Book Description
Building on the strengths of the first edition, the second edition of the Irwin Nicomachean Ethics features a revised translation (without extensive editorial intervention), expanded notes (including a summary of the argument of each chapter), an expanded Introduction, and a revised glossary.
Terence Irwin is Susan Linn Sage Professor of Philosophy, Cornell University.
Customer Reviews:
Nice Translation.......2007-05-13
Irwin's translation cannot be better. The only failure of the Hacket Edition is the material which is made out --both the cover and the pages are of a very weak stuff. Well, maybe it is just proporcional to the prize...
Anyway, an excellent translation. The notes and commentary are quite useful, too. The "further reading" section at the end may show some Englsih chavinism -there is hardly one item in a language which happens not to be English!
What to say about classic.......2006-11-03
What can one say abaout Aristotle, something new and compelling, in such a short manner and on a narrow place of thousand words. Tousands of years people commented on Aristotle, sciences emerged from his teachings, new ways of thinking were invented and people yet couldn't help but to read Aristotle again and again, making notes and commentary. Can there be greater recommendation of this book than this? Of course, rarely does one stumble on Aristotle by chance, especially nowaday, so I have to presume that you are here for some reason.
If you are studying philosophy, politics or some kind of philological studies than I cannot help you. To help you would require of me some kind of knowledge about this translation and history of translations of Aristotle on english language. I do not posses such knowledge, and you should probably walk away form this text to some that is more concise and has strong evidence that supports it.
If you stumbled here by chance, which I sincerely doubt, than it would be quite sufficient what I said in first paragraph. Western civilisation arose on legacy of number of powerfull books, and Nicomachean ethics is one of those books. It is amazing and never quite stops to fascinate me that hearing of voice inside your head, older than one can imagine, voice that speaks words that you can easily pinpoint to this particular time and place. One feels somewhat scared when holding such books. And therein lies the beuty of it.
Irwin's Translation is Indispensable... but some cautions.......2006-10-23
I would not hesitate to recommend Irwin's Hackett edition to anyone who wants to undertake the real work of understanding Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics."
The translation & the interpretation underlying it are not perfect. Other translations may in some (even many) cases be based on interpretations I would prefer. So why is Irwin better? Because his is the only version that lets the reader see the nuts and bolts--that is, just how trickily ambiguous Aristotle's text so often is, and just what the translator has done to interpret it and make sense of it. Only with this extra apparatus can a Greekless reader have some confidence in forming his or her own understanding. And even most of us who know Greek are dependent on commentaries and interpretations like Irwin's to force ourselves to confront real issues and possibilities of meaning that we might clumsily miss as we read the Greek.
Since the strength of Irwin's translation is its clearly labelled interpretative moves, I think it is worth considering looking for the out-of-print FIRST edition (ISBN 0915145669). In the first edition, Irwin intrudes his own section headings at the rate of at least ten per Bekker page. These help you know exactly how Irwin is taking the argument (and again, even if you disagree, the value of a translation lies in offering an interpretation that makes some sense). For example, at 1143b6 and following, Irwin's headings say of understanding "It seems to grow naturally..." and then later "...But in fact it requires experience." NO ONE reading the Greek out of context could possibly come up with this contrast, which basically assumes that Aristotle's Greek is misleadingly written (really straining the idea of a result clause, in this instance) in order to make Aristotle make more consistent sense.
Irwin's notes are great. He offers TONS of cross references. It reminds me of a really good study Bible, with zillions of references to other passages packed in along the margins. (In Irwin, these notes are in the back.) Aristotle is a systematic thinker, even if he looks at things from different angles at different times. The kind of comparative reading encouraged by these references is the only way to understand Aristotle.
In short, this is a great edition that lets an English-language reader get into the "laboratory" of interpreting Aristotle. It's not polished, but neither is Aristotle. If you're sentenced to a lengthy jail term, you could take this volume, read and reread it with all Irwin's glossary-essays and cross-refs., and really start to understand how Aristotle thinks. If you were smart, you would end up disagreeing with some of Irwin's translations and interpretations. But it's a tremendous testimony to his interpretative labor that you could disagree in this way. (But if it's a general handle on Aristotle, as opposed to the Ethics, you want, you should really start with Irwin and Fine's Hackett "Selections"--NOT their "Introductory Readings" which deprives you of the glossary-and-notes apparatus really needed to get it.)
Timeless classic.......2006-07-04
This philosophical work by Aristotle truly transcends time. The Nicomachean Ethics covers different grounds on human character and human relationships.
The main question of this book being: What is the meaning of life? And how can I fulfill it?
Aristotle underlines the difference between knowing the meaning and actually setting out to give life to this meaning through virtuous actions.
A truly eye and soul opening work. Read it, and apply your knowledge!
Wonderful.......2006-04-22
Although this is not exactly the most engaging of reads, it is still wonderful, most especially due to the depth of the intellectual ideas presented. A must for any fan of Philosophy, Politics or thinking in general.
Book Description
Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, based on lectures that he gave in Athens in the fourth century BCE, is one of the most significant works in moral philosophy, and has profoundly influenced the whole course of subsequent philosophical endeavor. Topics covered include the role of luck in human wellbeing, responsibility, courage, justice, friendship and pleasure. This accessible new translation follows the Greek text closely and also provides a non-Greek reader with something of the flavor of the original. The volume also includes a historical and philosophical introduction and notes on further reading.
Customer Reviews:
Doing the right thing.......2005-09-12
Aristotle was a philosopher in search of the chief good for human beings. This chief good is eudaimonia, which is often translated as 'happiness' (but can also be translated as 'thriving' or 'flourishing'). Aristotle sees pleasure, honour and virtue as significant 'wants' for people, and then argues that virtue is the most important of these.
In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle makes the claim that happiness is something which is both precious and final. This seems to be so because it is a first principle or ultimate starting point. For, it is for the sake of happiness that we do everything else, and we regard the cause of all good things to be precious and divine. Moreover, since happiness is an activity of the soul in accordance with complete and perfect virtue, it is necessary to consider virtue, as this will be the best way of studying happiness.
How many of us today speak of happiness and virtue in the same breath? Aristotle's work in the Nicomachean Ethics is considered one of his greatest achievements, and by extension, one of the greatest pieces of philosophy from the ancient world. When the framers of the American Declaration of Independence were thinking of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, there is little doubt they had an acquaintance with Aristotle's work connecting happiness, virtue, and ethics together.
When one thinks of ethical ideas such as an avoidance of extremes, of taking the tolerant or middle ground, or of taking all things in moderation, one is tapping into Aristotle's ideas. It is in the Nicomachean Ethics that Aristotle proposes the Doctrine of the Mean - he states that virtue is a 'mean state', that is, it aims for the mean or middle ground. However, Aristotle is often misquoted and misinterpreted here, for he very quickly in the text disallows the idea of the mean to be applied in all cases. There are things, actions and emotions, that do not allow the mean state. Thus, Aristotle tends to view virtue as a relative state, making the analogy with food - for some, two pounds of meat might be too much food, but for others, it might be too little. The mean exists between the state of deficiency, too little, and excessiveness, too much.
Aristotle proposes many different examples of virtues and vices, together with their mean states. With regard to money, being stingy and being illiberal with generosity are the extremes, the one deficient and the other excessive. The mean state here would be liberality and generosity, a willingness to buy and to give, but not to extremes. Anger, too, is highlighted as having a deficient state (too much passivity), an excessive state (too much passion) and a mean state (a gentleness but firmness with regard to emotions).
Aristotle states that one of the difficulties with leading a virtuous life is that it takes a person of science to find the mean between the extremes (or, in some cases, Aristotle uses the image of a circle, the scientist finding the centre). Many of us, being imperfect humans, err on one side or the other, choosing in Aristotle's words, the lesser of two evils. Aristotle's wording here, that a scientist is the only one fully capable of virtue, has a different meaning for scientist - this is a pre-modern, pre-Enlightenment view; for Aristotle, the person of science is one who is capable of observation and calculation, and this can take many different forms.
Aristotle uses different kinds of argumentation in the Nicomachean Ethics. He uses a dialectical method, as well as a functional method. In the dialectical method, there are opposing ideas held in tension, whose interactions against each other yield a result - this is often how the mean between extremes is derived. However, there are other times that Aristotle seems to prefer a more direct, functional approach. Both of these methods lead to the same understanding for Aristotle's sense of the rational - that humanity's highest or final good is happiness.
There is a discussion of the human soul (for this is where virtue and happiness reside). Aristotle argues that virtue is not a natural state; we are not born with nor do we acquire through any natural processes virtue, but rather through 'habitation', an embedding process or enculturation that makes these a part of our soul. However, it is not sufficient for Aristotle's virtue that one merely function as a virtuous person or that virtuous things be done. This is not a skill, but rather an art, and to be virtuous, one must live virtuously and act virtuously with intention as well as form.
Of course, one of the implications here is that virtue is a quantifiable thing, that periodically resurfaces in later philosophies. How do we calculate virtue?
This is a difficult question, and not one that Aristotle answers in any definitive way. However, more important than this is the key difference that Aristotle displayed setting himself apart from his tutor Plato; rather than seeing the possession of 'the good' or 'virtue' as the highest ideal, Aristotle is concerned with the practical aspects, the ethics of this. Based on Aristotle's lectures in Athens in the fourth century BCE, this remains one of the most important works on ethical and moral philosophy in history.
Book Description
Of Aristotle's works, few have had as lasting an influence on subsequent Western thought as The Nicomachean Ethics. In it, he argues that happiness consists in “activity of the soul in accordance with virtue,” defining “virtue” as both moral (courage, generosity, and justice) and intellectual (knowledge, wisdom, and insight). Aristotle also discusses the nature of practical reasoning, the different forms of friendship, and the relationship between individual virtue and the state. Featuring a lucid translation, a new introduction, updated suggestions for further reading, and a chronology of Aristotle's life and works, this is the authoritative edition of a seminal intellectual masterpiece.
Customer Reviews:
The Nicomachean Ethics - - Aristotol.......2007-06-08
An excellent book to get an understanding of this Greek philosopher's concept of "a good man" and the virtues he felt were required in an individual to be considered as "a good man". Also, it provides some insight into the affect of these Greek philosophic "virtues" from the period of about 300 BC as they predated the "morals and ethics" found in the biblical new testement of about 200 AD and the Koran of about 700 AD.
Early work of social science.......2006-11-08
Aristotle's Ethics by Penguin classics looks deceptively like a paperback novel. It is nothing of the kind, being a densely packed philosophical treatise on the nature of humankind and our relationships with others.
The book, a translation of the Nichomachean Ethics and not Aristotle's earlier Eudemian Ethics, may seem slightly mistitled to a modern audience. It deals primarily with analysis of character and what good character is and is not. Discussion of ethical issues and moral judgements of right and wrong are largely missing. The reader is expected to develop their behaviour towards others by perfecting their own character. For example, courage in its various forms is discussed but the practical application of courage is not. Much of Aristotle's thesis appears obvious to our modern minds but it is important to remember that Aristotle was systemetizing his description of human nature in an effort to understand it. Unfortunately this makes for a rather dry read.
The book also contains a lengthy introduction by Jonathan Barnes. While it is acessible to the general audience, a background in philosophy would be useful to really understand the issues he addresses. There is also a preface by Hugh Tredennick who explains why this new translation is needed - primarily for readability. Between J.A.K. Thompson (the translator), Barnes and Treddennick we appear to have the crème de la crème of Cambridge and Oxford Aristotaleans involved in this little book. The introduction has a substantial bibliography in its own right and the book includes 10 brief appendices which provide background on the philosophical ideas in the text. These are critical to understanding the book if you aren't widely read in the early Greek philosophers. A glossary of Greek words and an index of names proceeds a general index. Footnotes are brief and unobtrusive but usually helpful.
For couch philosophers and serious students looking for an inexpensive edition of the Nichomachean ethics, this is definitely the version for you. It has surprisingly good scholarly resources for such a slim volume. If, however, you had heard that Aristotle was Alexander the Great's tutor and are trying to conquer the business world this probably won't give you many pointers.
Aristotle's Ethics is a monumental work.......2005-08-25
Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics is one of the greatest philosophy books ever writen dealing with this issue. This is amazing considering the fact that these are just lecture notes taken by a student of his, which Aristotle did not get to edit.
As a Christian, I think that it is amazing to see just how close Aristotle got to being right. Anyone reading Aristotle's work can see clearly that God has written a moral law code on all men's hearts. Should it surprise us then to see Aristotle emphasizing nearly the same morals that Judaism at the time emphasized, and Christianiy does? It is not hard to see why Aquinas and the schoolmen were so fascinated by him and based their theology around his systems.
As close as Aristotle gets, however, he is still off. His ultimate end for which all is done is happiness (by this he does not mean pleasure). As a Christian, I would have to disagree. I believe the untimate end for our actions and lifestyle is to bring glory to God and fulfill His purpose for us. Aristotle got the means mostly right, but he ended up with the wrong end.
Doing the right thing.......2005-08-22
Aristotle was a philosopher in search of the chief good for human beings. This chief good is eudaimonia, which is often translated as 'happiness' (but can also be translated as 'thriving' or 'flourishing'). Aristotle sees pleasure, honour and virtue as significant 'wants' for people, and then argues that virtue is the most important of these.
In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle makes the claim that happiness is something which is both precious and final. This seems to be so because it is a first principle or ultimate starting point. For, it is for the sake of happiness that we do everything else, and we regard the cause of all good things to be precious and divine. Moreover, since happiness is an activity of the soul in accordance with complete and perfect virtue, it is necessary to consider virtue, as this will be the best way of studying happiness.
How many of us today speak of happiness and virtue in the same breath? Aristotle's work in the Nicomachean Ethics is considered one of his greatest achievements, and by extension, one of the greatest pieces of philosophy from the ancient world. When the framers of the American Declaration of Independence were thinking of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, there is little doubt they had an acquaintance with Aristotle's work connecting happiness, virtue, and ethics together.
When one thinks of ethical ideas such as an avoidance of extremes, of taking the tolerant or middle ground, or of taking all things in moderation, one is tapping into Aristotle's ideas. It is in the Nicomachean Ethics that Aristotle proposes the Doctrine of the Mean - he states that virtue is a 'mean state', that is, it aims for the mean or middle ground. However, Aristotle is often misquoted and misinterpreted here, for he very quickly in the text disallows the idea of the mean to be applied in all cases. There are things, actions and emotions, that do not allow the mean state. Thus, Aristotle tends to view virtue as a relative state, making the analogy with food - for some, two pounds of meat might be too much food, but for others, it might be too little. The mean exists between the state of deficiency, too little, and excessiveness, too much.
Aristotle proposes many different examples of virtues and vices, together with their mean states. With regard to money, being stingy and being illiberal with generosity are the extremes, the one deficient and the other excessive. The mean state here would be liberality and generosity, a willingness to buy and to give, but not to extremes. Anger, too, is highlighted as having a deficient state (too much passivity), an excessive state (too much passion) and a mean state (a gentleness but firmness with regard to emotions).
Aristotle states that one of the difficulties with leading a virtuous life is that it takes a person of science to find the mean between the extremes (or, in some cases, Aristotle uses the image of a circle, the scientist finding the centre). Many of us, being imperfect humans, err on one side or the other, choosing in Aristotle's words, the lesser of two evils. Aristotle's wording here, that a scientist is the only one fully capable of virtue, has a different meaning for scientist - this is a pre-modern, pre-Enlightenment view; for Aristotle, the person of science is one who is capable of observation and calculation, and this can take many different forms.
Aristotle uses different kinds of argumentation in the Nicomachean Ethics. He uses a dialectical method, as well as a functional method. In the dialectical method, there are opposing ideas held in tension, whose interactions against each other yield a result - this is often how the mean between extremes is derived. However, there are other times that Aristotle seems to prefer a more direct, functional approach. Both of these methods lead to the same understanding for Aristotle's sense of the rational - that humanity's highest or final good is happiness.
There is a discussion of the human soul (for this is where virtue and happiness reside). Aristotle argues that virtue is not a natural state; we are not born with nor do we acquire through any natural processes virtue, but rather through 'habitation', an embedding process or enculturation that makes these a part of our soul. However, it is not sufficient for Aristotle's virtue that one merely function as a virtuous person or that virtuous things be done. This is not a skill, but rather an art, and to be virtuous, one must live virtuously and act virtuously with intention as well as form.
Of course, one of the implications here is that virtue is a quantifiable thing, that periodically resurfaces in later philosophies. How do we calculate virtue?
This is a difficult question, and not one that Aristotle answers in any definitive way. However, more important than this is the key difference that Aristotle displayed setting himself apart from his tutor Plato; rather than seeing the possession of 'the good' or 'virtue' as the highest ideal, Aristotle is concerned with the practical aspects, the ethics of this. Based on Aristotle's lectures in Athens in the fourth century BCE, this remains one of the most important works on ethical and moral philosophy in history.
ethics.......2004-12-13
The ethics are interesting, but extremely tough to sift through. This book, evidently, is a compilation of Aristotle's notes from one of his students. It is a very slow read.
Book Description
At last a complete translation of Aristotle's classic that is both faithful and readable. In this volume, Joe Sachs (translator of Aristotle's Physics and Metaphysics) supplements his excellent translation with well-chosen notes and a glossary of important terms. This is a major translation of a seminal book in Ethics. Featured and discussed on C-Span Books Fall 2002 Review of new books as one of the twenty recommended books for Fall reading.
Customer Reviews:
Exceptional translation, excellent introduction.......2006-06-23
I've read and taught the Nicomachean Ethics several times in translation, and working through it this time with Joe Sachs' exceptional translation is what for the first time brought the urgency and interest of the text alive for me. I'd always said, in response to student complaints, something like: I know that the book itself, in style, is kind of boring and dry, but the subject matter could not be more important so try and look past that. With this translation, I didn't need to say that. You feel the urgency and importance of the subject in the writing itself. Joe Sachs has done a remarkable thing in bringing this text -- easily one of the most important philosophical works ever written -- to life.
As if that weren't enough, he has also written an excellent and very short introduction to the text that goes a long way towards overcoming many of the commmon misunderstandings of Aristotle's ethics, especially misconceptions tied to the Latin influences on translations of the text. Without any effort to give a "definitive" and inevitably partial account of the text as a whole, he confines himself to addressing three central concepts -- habit, the mean, and the noble -- shows how these have led many readers of the text astray, and points readers towards the passages in Aristotle that can overcome or resolve some of the basic misunderstandings (incidentally, one of these misunderstandings is evident in another review of this translation by FrKurt Mesick, and I can only assume he either didn't read the intro, or he disagreed with it in favor of more standard "textbook" interpretations of Aristotle, or that he is commenting on another translation and just happened to include his review under this one). Along the way, Sachs shows that the common reading of Aristotle as a kind of reformed or anti-Platonist is just false -- and that Aristotle's ethics is richer and more compelling than is usually thought precisely because of the elements of Platonism that Aristotle wisely retains.
Doing the right thing..........2005-10-10
Aristotle was a philosopher in search of the chief good for human beings. This chief good is eudaimonia, which is often translated as 'happiness' (but can also be translated as 'thriving' or 'flourishing'). Aristotle sees pleasure, honour and virtue as significant 'wants' for people, and then argues that virtue is the most important of these.
In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle makes the claim that happiness is something which is both precious and final. This seems to be so because it is a first principle or ultimate starting point. For, it is for the sake of happiness that we do everything else, and we regard the cause of all good things to be precious and divine. Moreover, since happiness is an activity of the soul in accordance with complete and perfect virtue, it is necessary to consider virtue, as this will be the best way of studying happiness.
How many of us today speak of happiness and virtue in the same breath? Aristotle's work in the Nicomachean Ethics is considered one of his greatest achievements, and by extension, one of the greatest pieces of philosophy from the ancient world. When the framers of the American Declaration of Independence were thinking of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, there is little doubt they had an acquaintance with Aristotle's work connecting happiness, virtue, and ethics together.
When one thinks of ethical ideas such as an avoidance of extremes, of taking the tolerant or middle ground, or of taking all things in moderation, one is tapping into Aristotle's ideas. It is in the Nicomachean Ethics that Aristotle proposes the Doctrine of the Mean - he states that virtue is a 'mean state', that is, it aims for the mean or middle ground. However, Aristotle is often misquoted and misinterpreted here, for he very quickly in the text disallows the idea of the mean to be applied in all cases. There are things, actions and emotions, that do not allow the mean state. Thus, Aristotle tends to view virtue as a relative state, making the analogy with food - for some, two pounds of meat might be too much food, but for others, it might be too little. The mean exists between the state of deficiency, too little, and excessiveness, too much.
Aristotle proposes many different examples of virtues and vices, together with their mean states. With regard to money, being stingy and being illiberal with generosity are the extremes, the one deficient and the other excessive. The mean state here would be liberality and generosity, a willingness to buy and to give, but not to extremes. Anger, too, is highlighted as having a deficient state (too much passivity), an excessive state (too much passion) and a mean state (a gentleness but firmness with regard to emotions).
Aristotle states that one of the difficulties with leading a virtuous life is that it takes a person of science to find the mean between the extremes (or, in some cases, Aristotle uses the image of a circle, the scientist finding the centre). Many of us, being imperfect humans, err on one side or the other, choosing in Aristotle's words, the lesser of two evils. Aristotle's wording here, that a scientist is the only one fully capable of virtue, has a different meaning for scientist - this is a pre-modern, pre-Enlightenment view; for Aristotle, the person of science is one who is capable of observation and calculation, and this can take many different forms.
Aristotle uses different kinds of argumentation in the Nicomachean Ethics. He uses a dialectical method, as well as a functional method. In the dialectical method, there are opposing ideas held in tension, whose interactions against each other yield a result - this is often how the mean between extremes is derived. However, there are other times that Aristotle seems to prefer a more direct, functional approach. Both of these methods lead to the same understanding for Aristotle's sense of the rational - that humanity's highest or final good is happiness.
There is a discussion of the human soul (for this is where virtue and happiness reside). Aristotle argues that virtue is not a natural state; we are not born with nor do we acquire through any natural processes virtue, but rather through 'habitation', an embedding process or enculturation that makes these a part of our soul. However, it is not sufficient for Aristotle's virtue that one merely function as a virtuous person or that virtuous things be done. This is not a skill, but rather an art, and to be virtuous, one must live virtuously and act virtuously with intention as well as form.
Of course, one of the implications here is that virtue is a quantifiable thing, that periodically resurfaces in later philosophies. How do we calculate virtue?
This is a difficult question, and not one that Aristotle answers in any definitive way. However, more important than this is the key difference that Aristotle displayed setting himself apart from his tutor Plato; rather than seeing the possession of 'the good' or 'virtue' as the highest ideal, Aristotle is concerned with the practical aspects, the ethics of this. Based on Aristotle's lectures in Athens in the fourth century BCE, this remains one of the most important works on ethical and moral philosophy in history.
Doing the right thing.......2005-09-19
Aristotle was a philosopher in search of the chief good for human beings. This chief good is eudaimonia, which is often translated as 'happiness' (but can also be translated as 'thriving' or 'flourishing'). Aristotle sees pleasure, honour and virtue as significant 'wants' for people, and then argues that virtue is the most important of these.
In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle makes the claim that happiness is something which is both precious and final. This seems to be so because it is a first principle or ultimate starting point. For, it is for the sake of happiness that we do everything else, and we regard the cause of all good things to be precious and divine. Moreover, since happiness is an activity of the soul in accordance with complete and perfect virtue, it is necessary to consider virtue, as this will be the best way of studying happiness.
How many of us today speak of happiness and virtue in the same breath? Aristotle's work in the Nicomachean Ethics is considered one of his greatest achievements, and by extension, one of the greatest pieces of philosophy from the ancient world. When the framers of the American Declaration of Independence were thinking of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, there is little doubt they had an acquaintance with Aristotle's work connecting happiness, virtue, and ethics together.
When one thinks of ethical ideas such as an avoidance of extremes, of taking the tolerant or middle ground, or of taking all things in moderation, one is tapping into Aristotle's ideas. It is in the Nicomachean Ethics that Aristotle proposes the Doctrine of the Mean - he states that virtue is a 'mean state', that is, it aims for the mean or middle ground. However, Aristotle is often misquoted and misinterpreted here, for he very quickly in the text disallows the idea of the mean to be applied in all cases. There are things, actions and emotions, that do not allow the mean state. Thus, Aristotle tends to view virtue as a relative state, making the analogy with food - for some, two pounds of meat might be too much food, but for others, it might be too little. The mean exists between the state of deficiency, too little, and excessiveness, too much.
Aristotle proposes many different examples of virtues and vices, together with their mean states. With regard to money, being stingy and being illiberal with generosity are the extremes, the one deficient and the other excessive. The mean state here would be liberality and generosity, a willingness to buy and to give, but not to extremes. Anger, too, is highlighted as having a deficient state (too much passivity), an excessive state (too much passion) and a mean state (a gentleness but firmness with regard to emotions).
Aristotle states that one of the difficulties with leading a virtuous life is that it takes a person of science to find the mean between the extremes (or, in some cases, Aristotle uses the image of a circle, the scientist finding the centre). Many of us, being imperfect humans, err on one side or the other, choosing in Aristotle's words, the lesser of two evils. Aristotle's wording here, that a scientist is the only one fully capable of virtue, has a different meaning for scientist - this is a pre-modern, pre-Enlightenment view; for Aristotle, the person of science is one who is capable of observation and calculation, and this can take many different forms.
Aristotle uses different kinds of argumentation in the Nicomachean Ethics. He uses a dialectical method, as well as a functional method. In the dialectical method, there are opposing ideas held in tension, whose interactions against each other yield a result - this is often how the mean between extremes is derived. However, there are other times that Aristotle seems to prefer a more direct, functional approach. Both of these methods lead to the same understanding for Aristotle's sense of the rational - that humanity's highest or final good is happiness.
There is a discussion of the human soul (for this is where virtue and happiness reside). Aristotle argues that virtue is not a natural state; we are not born with nor do we acquire through any natural processes virtue, but rather through 'habitation', an embedding process or enculturation that makes these a part of our soul. However, it is not sufficient for Aristotle's virtue that one merely function as a virtuous person or that virtuous things be done. This is not a skill, but rather an art, and to be virtuous, one must live virtuously and act virtuously with intention as well as form.
Of course, one of the implications here is that virtue is a quantifiable thing, that periodically resurfaces in later philosophies. How do we calculate virtue?
This is a difficult question, and not one that Aristotle answers in any definitive way. However, more important than this is the key difference that Aristotle displayed setting himself apart from his tutor Plato; rather than seeing the possession of 'the good' or 'virtue' as the highest ideal, Aristotle is concerned with the practical aspects, the ethics of this. Based on Aristotle's lectures in Athens in the fourth century BCE, this remains one of the most important works on ethical and moral philosophy in history.
Sachs' translation shines.......2005-09-07
Sachs makes this work come alive, and he deserves enormous credit. He manages to strike a delicate balance that is so rare in the world of translating. He has produced a dynamic, lively translation of an ancient text--without compromising the true meaning of the Greek.
Sachs' introduction and footnotes are indispensable. He explains the nuances of several key Greek words, though not in a way that might intimidate the novice. His introduction provides the reader with a stronger understanding of important terms and ideas that will be found in the text, and his footnotes are never intrusive but always welcome. It would be a mistake to take Sachs (or anyone else) as a sole authority on these matters, but his explanations of certain Greek terms are both concise and clear. Many translators of the 'Ethics' have sacrificed the original meaning of the Greek in the attempt to provide readers with something more contemporary-sounding. This is the brilliance of Sachs' translation--he presents the complexities of several Greek concepts without compromising their meaning and without leaving the reader floundering. His use of examples helps illuminate the text as well, especially in his footnotes.
The publication itself is also praiseworthy. It has ample margins and is pretty well bound. All in all, I would recommend Sachs' translation over all others (at least for now).
Phenomenal Translation.......2003-03-03
Finally, a translator who allows the reader access to Aristotelian thought without all the previous problems encountered with the Latin translations. Sachs gives us a fresh translation of Aristotle's concepts as they were intended to be expressed.
If you're serious about Aristotelian philosophy, I highly recommend Joe Sach's translations.
Book Description
Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics deals with character and its proper development in the acquisition of thoughtful habits directed toward appropriate ends. The articles in this unique collection, many new or not readily available, form a continuos commentary on the Ethics. Philosophers and classicists alike will welcome them.
Customer Reviews:
Getting Back to Aristotle.......2001-03-17
In this collection of 21 essays, most written during the 1970s, Amelie Rorty has pulled together some penetrating and diverse analyses of the Nicomachean Ethics (and related works) of Aristotle. One of the valuable features of the book is its arrangement: the essays are grouped according to the books of the Ethics of which they treat. Thus, the essays on *akrasia* are grouped together. The two best essays in the book, in my humble opinion, are John M. Cooper's "Aristotle on Friendship," and Martha Craven Nussbaum's "Shame, Separateness, and Political Unity: Aristotle's Criticism of Plato." Both lead one to pursue further reading in these interesting topics. Nussbaum, for example, not only provides a critique of Plato's concept of self-respect, particularly in The Republic, and compares it to Aristotle's presentation in the Ethics and the Politics; she also brings in John Rawls' A Theory of Justice, and two novels by Henry James. For those looking for some guidance, and some analytic tools, in reading Aristotle's ethical works, this is a great resource.
Book Description
Intended for philosophy of education courses, this anthology brings together classic writings on education by leading figures in the history of philosophy and notable contributions to the field by a variety of contemporary thinkers. The first section provides material from a sizable collection of classic writers, enabling students to read the original sources for themselves. The second section includes recent materials that reflect diverse approaches such as feminism, critical theory, and multiculturalism.
Customer Reviews:
Quick shipping.......2007-02-06
This book shipped quickly! I even bought standard shipping and I got it in a couple of days!
Classic and Contemporary Readings in the Philosophy of Education.......2006-03-18
Many of the readings are interesting and easy to understand, but a lot of the selections are difficult and take some time to think through.
Dense but informative.......2006-03-09
I am currently teaching philosophy of education to masters students, most of whom will become teachers. Cahn is a tough read. Many passages are long and others are excerpts of the whole text, which always makes for difficult reading. My biggest problem, besides some of the philosophers that Cahn uses, is that Cahn regularly fails to let the reader know the original date of the writing he has included. For my students and myself, this makes it difficult to understand the historical setting in which the original writing has taken place. If I have a difficult time figuring out the date of the excerpt, it makes teaching this material worse.
For an educator who has been writing philosophy books since the early 1970s, I find it strange that Cahn cannot take the time to include this little bit of information.
A Mixture.......2001-01-11
Mixture of classic writers that were pretty deep. Truthfully some of the classic writers were over my head (Plato, Aristotle, John Dewey, etc.). The rest of the book was more contemporary with essays from a culturally diverse population of writers. I had to buy it for a Philosopy of Ed. class and managed to get by with an A, but some of the classic writer's I'd like to read again, and again (since I probably won't get what in the heck they're saying the first time around). Something to put on your summer reading list for professional enrichment.
Book Description
Aristotle, great Greek philosopher, researcher, reasoner, and writer, born at Stagirus in 384
BCE, was the son of Nicomachus, a physician, and Phaestis. He studied under Plato at Athens and taught there (367-347); subsequently he spent three years at the court of a former pupil, Hermeias, in Asia Minor and at this time married Pythias, one of Hermeias's relations. After some time at Mitylene, in 343-2 he was appointed by King Philip of Macedon to be tutor of his teen-aged son Alexander. After Philip's death in 336, Aristotle became head of his own school (of 'Peripatetics'), the Lyceum at Athens. Because of anti-Macedonian feeling there after Alexander's death in 323, he withdrew to Chalcis in Euboea, where he died in 322.
Nearly all the works Aristotle prepared for publication are lost; the priceless ones extant are lecture-materials, notes, and memoranda (some are spurious). They can be categorized as follows: I Practical: Nicomachean Ethics; Great Ethics (Magna Moralia); Eudemian Ethics; Politics; Economics (on the good of the family); On Virtues and Vices. II Logical: Categories; Analytics (Prior and Posterior); Interpretation; Refutations used by Sophists; Topica. III Physical: Twenty-six works (some suspect) including astronomy, generation and destruction, the senses, memory, sleep, dreams, life, facts about animals, etc. IV Metaphysics: on being as being. V Art: Rhetoric and Poetics. VI Other works including the Constitution of Athens; more works also of doubtful authorship. VII Fragments of various works such as dialogues on philosophy and literature; and of treatises on rhetoric, politics and metaphysics.
The Loeb Classical Library edition of Aristotle is in twenty-three volumes.
Customer Reviews:
about halfway through it........2006-12-21
this book is beautiful for context when reading kierkegaard or thomas aquinas. for instance, take patience; where on the scale between passivity and wrath does turning the other cheek fit in? it is necessary to understand this in order to understand the teleological suspension of the ethical or to understand the theological virtues, faith, hope and charity, as departures from ethics. btw, father messick in an earlier review writes that the writers of the declaration of independence had an aristotelian mindset and i will not argue that point. i would just like to point out that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is commandeered, so to speak, from the writings of adam smith, i.e., life, liberty and the pursuit of property. also that thomas jefferson much preferred continental philosophers, such as locke and rousseau, to the ancient greeks as is evident in his letters. loeb library is the right choice for poor students of greek such as myself. i also have homer and hesiod.
Doing the right thing.......2005-10-05
Aristotle was a philosopher in search of the chief good for human beings. This chief good is eudaimonia, which is often translated as 'happiness' (but can also be translated as 'thriving' or 'flourishing'). Aristotle sees pleasure, honour and virtue as significant 'wants' for people, and then argues that virtue is the most important of these.
In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle makes the claim that happiness is something which is both precious and final. This seems to be so because it is a first principle or ultimate starting point. For, it is for the sake of happiness that we do everything else, and we regard the cause of all good things to be precious and divine. Moreover, since happiness is an activity of the soul in accordance with complete and perfect virtue, it is necessary to consider virtue, as this will be the best way of studying happiness.
How many of us today speak of happiness and virtue in the same breath? Aristotle's work in the Nicomachean Ethics is considered one of his greatest achievements, and by extension, one of the greatest pieces of philosophy from the ancient world. When the framers of the American Declaration of Independence were thinking of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, there is little doubt they had an acquaintance with Aristotle's work connecting happiness, virtue, and ethics together.
When one thinks of ethical ideas such as an avoidance of extremes, of taking the tolerant or middle ground, or of taking all things in moderation, one is tapping into Aristotle's ideas. It is in the Nicomachean Ethics that Aristotle proposes the Doctrine of the Mean - he states that virtue is a 'mean state', that is, it aims for the mean or middle ground. However, Aristotle is often misquoted and misinterpreted here, for he very quickly in the text disallows the idea of the mean to be applied in all cases. There are things, actions and emotions, that do not allow the mean state. Thus, Aristotle tends to view virtue as a relative state, making the analogy with food - for some, two pounds of meat might be too much food, but for others, it might be too little. The mean exists between the state of deficiency, too little, and excessiveness, too much.
Aristotle proposes many different examples of virtues and vices, together with their mean states. With regard to money, being stingy and being illiberal with generosity are the extremes, the one deficient and the other excessive. The mean state here would be liberality and generosity, a willingness to buy and to give, but not to extremes. Anger, too, is highlighted as having a deficient state (too much passivity), an excessive state (too much passion) and a mean state (a gentleness but firmness with regard to emotions).
Aristotle states that one of the difficulties with leading a virtuous life is that it takes a person of science to find the mean between the extremes (or, in some cases, Aristotle uses the image of a circle, the scientist finding the centre). Many of us, being imperfect humans, err on one side or the other, choosing in Aristotle's words, the lesser of two evils. Aristotle's wording here, that a scientist is the only one fully capable of virtue, has a different meaning for scientist - this is a pre-modern, pre-Enlightenment view; for Aristotle, the person of science is one who is capable of observation and calculation, and this can take many different forms.
Aristotle uses different kinds of argumentation in the Nicomachean Ethics. He uses a dialectical method, as well as a functional method. In the dialectical method, there are opposing ideas held in tension, whose interactions against each other yield a result - this is often how the mean between extremes is derived. However, there are other times that Aristotle seems to prefer a more direct, functional approach. Both of these methods lead to the same understanding for Aristotle's sense of the rational - that humanity's highest or final good is happiness.
There is a discussion of the human soul (for this is where virtue and happiness reside). Aristotle argues that virtue is not a natural state; we are not born with nor do we acquire through any natural processes virtue, but rather through 'habitation', an embedding process or enculturation that makes these a part of our soul. However, it is not sufficient for Aristotle's virtue that one merely function as a virtuous person or that virtuous things be done. This is not a skill, but rather an art, and to be virtuous, one must live virtuously and act virtuously with intention as well as form.
Of course, one of the implications here is that virtue is a quantifiable thing, that periodically resurfaces in later philosophies. How do we calculate virtue?
This is a difficult question, and not one that Aristotle answers in any definitive way. However, more important than this is the key difference that Aristotle displayed setting himself apart from his tutor Plato; rather than seeing the possession of 'the good' or 'virtue' as the highest ideal, Aristotle is concerned with the practical aspects, the ethics of this. Based on Aristotle's lectures in Athens in the fourth century BCE, this remains one of the most important works on ethical and moral philosophy in history.
Aristotle's Ethics: The Art of Living.......2000-06-20
I bought this book almost accidentaly, for having nothing better to do one night on a business trip to Pretoria. Being Greek, I have a love-hate relationship with the Ancients: brought up to marvel at their genius, but feeling alienated by an education system that force-fed us with sterile, badly translated texts, which always seemed irrelevant to our lifes. This book opened my eyes to the true meaning of "Philosophy". The translation is in modern English, free from the back-to-front syntax of the Ancient Greek text (which makes it impossible to understand the meaning of a sentence until you reach the end of it!).
The subject matter is "Ethics". However, a modern author may have called it something more akin to "The Meaning of Life" or "The Art of Living". Aristotle proceeds with simple and clear logic, to reveal the objective of human struggle in this life. He demonstrates a deep understanding of the Human Being, what we are and what we are not, what makes us act in one way or another and what makes us feel joy or distress. He addresses anxienties of the modern human, such as the question of nature or nurture, the moral action versus the practical, violence versus non-violence. His recommendations for living this life in a manner that is meaningfull and rewarding are profound yet simple. I found myself shaking my head in recognition at every example or conclusion. I felt a fresh wind in my chest, as if it was I who was discovering this knowledge, not some 2.5 thousand year old man.
I recommend this book to anyone who wants to discover more about how to live this life, but feels foreign to current eastern-derived, philosophical/religious fashions which, even when illuminating, can appear alien to the western way of thinking.
Average customer rating:
|
On Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics 1-4, 7-8" (Ancient Commentators on Aristotle)
Aspasius
Manufacturer: Cornell University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 General
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Greek & Roman
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Criticism
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Greece
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
ASIN: 0801445310 |
Book Description
Gabriel Richardson Lear presents a bold new approach to one of the enduring debates about Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics: the controversy about whether it coherently argues that the best life for humans is one devoted to a single activity, namely philosophical contemplation. Many scholars oppose this reading because the bulk of the Ethics is devoted to various moral virtues--courage and generosity, for example--that are not in any obvious way either manifestations of philosophical contemplation or subordinated to it. They argue that Aristotle was inconsistent, and that we should not try to read the entire Ethics as an attempt to flesh out the notion that the best life aims at the "monistic good" of contemplation.
In defending the unity and coherence of the Ethics, Lear argues that, in Aristotle's view, we may act for the sake of an end not just by instrumentally bringing it about but also by approximating it. She then argues that, for Aristotle, the excellent rational activity of moral virtue is an approximation of theoretical contemplation.
Thus, the happiest person chooses moral virtue as an approximation of contemplation in practical life. Richardson Lear bolsters this interpretation by examining three moral virtues--courage, temperance, and greatness of soul--and the way they are fine. Elegantly written and rigorously argued, this is a major contribution to our understanding of a central issue in Aristotle's moral philosophy.
Book Description
This "guided tour" actively engages students with Aristotle's work through a variety of tasks that help them develop their critical thinking, reading, and writing skills. The text provides complete discussion of books 1-4 and 10 and offers summaries and excerpts of Books 2, 3, and 5 through 9.
Books:
- No Sheep for You: Knit Happy with Cotton, Silk, Linen, Hemp, Bamboo & Other Delights
- Obesity Cancer & Depression: Their Common Cause & Natural Cure
- Of Mice and Men (Penguin Great Books of the 20th Century)
- Official Nintendo Animal Crossing: Wild World Player's Guide
- One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch (Signet Classics)
- Our Lady of the Lost and Found: A Novel of Mary, Faith, and Friendship
- Phantom: Chainfire Trilogy, Part 2 (Sword of Truth, Book 10)
- Power of the Soul: Inside Wisdom for an Outside World
- Reading, Writing and Learning in ESL: A Resource Book for K-12 Teachers (4th Edition)
- Sliver of Truth: A Novel
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Alif Baa: Introduction to Arabic Letters and Sounds
- The Picture of Dorian Gray
- Performance Measurement and Control Systems for Implementing Strategy Text and Cases
- Technology Strategies for the Hospitality Industry
- SQL Built-In Functions and Stored Procedures: The i5/iSeries Programmer's Guide
- The Mother Tongue
- The New Greek-English Interlinear NT
- Accounting Sampler
- The Economics of Petroleum Supply: Papers by M. A. Adelman, 1962-1993
- Every Young Man's Dream : Confessions of a Southern League Shortstop
Utilitarianism
Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals: With on a Supposed Right to Lie Because of Philanthropic Concerns
Kant: Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy)
The Republic (Penguin Classics)
Politics (Dover Thrift Editions)
