Aristotle's Moral Virtues and Practical Wisdom - Essay Example

Aristotle: Moral Virtues and Practical Wisdom The ancient Greek philosopher known as Aristotle is often cited as one of our most learned men in history. This man defined the ultimate goal of life to be the attainment of happiness. Not defined as the pursuit of every hedonistic pleasure a person might imagine, Aristotle envisioned happiness as being attained only when we are able to live our lives according to our individual understanding of moral virtues which would lead to the use of practical wisdom. In making his case, Aristotle illustrates how there are actually several virtues, which he calls by the names of courage, temperance, magnanimity, pride, gentleness, truthfulness and wit, but also how these virtues do not necessarily have clearly defined borders that can be spelled out through the simple medium of letters. This is an important distinction to make as the formation of these moral virtues depends in large measure upon the experiences one has that help form them. The second part of the equation for happiness is the exercise of practical wisdom. Generally, Aristotle said that practical wisdom is wisdom based on rationality and an accurate interpretation of what the greatest good would be in a given situation. This is a natural tendency in all people, to try to make decisions in life that are based upon the wisdom they’ve learned so far, but Aristotle indicates that without the benefit of well-developed moral virtues, these decisions will often lead to imperfect understandings of the situation and imperfect assessments of the right action to take. However, taking the right action is essential if one is to develop strong moral virtues. As a result, Aristotle makes the claim, particularly in his book Nicomachean Ethics, that practical wisdom depends upon the existence of moral virtues to be exercised, yet at the same time, moral virtues require the exercise of practical wisdom to be developed. Moral ethics becomes the primary topic of conversation in the first chapter of Book 2 of Nicomachean Ethics. He defines them as inner conscience grown out of consistent practice. “None of the moral virtues arises in us by nature; for nothing that exists by nature can form a habit contrary to its nature … Neither by nature, then, nor contrary to nature do the virtues arise in us; rather we are adapted by nature to receive them, and are made perfect by habit.”1 Aristotle compares the process to learning how to play an instrument, but a process that might be more familiar to people in the modern period would be learning to type on a blank keyboard. Anyone can hit the keys on the keyboard, but they don’t produce anything meaningful on the computer screen until one begins to learn the position of the letters. With practice, a person can begin to type without error as fast as they can think the words. This constant practice until one is proficient is the same process that is required for the development of strong moral virtues. The difference between this analogy and the analogy of the instrument that Aristotle uses is that once the keyboard strokes are learned, they are much the same for each individual regardless of what is being typed. In playing music, of course, there is a great deal of interpretation and nuance brought in by the personality of the player, making each performance unique even when the same song is played on the same instrument in the same venue by the same player. In the same way, moral virtues are uniquely individual, different according to the individual, the virtue being tested, the situation that is presented and the definition of what constitutes the greatest good. Just as the proficient typist will experience a sense of pleasure at having typed a long work without error or the musician will gain an immense sense of satisfaction at having performed a particularly difficult piece, so the individual exercising his moral virtues will experience a tremendous sense of pleasure at having done the right thing. This feeling, Aristotle says, is the indication that one has developed a virtuous disposition. There are several virtues listed in Nicomachean Ethics that require development. The first one, and one of the more important ones as it receives more attention from Aristotle than some of the others, is courage. Instead of being defined in terms of someone who is never afraid, Aristotle says true courage means knowing what fear is but being willing to face it in order to do what is good and right for the common good. Indeed, when it comes to the man who tries to prove his courage by demonstrating that he has no fear, Aristotle says, “Common usage has no name for excessive lack of fear, but the man who is afraid of nothing is either a madman or totally immune to pain.” 2 On the other hand, a man who runs away from every battle on the pretense that getting himself killed won’t help matters is not showing courage either. Aristotle says, “The coward, then, is a despairing sort of person; for he fears everything.”3 The trick is to discover that place somewhere in the middle of these two extremes where courage exists. In the same way that courage is a balancing point between two extremes, so are the other virtues portrayed as virtues of moderation. Temperance, for example, is the practice of finding a balance between complete self-satisfaction and total humanitarianism. Magnificence means finding a balance between giving away what is needed and giving away too much. “In everything that is continuous and divisible it is possible to take more, less, or an equal amount, and that either in terms of the thing itself or relatively to us; and the equal is an intermediate between excess and defect. By the intermediate in the object I mean that which is equidistant from each of the extremes, which is one and the same for all men; by the intermediate relatively to us that which is neither too much nor too little”4 So, to be considered virtuous, an individual must discover that place between two extremes where they can do the greatest good and remains fairly lodged between doing what is right for others and doing what is right for self. He suggests that the person who is able to balance all of this appropriately will live and virtuous life and, because it is virtuous, it will also be happy. So, if the ultimate goal of life is to be happy and happiness is obtained by living a virtuous life and virtues cannot be clearly defined but are individual balancing acts between extremes that fluctuate with given scenarios, just how is one supposed to achieve happiness? It seems that there are too many variables at play to manage. Aristotle provides an answer in chapter 5 of Book 6 of Nicomachean Ethics with the idea of practical wisdom. Basically, practical wisdom is the sense of what is the right balance for a given situation in seeking the greatest good for all, including the self. Aristotle says, “we credit men with practical wisdom in some particular respect when they have calculated well with a view to some good end.”5 Although in some situations, practical wisdom may seem nearly automatic, such as whether it is the right thing to do to keep a small child, not your own, from being run over by an oncoming car, it is really a rational, meaning thinking, process. This is more apparent when one is faced with a greater issue, such as whether it is right for a person to steal food as a means of feeding her children when all other avenues have failed. The process of practical wisdom begins when the mother realizes that she will not be able to get food for her children today and her children are hungry now. She considers that it is wrong to steal anything, including food. This is not based upon what she knows of the law, but is instead an ethical law she was taught from her childhood that has to do with respecting property and the rights of others. On the other hand, her children, as living, breathing human beings, have a right to sustenance, which is a greater need than the food vendor’s cash. Her knowledge of the food vendor informs her that her theft will not adversely affect his quality of life but she knows that her decision not to steal will end in her children’s suffering. Her decision to act or not to act, and the reasons she made this decision, is itself the act of practical wisdom as either way will be because of a concern for human good. “It is a true and reasoned state of capacity to act with regard to the things that are good or bad for man. For while making has an end other than itself, action cannot; for good action itself is its end.”6 The mother’s decision to steal or not to steal is an action that begins to imprint and define for her what her virtues are and where she stands in the continuum. The action is necessary for this conscious definition to begin. “Practical wisdom, then, must be a reasoned and true state of capacity to act with regard to human goods … there is no such thing as excellence in practical wisdom; and in art he who errs willingly is preferable, but in practical wisdom, as in the virtues, he is the reverse. Plainly, then, practical wisdom is a virtue and not an art.”7 Because it is a virtue, it is like all the other virtues that were discussed earlier and must be practiced if it is to be developed. Since it can only be practiced and developed through action, it requires more than just the concept of thought as a driving force. Because practical wisdom is itself a virtue, there is an obvious need for virtues to develop in a person before it can be practiced. After all, there must be virtues to consider before the practical wisdom process of defining and balancing can begin. However, it is through the process of practical wisdom that virtues are developed. This introduces a chicken or the egg paradox that illustrates the absolute necessity for both to be present before either can exist. “The man who is without qualification good at deliberating is the man who is capable of aiming in accordance with calculation at the best for man of things attainable by action.”8 By acting on their interpretation of what is right, true and fair, individuals are engaging in the process of practical wisdom. Practical wisdom is the vehicle that helps them continue to refine these ideas of what is right, true and fair. Through this discussion, Aristotle has demonstrated that the concepts of moral virtues and practical wisdom are merely parts of a revolving wheel that would not turn if these parts were not present. Working on the idea that the ultimate purpose in life was to find happiness, Aristotle set about discovering what actions truly make us happy. Eventually, he determined that the happiest people he’d seen were happy because they were virtuous. They possessed all of the desirable qualities society respects, including courage, temperance, magnanimity, pride, gentleness and wit. In each individual happy person, Aristotle noted that they were able to quickly and accurately assess a balanced state between multiple extremes. They knew how to practice moderation not just in ensuring their own peace and comfort, but also in facing up to their fears and standing up for the common good of all society. It is an important lesson for anyone desiring to discover happiness in life and, while Aristotle could not provide hard and fast definitions of the various virtues that are necessary to a happy life, the mapping out of the process goes a long way toward pointing one in the right direction. References Aristotle. (350 BC). Nicomachean Ethics. W.D. Ross (Trans.). Available November 8, 2007 from Read More