Nicomachean Ethics explores what it means to really live a happy life and how that relates to virtue. The work begins with Aristotle stating, “Every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim.” He discusses how different arts must result in something better than the activity that took to do it. For instance, the art of medicine is an art that should be inherently good. 7 years of medical school may result in saving someone’s life, and the saving of someone’s life is the final good to come out of it.
Aristotle believes that humans will stumble into doing what is right. Humans will strive towards a chief good, and that good is what life is meant for. Discovering what this chief good is not simple. People with little to no experience will not be able to discover what this good is. It requires someone who is knowledgeable and well-rounded to understand what this universal good is. He then divides what the three prominent types of life are. “For there are, we may say, three prominent types of life- that just mentioned [vulgar], the political, and thirdly the contemplative life.” This section of the Nicomachean is incredibly pretentious. It certainly shames those who do not wish to live Aristotle’s definition of a “virtuous life.” Aristotle also seems to be a part of the second type of people. Considering he spent his life traveling around the world teaching and publishing his works, it does not seem like he was someone to shy away from awards and honors. While he may not have been someone to aim for these awards and honors, it seems slightly hypocritical to claim that all activities that are not virtuous in his eyes do not yield a virtuous life.
Virtue is also an important aspect of Nicomachean Ethics. In Aristotle’s eyes, humans have an irrational and rational part of their soul. The irrational part governs things like nutrition and growing while the rational part governs everything else. For example, the irrational part of the soul may crave ice cream, but the rational part may choose to eat a healthier option to preserve good health. A person who listens to the more rational part of their brains will then be more virtuous and do more good. This logic holds up somewhat. Aristotle attempts to make an argument on how to gain happiness or fulfillment in life and that it is through being good and virtuous.
It is hard to know what is truly virtuous. For instance, a woman having no real voice may be considered virtuous. It certainly takes restraint in not conveying true emotion or expressing oneself. It would be an example of the rational part of the soul taking over the irrational. In history, the argument was used that women were too emotional and that they should be subservient to men in order to live a fulfilling life. However, this is not my idea of a virtuous or fulfilling life; the thought of it gives no pleasure or happiness whatsoever. I’m not sure if Aristotle would classify that as being vulgar or seeking too much honor, but it definitely is not my version of happiness.
Aristotle. “The Internet Classics Archive: Nicomachean Ethics .” Translated by W. D. Ross, The Internet Classics Archive | Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle, 1994, classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.1.i.html.
