UNIVERSITY OF THE FREESTATE

WYS 605
A Critical analysis of Book 2 of the Nicomachean
Ethics by Aristotle
Francois Maritz, 2007034388
8/28/2012
Index
Introduction page 2

Critical discussion of the second book of the Nicomachean Ethics page 2

Conclusion page 5

Bibliography page 6

1
Introduction
What I propose do to in this essay is to analise the second book of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics
(NE) in detail, section by section, so that through close reading of this book we can discover what
richness it holds.

This second book of Aristotle can be seen as the instructions as to how the rest of the NE will
operate. It is concerned with moral virtue, how it is produced, in what medium and in what matter.
This will then be the subject of this essay, to explore the inner workings of Aristotle’s NE.

Book 2
It, like the arts, is acquired by repetition of the corresponding acts.
Aristotle divides virtue into two kinds, that of intellectual and that of moral. Intellectual virtue comes
about by teaching where as moral virtue comes about by habit and constant practice. This moral
virtue is unnatural in that it cannot arise in us by nature, according to Aristotle. We are all born with
the potential to be morally virtuous, but it is only by the right activity that we train ourselves to be
virtuous.

What produces and what destroys the virtue will be both the same. For if it weren’t so there would
be no need of a teacher to teach the good from the bad. Character thus arises out of the state of the
activity, and this learned character becomes a disposition giving structure for future actions.

These acts cannot be prescribed exactly, but must avoid excess and defect.
In order to find the state of character that is produced we must examine the nature of our actions.
Firstly Aristotle considers the nature of things destroyed by defect and excess, where to little or too
much can destroy one, the right amount can not only improve one, but also preserve one.

In this lies Aristotle’s Doctrine of the Mean1, often the doctrine of the mean has been interpreted in
acting rather moderately of without feeling, but this is a Stoic misinterpretation of what Aristotle is
saying. Immediately after the introduction of the doctrine of the mean Aristotle goes to say that the
mean is not a mathematical equation, but rather something that is very much dependant on the
context of the situation, for him the mean is something ‘relative to us’2.

1
(Johnston, 1997)
2
(Aristotle, -322) Section 2

2
As Johnston puts is so eloquently;

“Acting virtuously, therefore, requires awareness that in any situation one has to choose how
to respond and that there are two major dangers: over- and under-reacting. The best
behavior, the most morally excellent conduct, will be the response appropriate to that set of
circumstances.” (Johnston, 1997)

Pleasure in doing virtuous acts is a sign that the virtuous disposition has
been acquired: a variety of considerations show the essential connection of
moral virtue with pleasure and pain.
In learning the appropriate attitude towards pleasure and pain Aristotle quotes Plato to give a certain
strength to his argument that in order to learn certain traits of character one should be brought up in
a certain environment.
“Hence we ought to have been brought up in a particular way from our very youth, as Plato says, so
as both to delight in and to be pained by the things that we ought; for this is the right education.”3

This statement is somewhat controversial that something as all encompassing as Ethics can be so
exclusive. What should not be forgotten is that Aristotle was part of the noble and also taught to the
most noble of his polity, thereby it would have been accepted to state something like this saying that
only the elite few have a chance at reaching a morally virtuous life because of the life they have been
born into. What is further proof of this is that Aristotle tells us that “we cannot take the virtues
piecemeal: we cannot consider a person to be truly virtuous unless that person possesses all the
virtues.”4 Seen in relation with Book 4 of his NE on virtues concerned with money, it leads us to the
uncomfortable conclusion that only wealthy people can be truly virtuous.

There are three things around which all virtue and vice turn;

the noble, the advantages, the pleasant

the base, the injurious, the painful

Pleasure is the most important concerning the virtue, because the other are also perceived as being
pleasant, and pain being the inverse to pleasure. An appropriate attitude towards pleasure and pain
is one of the most important habits to develop for moral virtue.

3
(Aristotle, -322) Section 3
4
SparkNotes Editors. “SparkNote on Nicomachean Ethics.” SparkNotes LLC. 2003.
http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/ethics/ (accessed August 25, 2012).

3
The actions that produce moral virtue are not good in the same sense as
those that flow from it: the latter must fulfill certain conditions not
necessary in the case of the arts.
By doing something, that something is produced. By doing just acts, the just man is produced. In
order to be virtuous you must know that are behaving in the right way, you must behave in the right
way for the sake of being virtuous, and your behavior must manifest as part of a fixed virtuous
disposition. These three characteristics of an act must be present for the act to be virtuous.

Its genus: it is a state of character, not a passion, nor a faculty.

What is virtue? There are three kinds of things found in the soul, and virtue for Aristotle must be one
of these three. Passions, Faculties, or States of Character.

Virtue involves a choice, and in the passions, how can virtue be seen if it is not something chosen but
of passion? The faculties can also not be called virtue because how can the capacity to be good or
bad are called virtues if there is no choice but only capacity? Then by eliminating passions, and
faculties, virtue must be the state of the character because therein lies the choice. The states of
character is how one respond to the good or bad and in that there is choice, thus confirming the
above mentioned.

Virtue is a disposition, not a feeling or a faculty; it is a disposition to behave in the right way.

Its differentia: it is a disposition to choose the mean.

“Therefore virtue is a kind of mean, since, as we have seen, it aims at what is intermediate...Virtue,
then, is a state of character concerned with choice, lying in a mean...”5 Relating to the doctrine of the
mean as mentioned above, to be virtuous would be to act from a certain disposition.

In some cases a passion does not have an excess or deficiency; for some are already implicitly bad.

The extremes are opposed to each other and to the mean.

“There are three kinds of disposition, then, two of them vices, involving excess and
deficiency respectively, and one a virtue, viz. the mean, and all are in a sense opposed to
all...”6

This triangular relation of the dispositions is very striking as all three of the dispositions are in
relation with one another and also in the same stance in total opposition to one another. It is a very

5
(Aristotle, -322) Section 6
6
(Aristotle, -322) Section 8

4
dynamically structured whole, and when taking out one of the legs of this disposition-tripod the
whole structure collapses.

This point towards an ethics of balance, where all needs to be in harmony or everything will be in
total chaos, and this chaos will again be a struggle to harmony. To achieve the balance between too
little and too much one has to aim for the mean, and hope to hit the target.

The mean is hard to attain, and it is grasped by perception, not by

reasoning.
To achieve the mean is not an easy task and for everyone it is a different situation as it was stated
earlier that the mean is relative towards your situation. Aristotle paints the example and says that to
find the middle of the circle is not for everyone but for him who knows.

Aristotle does offer some condolences for one seeking a general rational in order to achieve the
mean, he says that if we dismiss pleasure we are less likely to go astray and hold to the mean, the in-
between, between excess and deficiency.

Conclusion
Taking into account all that has been mentioned one will realize that in order to lead a virtuous life
one must keep your wits about. That every situation differs from the next and the mean for every
person acting out will be different.

What is rather implicit and not stated in this book is that in order to be virtuous one cannot live in
isolation and will not ever be able to live as such. To end this analysis off with a quote from next part
of Aristotle work would be a good indication as to what use the ethics are and for what purpose the
ethics are discussed in Aristotle’s work before is politics. And I quote from the very first book of his
politics;

“Hence it is evident that the state is a creation of nature, and that man is by nature a political
animal. And he who by nature and not by mere accident is without a state, is either a bad
man or above humanity; he is like the Tribeless, lawless, hearthless one, whom Homer
denounces—the natural outcast is forthwith a lover of war; he may be compared to an
isolated piece at draughts.”7
With this it is then clear that it is everyone responsibility to act in a virtuous manner in order for
society, not only to function, but to function well.

7
(Aristotle, -322) Politics Book 1

5
Bibliography

Aristotle, 1925. The Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle. London: Oxford University Press.

Aristotle, -322. The Nicomachean Ethics. In: The Complete Aristotle. Adelaide: University of Adelaide,
p. 1858-1868.

Johnston, I., 1997. Lecture on Aristotle's Nicomachaean Ethics. [Online]

Available at: http://records.viu.ca/~johnstoi/introser/aristot.htm
[Accessed 25 08 2012].

SparkNotesEditors, 2003. SparkNote on Nicomachean Ethics.. [Online]

Available at: http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/ethics/
[Accessed 25 08 2012].