44 pages • 1 hour read
AristotleNicomachean Ethics
Nonfiction | Book | AdultA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Summary
Background
Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Key Figures
Themes
Index of Terms
Important Quotes
Essay Topics
Tools
BetaThemes
The Meanings of Good and Happiness
Aristotle begins by establishing happiness as the ultimate goal of life. He suggests that happiness is the perfect and complete form of good. Humans engage in various activities to find good, or the best way to live. All humans seek happiness. This idea comes from the Greek eudaimonia, which translates as “good spirits.” Traditional views about what it means to live a good life relate to pleasure, politics, and virtue. Aristotle proposes that all these things play a role in happiness, but none of them alone is the pathway. Pleasure has a tendency for seek extremes, and it does not explore the depth and heart of life. The political life, which many believe to be about honor, does not engage the other virtues necessary for the aim. Virtue is good, but it is not the complete picture of happiness. Aristotle suggests that a person could be entirely virtuous through non-action. If one never acts, one never engages with vice. A mixture of these things, however, contributes to overall happiness. This hints at his thesis, developed later in the collection, that complete happiness is achieved through virtues of thought.
Happiness the complete or final end. Aristotle acknowledges that many other finalities attach themselves to the end of life. A person can have the aim to achieve wealth and do so, for example. Beyond wealth, though, is the ultimate goal: happiness. Humans seek happiness for its own sake. There is nothing beyond it that they would rather have instead, and many people mistake worldly pleasures and aims for happiness, supplanting it with cheap alternatives.
However, in the last book, Aristotle makes a case for cognition. He proposes that happiness is truly achieved through understanding and contemplation, also referred to as study. To better understand this view, Aristotle seeks to define the function of humankind. He argues that there must be something that separates humans from the animal world, some defining quality or task that distinguishes humans and speaks to the aim of happiness. This, he determines, is reason. Virtues are divided into two categories: moral and thought. Those virtues aligned with thought are born out of reason. Aristotle views them as superior to moral virtues.
Study is the greatest virtue and the worthiest activity. Aristotle argues that it is the thing that brings humans closest to the divine. He also asserts that study brings the most pleasure and fulfillment. It is a supreme virtue that leads to happiness. Although Aristotle does not detail the definition or practical applications of contemplation, he makes it clear that contemplation requires inquiry. Nicomachean Ethics seeks to answer myriad questions about the nature of virtue and vice, the pursuit of the good, and the true meaning of happiness, and Aristotle’s lectures serve as a guidepost for how to search for and identify truth.
Finding Balance in Virtue
As Aristotle presents each virtue, he also presents its corresponding vices. His study professes that each virtue is a mean between two vices. Therefore, each virtue lies between extremes of itself that are presented as vices. For example, bravery is the virtue that represents the mean between the vices of fearlessness and cowardice. Temperance is balanced with intemperance. Continence is balanced with incontinence. In Aristotle’s view, life is a push and pull between opposing forces; this tension emphasizes the role of duality or opposing poles in his system. In this book, this approach to navigating vice and virtue presents the first example of Aristotle’s advocacy for balance. He suggests that aiming toward the mean of virtue often results in hitting the target slightly off the center. These attempts balance out to yield virtue.
Similarly, Aristotle argues for balance when considering pleasure and pain. He rejects the ideas that pleasure is wholly good and pain is wholly bad. These ideas are rooted in a belief that feeling trumps all other forms of experience. Aristotle argues, instead, that pleasure and pain are neither good nor bad. Rather, they are a good, meaning they are a product that can influence our experience of life and of virtue and vice. Pleasure and pain can act as a kind of compass, influencing and informing individuals of the relativity of their actions to goodness. The pursuit of extreme pleasure or the immobilizing fear of pain can plunge the individual into a life of vice. However, this does not speak to the inherent goodness or badness of pleasure or pain. It speaks only to human experience of them and the choices people make based on the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain.
Aristotle’s advocacy for balance is sometimes referred to as the golden mean. Excess of any kind does not lead to happiness. It is true that excess may lead to wealth or fame or honor, and these aims are not naturally bad. However, they do not translate to complete happiness. One can be wealthy and happy, but wealth does not make one happy. Self-gratification and self-love stand in the way of achieving happiness, because they offer instantaneous experiences of pleasure. This pleasure clouds the individual’s moral vision. A pursuit of balance allows the individual to act through virtue and maintain focus on the aim of happiness. Deprivation and excess may appear satisfying in the moment because they speak of pain and pleasure, but they do not have a lasting effect. Instead, excess is a human quality that diverges from the divine. Aristotle proposes that humans must attempt to be as much like gods as possible, seeking balance and understanding.
The Importance of Relationships for Good
In the first few books of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, the role that relationships play in the grander aim of human happiness may not be immediately clear. Aristotle spends much of the book defining various virtues and vices and establishing their role in contribution to complete happiness. The discussion of relationships is limited. Aristotle explores, for example, the ways that actions produce justice and injustice. Virtues are understood through the amount of pleasure or pain they cause for both the individual and others. However, friendship is not a virtue, and it is not addressed until later.
Then Aristotle changes course. For two books, he expounds upon the role of relationships in the aim of happiness. He defines friendships that do not contribute to happiness and praises those that do. Aristotle proposes that there are three types of friendship; these are predicated upon complete love, love for some particular aim, and love for pleasure’s sake. The last two types of friendship are incomplete and do not contribute to the aim of happiness. They function so long as they are mutually beneficial to both parties; they always end—often badly—when one person stops being gratified by the relationship. Incomplete friendships are out of balance, and balance is central to Aristotle’s theories. Complete love, or true friendship, works to refine each person. In these relationships, friends uphold one another to the divine. They encourage and support one another. Each party seeks virtue and brings out the best in the other, urging the other toward right action and right thought.
Therefore, Aristotle views friendship as a necessary part of life. True friendships, although rare and the products of challenging work and dedication, help people to refine themselves and to achieve something closer to divinity. Aristotle also connects this idea to individuals’ relationships with themselves. He asserts that the same principles that can be applied to outward friendships must also be applied internally. As seen in the theme “Finding Balance in Virtue,” self-love requires moderation. However, it is a vital part of right action.
Aristotle often likens right action and good with the characteristics that distinguish humans from animals. The bestial side of humans indicates a connection to the animal world; the rational side indicates a connection to the divine. Community, comprised of relationships, differentiates humans from the animal world and mirrors the divine relationships of the gods. By seeking complete friendships, ones based on equality and mutual support, humans move closer to what is good and, therefore, closer to the divine.
Related Titles
By Aristotle
