Essay On The Golden Mean Of Aristotle

1337 Words6 Pages
Chapter two of Nicomachean Ethics deals with virtue, most importantly, its golden mean—the amount that which the virtue is secreted neither in excess nor in deficiency. For example, courage is a mean between its deficiency of rashness and the excess of cowardice. Another example can be justice, its deficiency being giving too little and its excess being giving too much. As such, Aristotle argues that virtue cannot be good nor can be virtue in itself unless it completes the criteria of achieving the golden mean. At first glance, this argument seems to be inevitable, as it seems that moderation to everything is a necessity. Neither too much nor too little of anything can be good; that in order for something to be good it has to be the right amount—that which Aristotle describes as the golden mean. However, his arguments present to be too vague, lack evidence and reality, and many times is a circular argument lacking any true definition of his main points. Aristotle begins his argument by defining two different types of virtues: intellectual virtue and moral virtue. Intellectual virtue owes its existence to teaching and moral virtue to habits. Virtuous habits, therefore, leads a man to continually experience moral virtue, eventually leading to the development of the individual’s character. Continually, he argues that, a virtuous man is not virtuous by solely performing virtuous actions. Rather, there are criteria to how the man should act virtuously: the agent needs to be fully conscious of what he is doing, he needs to deliberately choose or will his action, and the action must be derived from a fixed moral disposition. Moreover, according to Aristotle, to be truly happy in and of itself is for a man to be virtuous. For a man to be virtuous, he must hold to Aristotle’s golden mean—the middle point between the two vices. To explain in greater detail, he writes that

More about Essay On The Golden Mean Of Aristotle

Open Document