is not virtuous, because they haven't been able to possess this virtue out of habit. Aristotle believes that you must love virtue to be a virtuous person. You should want to do virtuous things; if you do not want to do virtuous things, then you are not virtuous. Aristotle would agree that being virtuous hurts, but that it is not exclusive to pain, as he states that a virtuous person comes from a good upbringing where one is taught that the pain of doing what is right is pleasurable. So doing what is right in the end is pleasurable, not painful.

5. Aristotle claims that an action caused by ignorance is involuntary when one is ignorant of the particulars of an action. What does he mean by this? (NE 1111a4-20) What is the epithet fitting for one who is ignorant of universal rules of conduct, according to Aristotle?

Aristotle states that to be ignorant you must not know what you are doing for it to be ignorant and involuntary. By saying this, he means that you cannot be blamed for the result of an action that you did not know was going to happen (especially if you have regret). Although, there is no excuse for the ignorance of universal laws. For example, not knowing that there is a bag in the road is full of puppies, and not knowing that running over puppies is a bad thing are different. The first one is excusable, however the second is not. Epithet fitting for one is wickedness. (Ex: I did not know that torturing animals is bad)

6. What is the ergon (characteristic activity or function) of human beings? (NE 1098a1-16)How is the sense in which human beings have an ergon different from the sense in which a heart, key or shoe has an ergon?

Ergon is defined as a characteristic activity or function. The human ergon is the exercise of reason. Our ergon is different from a heart, key, or shoe's ergon as it is our primary function that makes our ergon. A "shoes ergon" is to protect our feet, a "hearts ergon" is to pump blood, a "keys ergon" is to open something that is locked. Although, since our ergons function is to "reason", and the act of reasoning is a virtue.

7. Why is eudaimonia an activity and not a state?

Eudaimonia is found when one reasons well. The act of exercising our ergon well, is an act not a state. This is an act not a state because we have to work for this. We are not given this by nature, while a state is something that you have naturally. A state is a disposition that one naturally has a tendency to be, although you cannot be naturally happy. A state is something you are, and to be happy is not a dispositive as you have to achieve happiness through action. Eudaimonia comes from actively reasoning well, not just having the state to do well.

1. Explain Aristotle's argument that the highest good is "happiness" or "eudaimonia". (NE1094a1-22) Why is this the subject of ethics?

For something to be the highest good, it must meet three requirements: Ultimate end, unqualifiedly complete end of all action, and be self-sufficient. Aristotle states that "happiness" meets all 3 of these, therefore it is the highest good. Happiness is (a) the end of an action, (b) self-sufficient, (c) it is complete. Happiness is characterized by well-being and prosperity. Ethics is the study of what makes actions worth doing. Therefore, the highest good is the topic of ethics. The subject of ethics is the "good life". Eudaimonia (the good life) is doing well, doing good, or a well exercised function (doing what you are supposed to be doing well) which is a virtue.

4. Why does eudaimonia or happiness not consist simply of pleasure, honor or wealth? 1095b14 1096a10)

Happiness does not consist simply of each of these since they do not meet the 3 means of a highest good. Therefore, happiness cannot consist of them. It cannot consist of honor as it depends on who "gives it", therefore it is not self-sufficient and it a mere "replacement" for virtue. It cannot be wealth due to wealth not being "complete". It cannot be pleasure, as only certain people believe certain things are pleasurable which makes it "unqualifiable". Wealth, honor, and pleasure are not finals ends—due to it not being a final end, it cannot be the highest good.

2. Aristotle appears to argue fallaciously that since every action aims at some good, there issome good that every action aims at. (NE 10941-3) Explain the fallacy. Could he beinterpreted in a way that avoids the fallacy?

The fallacy with his argument is that he states that there is some good that every action aims, he is stating that the "good" is something singular and it is the same. For example: (a) Everyone has somebody to love, therefore there is somebody that everyone loves. (b) Everyone watches TV, therefore there is a TV that everyone watches. The argument is that there isn't a "singular good" that every action collectively aims. He could be interpreted in a way where every activity has a purpose which is subordinate to the purpose of a further activity. The purpose of the ruling activity is more choice worthy. Therefore, if no highest good exists, then we choose everything for the sake of something else

11. Aristotle holds that both our states of character (our virtues and vices) as well as our actions (our virtuous or vicious actions) are voluntary, but not in the same ways. (NE1113b4-1115a7) Explain why.

The means of both of these are voluntary. Although, it is not that your character and actions are caused, but how they are caused. We are in control of our actions and traits in different senses. For example, our traits we are only in control at the beginning. Whereas, our actions we are in control from beginning to end.

9. What delimits the possible subjects of deliberation? (NE 1112a19-1113a14) What are the specific attributes of the subjects of deliberation?

Things that are eternal, necessary or natural, random, by chance, by convention, or the ENDS of something. This involves many different virtues and vices that begin with a desire for the future end.

8. Explain and discuss Aristotle's claim that the vices have no "means", and the virtue has no "extremes". (NE 1107a10-26) Do you agree? Does the fact that a person could be excessively greedy or cowardly show that he is wrong? Why or why not?

Vices are bad and has no means because they are the extremes (excess and deficiency). Virtues have no extremes since they are noble in only one way, although vices are bad in all sorts of ways. Yes, it shows that he is wrong. Extremes cannot have means in themselves because there is no excessiveness of excess or deficiency in being deficient. The mean only exists in between the extremes, and not in them, in reference to being greedy or cowardly.

5. Explain what Aristotle means when he claims that performing "just and temperate" actions is not sufficient to be a "just and temperate person"? (NE 1105a26-1105b12) What is the difference between performing virtuous actions and being a virtuous person?

Virtue is a state where we achieve between extremes. It is not a capacity to act or feel a certain way. So, although Aristotle discusses the interconnection between feeling and action—it is the disposition to act in a particular way that is/isn't virtuous.

2. Explain why virtue "tends to be ruined by excess and deficiency" (NE 1104a12-1104b3).

Virtue tends to be ruined by excess and deficiency as virtue is the mean between excess and deficiency. Therefore, as too much of something is bad and too less of something is equally as bad which is why you must find the mean—the doctrine of the golden mean.

8. Decision requires deliberation, according to Aristotle. (NE 1112a14-18) Why?

We deliberate things that are up to us when the outcome is open when the act is not already completely defined.

4. How does Aristotle respond to the objection (NE 1105a18-20) that if virtues arise out of like actions, then no one could gain a virtue, since only one who has a virtue acts virtuously?

We have to know that what we are doing is virtuous. We need to be able to fight out what to do/why we should do it on our own, not by just following someone's directions. Virtues involve more than knowledge, they involve feeling the right way about things, and being in the right state. We develop these feelings through repetition. A person can speak grammatically without being a grammatical speaker. Therefore, one perform virtuous acts without being virtuous.

9. Aristotle's practical advice for "hitting the mean" and thus performing a virtuous action is to "avoid the easier extreme". (NE1109a30-35) Explain why.

We must recognize our own personal goals as they differ from person to person. By acknowledging our tendencies and seeing what we wish to accomplish, we can recognize which extreme we want to avoid and how we can hit our mean. The easier extreme is the one which you will receive the most pleasure from. The action with the most pain will be the extreme, because pleasure is an indicator. By avoiding the easier extreme, we will then hit the mean.

10. Why is happiness honored but not praised? (NE 1101b10-1102a1) What does this show about happiness, according to Aristotle?

We praise something that we have done or that we are doing; although we would not praise something that we are. Happiness is rather honored because it is something we value. This shows that Aristotle believes that praise is meant for an action being done well, but happiness should instead be honored.