We had a good call tonight discussing Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics Books IV - VI.
We discussed a wide range of issues: liberality, generosity, moral virtue, justice, practical wisdom.
And we prepared for our call with Barry Schwartz in September.
Phil
P.S. You can register for the free call and discussion with Barry here.
Phil - to your question about the Greek work for "liberal":
Liberal is, in this case: eleutherios, which translates as "free, open to all" The verb form is to "make free, loose from.." Latin is liberalis.
Posted by: Tim Albright | July 07, 2009 at 09:37 PM
Sorry, recovering from some kind of cold after returning to the Texas heat. :-(
I am attending. I'm going to focus my comments on Book V because it really grabbed me. But a couple of other tidbits first:
IV.1121.28 "cheeseparer"
According to the OED, a cheeseparer is a miserly type who pares the rind of the cheese, offering nothing of value to his guests.
IV.1124.8-9
In his discussion of the Proud Man, A. notes that the proud man "[knows] there are conditions on which life is not worth having." This struck me in part because the description of the proud man was surprising in general but also because it is rather tossed off. It was thought
provoking for me.
VI.1141.13-18
I really enjoyed the point that true practical wisdom requires some experience. Maybe I am showing my age.
Book V
There's a lot to this book, including the extrapolations toward civic implications (1132.33, 1133a.330, et cetera) and hints at the debate between oligarchy and democracy (1131.25). One main question nagged me. A. argues repeatedly that what is just is proportional and what is
unjust violates the proportion. He even uses math and geometry to explain the proportions and ratios. However, as I understand it, his justice does not seek equality: unequal shares are possible and predictable (1131). Whatever "equality" can be sought is based on ratios because of unequal proportions between individuals.
So, the place A. is silent is to me the toughest question: how do we examine our own assumptions about the "just" proportions and who "deserves" what? For A., women have a lesser share than men, children less than women, slaves less than children, barbarians less than slaves,
et cetera.
I do not see his considerable logic turned to the most basic and, I would argue, most thorny question: can we, should we, how would we strive for true equality as the goal of justice? Did I miss it?
See you all tonight.
Cheers,
Tim
Posted by: Tim Albright | July 08, 2009 at 08:46 AM
I think one could argue that Aristotle's conception of equality doesn't fail because he only extended it to male citizens. By saying that different people deserve different rewards he inherently acknowledges that there is no single standard by which every person is judged and rewarded. If equality does not equal sameness, he leaves the door wide open to differing concepts of who is deserving. How we value an individual's traits is eminently subjective and changeable. The truth is that over history those concepts indeed change dramatically, and ours will probably not be the same as our grandchildren's.
Posted by: Bill Swislow | July 08, 2009 at 08:49 AM
Hi Bill,
Great note and I completely agree. I definitely don't want to suggest that A.'s effort failed. I don't think it did. I guess I'm just surprised that, given his thorough nature, he doesn't enter the "open door" you describe.
Tim
Posted by: Tim Albright | July 08, 2009 at 08:49 AM
I have to agree with Bill here. Should equality of reward always be the goal?
Posted by: Frank Renzler | July 08, 2009 at 08:50 AM
Nope. And I am not advocating that. Put the question the other way around: how do we determine when the inequality of reward (or other type of justice) is too great? In other words, assuming there is a sliding scale, how do make sure it is just if equality is not the measure?
Posted by: Tim Albright | July 08, 2009 at 08:50 AM
Hey everyone,
I look forward to our phone call this evening, Tuesday, July 7 2009 at 8pm ET.
Here are some interesting passages that we might discuss more.
Phil
----------
Liberality
Book IV, 1119, line 21
"for the liberal man is praised not in respect of military matters nor of those in respect of which the temperate main is praised, nor of judicial decisions, but with regard to the giving and taking of wealth, and especially in respect of giving."
Interesting to see Aristotle starting Book IV with this concept. I wonder what the ancient word was that is being translated here as liberal.
What did you think of these beginning passages?
----------
"giving" and "not taking"
Book IV, 1120a, line 16
"And gratitude is felt towards him who gives, not towards him who who does not take, and praise is also bestowed more on him." This is an activistic approach - i.e. it's not enough to "not take" but you should also give. This fits with A's earlier point about wisdom as a habit, yes?
----------
great sentence
Book IV, 1120b, lines 11 and 12
"...all men are fonder of their own productions, as are parents and poets."
----------
not easy to be rich?
Book IV, 1120b, line 12
Aristotle: "It is not easy for the liberal man to be rich, since he is not apt either at taking or at keeping but at giving away, and does not value wealth for its own sake but as a means to be giving."
reminiscent of Matthew 19:24: "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven"
----------
methodology of "the middle"
throughout the ethics, Aristotle argues for the good of the middle - not the extremes on either end. what do we think of this?
and A also takes care to note when opposites or "the mean" has no name. he says this several times. what does he mean?
i.e. "Good temper is a mean with respect to anger; the middle state being unnamed, and the extremes almost without a name as well..."Book IV, chapter 4, 1125
and
"...the middle state is laudable - that in virtue of which a man will put up with, and will resent, the right things and in the right way: but no name has been assigned to it, though it most resembles friendship." Book IV, chapter 6, 1126
----------
Pride
Book IV, Chapter 3
Aristotle does not seem to criticize pride. what does he say about it? "Crown of the virtues"..."not found without them" but "it is hard to be truly proud" but it is "concerned with honour on the grand scale."
and why did "the Spartans not recount their services to the Athenians" but instead "those they had received."? What's he referring to here? Do we know from our past historic reading?
----------
Boastfulness
Book IV, chapter 7
A goes after boastfulness and mock modesty and in so doing seems to attack Socrates.
"Mock-modest people, who understate things, seem more attractive in character; for they are thought to speak not for gain but to avoid parade; and here too it is qualities which bring reputation that they disclaim, as Socrates used to do."
----------
Humour
Book IV, chapter 8
A seems to go after excessive humour. What would Bob Mankoff, the New Yorker cartoon editor have to say about that? Or you?
What is A saying here?
----------
Justice
Book V
Book V is dedicated to justice
What does A mean by:
- "Since the unjust man is grasping, he must be concerned with goods - not all goods , but those which prosperity and adversity have to do, which taken absolutely are always good, but for a particular person are not always good." Book V, chapter 1, 1129b
- Justice is "social"?
"...justice, alone of the virtues, is thought to be 'another's good', because it is related to our neighbor....justice is virtue entire."
He's quoting Plato in this passage. What is he saying? Is he saying justice is social - "in relation to one's neighbor"? Book V, chapter 1, 1130a
- Just distribution is "merit" based?
"what is just in distribution must be according to merit in some sense" Book V, chapter 3, 1131a
- And goes on to say how that relates to each kind of social system
"...democrats identify it with the status of freeman, supporters of oligarchy with wealth (or with noble birth), and supporters of aristocracy with excellence." Book V, chapter 3, 1131a
- Aristocracy's merit is "excellence"?
- Justice, proportions and geometry
A goes into some math. What's going on here?
"the just is - proportional ; the unjust is what violates proportions." Book, V, chapter 3, 1131b
"Hence one term becomes too great, the other too small, as indeed happens in practice; for the just man who acts unjutly has too much, and the man who is unjustly treated too late, of what is good."
- What is "rectifactory" justice?
- What does A say about reciprocity?
- How does money come into it?
- Political justice?
"Now we have previously stated how the reciprocal is related to the just; but we must not forget that what we are looking for is not only what is just without qualification but also political justice." Book V, Chapter 6, 1134a
- What is political justice?
it can only be created by men who "share their life with a view to self-sufficiency; men who are free and either proportionately or arithmetically equal, so that between those who do not fulfill this condition there is not political justice but justice in a special sense and by analogy."
- Law?
A goes on to say that "justice exists only between men whose mutual relations are governed by law; and law exists for men between whom there is injustice; for legal justice is the discrimination of the just and the unjust." Book IV, chapter 6, 1134a
- A touches on our mission
"Similarly, to know what is just and what is unjust requires men think, no great wisdom, because it is not hard to understand the matters dealt with by the laws...but how actions must be done and distribution effected in order to be just, to know *this* is a greater achievement than knowing what is good for the health." Book V, chapter 9, 1137a
- And he goes on to say that justice is essentially human...
What does he mean by that?
- Earlier, he asks an interesting question
"Is it possible to treat oneself unjustly?" What's his answer? What do you think?
- Throughout chapter V, Aristotle alludes to practical wisdom
i.e. Book V, chapter 11, 1138b
"...theory cares nothing for this; it calls pleurisy a more serious mischief than a stumble; yet the latter may become incidentally the more serious, if the fall due to it leads to your being taken prisoner or put to death by the enemy."
----------
Book IV
and in Book VI he speaks of it directly
"it is a true and and reasoned state of capacity to act with regard to the things that are good or bad for man..."
What does A mean that "practical wisdom is a virtue."? Book VI, chapter 5, 1140b
- Wisdom
A revisits wisdom and calls it "the most finished of the forms of knowledge." Book VI, Chapter 7. What is he talking about here? Does it contradict or complement his earlier thoughts on "wisdom as a habit"?
- Conclusion
And he concludes Book VI with "it is not possible to be good in the strict sense without practical wisdom, nor practically wise without moral virtue."
And how does A "prove" that you can't have one "good" virtue without having all of them?
Posted by: Phil Terry | July 08, 2009 at 09:46 AM
Dear folks--
Really enjoyable call on Aristotle--good food for thought, as always.
A juicy quote in Book V (p. 1013 in our edition, 1134a ln. 35) we didn't get to, but seems apt in light of the Albany shenanigans, and the mayor's bulldozing of voter-approved term limits:
"This is why we do not allow a *man* to rule, but *rational principle,* because a man behaves thus in his own interests and becomes a tyrant."
Two small asides:
--Simonides: In book IV (p. 987, sec. 1121a) Aristotle mentions disagreeing with a saying by Simonides on liberality. I Googled Simonides in hopes of finding the saying (no such luck), and found a few brilliant ones. The one I enjoyed most: "Painting is silent poetry, and poetry is painting with words."
--Aristophanes' "Lysistrata," which we didn't read together, but which is well-known for its bawdy humor and its premise: the Athenian and Spartan women collude to deny sex to the men of Greece, to force them to end to the Peloponnesian War. ("No peace, no sex.") There was a real-life "Lysistrata"-style sex strike in Kenya earlier this year, to force an end to political deadlock following a disputed election. Read about it here:
http://tinyurl.com/dmobna
Life imitating art, and .... If the women of Minnesota had gotten their act together, their senator might have been seated sooner than last week.... ;-)
Looking forward to digging in to the rest of "Ethics" with you all.
:-)
Pat
Posted by: Pat Wictor | July 09, 2009 at 09:55 AM
Great quotes and references.
You and I talked that Book V quote after the call. Couldn't agree more. Even when people ("men" in Aristotle's language) rule "for the people" - they mostly inevitably become tyrants.
Love the description of poetry from Simonides.
And I enjoyed seeing Lysistrata with you and Nancy Kopans several years back. We didn't read it but we did take a field trip. Good stuff.
Phil
Posted by: Phil Terry | July 09, 2009 at 10:05 AM