Aristotle nicomachean ethics second edition pdf

ARISTOTLE

NICOMACHEAN ETHICS

Translated with Introduction, Notes, and Glossary, by

TERENCE IRWIN

Second Edition

Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. Indianapolis /Cambridge

Copyright© 1999 by Terence Irwin

All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America

17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 7 8 9 10 11

For further information, please address Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. P. 0. Box 44937 Indianapolis, Indiana 46244-0937

www.hackettpublishing.com

Cover design by Listen berger & Associates Interior design by Meera Dash and Abigail Coyle

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Aristotle.

[Nicomachean ethics. English] Nicomachean ethics I Aristotle : translated, with introduction,

notes, and glossary by Terence Irwin.-2nd ed. p. em.

Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-87220-465-0-ISBN 0-87220-464-2 (pbk.) 1. Ethics. I. Irwin, Terence. II. Title.

B430.A5N5313 1999 171 '.3-dc21

ISBN-13: 978-0-87220-465-2 (cloth) ISBN-13: 978-0-87220-464-5 (pbk.) Adobe PDF ebook ISBN: 978-1-60384-567-0

99-26709 CIP

N I COMAC H EAN ETH I CS Book I , Chapte r 4 §5

cated in that area, and the unqualifiedly good judge is the person edu- 1 095a cated in every area.

This is why a youth is not a suitable student of political science; for he lacks experience of the actions in life, which are the subject and premises of our arguments. §6 Moreover, since he tends to follow his feelings, his study will be futile and useless; for the end [of political science] is action, 5 not knowledge.* §7 It does not matter whether he is young in years or immature in character, since the deficiency does not depend on age, but results from following his feelings in his life and in a given pursuit; for an immature person, like an incontinent person, gets no benefit from his knowledge. But for those who accord with reason in forming their desires 10 and in their actions, knowledge of political science will be of great benefit.

§8 These are the preliminary points about the student, about the way our claims are to be accepted, and about what we propose to do.*

4

[Co m mon Be l iefs]

Let us, then, begin again.* Since every sort of knowledge and decision* pursues some good, what is the good that we say political science seeks? 15 What, [in other words,] is the highest of all the goods achievable in action?

§2 As far as its name goes, most people virtually agree; for both the many and the cultivated call it happiness, and they suppose that living well and doing well are the same as being happy.* But they disagree 20 about what happiness is, and the many do not give the same answer as the wise.*

§3 For the many think it is something obvious and evident-for instance, pleasure, wealth, or honor. Some take it to be one thing, others another. Indeed, the same person often changes his mind; for when he has fallen ill, he thinks happiness is health, and when he has fallen into pov­ erty, he thinks it is wealth. And when they are conscious of their own ignorance, they admire anyone who speaks of something grand and 25 above their heads. [Among the wise,] however, some used to think that besides these many goods there is some other good that exists in its own right and that causes all these goods to be goods.*

§4 Presumably, then, it is rather futile to examine all these beliefs, and it is enough to examine those that are most current or seem to have some 30 argument for them.

§5 We must notice, however, the difference between arguments from principles and arguments toward principles.* For indeed Plato was right to be puzzled about this, when he used to ask if [the argument] set out from the principles or led toward them*-just as on a race course the path 1095b may go from the starting line to the far end,* or back again. For we should

3

David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
Book I, Chapte r 4 §5 AR I STOT LE

1095b certainly begin from things known, but things are known in two ways;* for some are known to us, some known without qualification. Presum­ ably, then, we ought to begin from things known to us.

5 §6 That is why we need to have been brought up in fine habits if we are to be adequate students of fine and just things, and of political ques­ tions generally. §7 For we begin from the [belief] that [something is true]; if this is apparent enough to us, we can begin without also [know­ ing] why [it is true].* Someone who is well brought up has the begin­ nings, or can easily acquire them.* Someone who neither has them nor

10 can acquire them should listen to Hesiod:* 'He who grasps everything himself is best of all; he is noble also who listens to one who has spoken well; but he who neither grasps it himself nor takes to heart what he hears from another is a useless man.'

5

[T he T h ree L ives]

But let us begin again from the point from which we digressed.* For, it would seem, people quite reasonably reach their conception of the good,

15 i.e., of happiness, from the lives [they lead]; §2 for there are roughly three most favored lives: the lives of gratification, of political activity, and, third, of study.*

The many, the most vulgar, would seem to conceive the good and hap­ piness as pleasure, and hence they also like the life of gratification.

20 §3 In this they appear completely slavish, since the life they decide on is a life for grazing animals.* Still, they have some argument in their defense, since many in positions of power feel as Sardanapallus* felt, [and also choose this life].

§4 The cultivated people, those active [in politics], conceive the good as honor, since this is more or less the end [normally pursued] in the political life. This, however, appears to be too superficial to be what we

25 are seeking;* for it seems to depend more on those who honor than on the one honored, whereas we intuitively believe that the good is something of our own and hard to take from us.* §5 Further, it would seem, they pursue honor to convince themselves that they are good; at any rate, they seek to be honored by prudent people, among people who know them,

30 and for virtue. It is clear, then, that-in their view at any rate-virtue is superior [to honor].

§6 Perhaps, indeed, one might conceive virtue more than honor to be the end of the political life. However, this also is apparently too incom­ plete [to be the good]. For it seems possible for someone to possess virtue

1096a but be asleep or inactive throughout his life, and, moreover, to suffer the worst evils and misfortunes. If this is the sort of life he leads, no one would count him happy, except to defend a philosopher 's paradox.*

4

David
Cross-Out
N I COMAC H EAN ETH I CS Book I , Chapte r 6 §4

Enough about this, since it has been adequately discussed in the popular 1 096a works* as well.

§7 The third life is the life of study, which we shall examine in what 5 follows.*

§8 The moneymaker 's life is in a way forced on him [not chosen for itself];* and clearly wealth is not the good we are seeking, since it is [merely] useful, [choiceworthy only] for some other end. Hence one would be more inclined to suppose that [any of] the goods mentioned earlier is the end, since they are liked for themselves. But apparently they are not [the end] either; and many arguments have been presented 10 against them.* Let us, then, dismiss them.

6

[T he P lato n i c Form of the Good ]

Presumably, though, we had better examine the universal good, and puz­ zle out what is meant in speaking of it.* This sort of inquiry is, to be sure, unwelcome to us, because those who introduced the Forms were friends* of ours; still, it presumably seems better, indeed only right, to destroy 15 even what is close to us if that is the way to preserve truth. We must espe- cially do this as philosophers, [lovers of wisdom]; for though we love both the truth and our friends, reverence is due to the truth first.

§2 Those who introduced this view did not mean to produce an Idea for any [series] in which they spoke of prior and posterior [members];* that was why they did not mean to establish an Idea [of number] for [the series of] numbers. But the good is spoken of both in what-it-is [that is, 20 substance], and in quality and relative;* and what exists in its own right, that is, substance, is by nature prior to the relative,* since a relative would seem to be an appendage and coincident of being. And so there is no com- mon Idea over these.

§3 Further, good is spoken of in as many ways as being [is spoken of]:* in what-it-is, as god and mind;* in quality, as the virtues; in quantity, as the 25 measured amount; in relative, as the useful; in time, as the opportune moment; in place, as the [right] situation; and so on. Hence it is clear that the good cannot be some common and single universal; for if it were, it would be spoken of in only one [of the types of] predication, not in them all.

§4 Further, if a number of things have a single Idea, there is also a sin- 30 gle science of them; hence [if there were an Idea of good] there would also be some single science of all goods. But, in fact, there are many sciences even of the goods under one [type of] predication; for the science of the opportune moment, for instance, in war is generalship, in disease medi- cine. And similarly the science of the measured amount in food is medi- cine, in exertion gymnastics. [Hence there is no single science of the good, and so no Idea.]

5

David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
N I COMAC H EAN ETH I CS Book I , Chapte r 7 §4

§14 Perhaps, however, someone might think it is better to get to know 1096b the Idea with a view to the goods that we can possess and achieve in 1097a action; for [one might suppose that] if we have this as a sort of pattern, we shall also know better about the goods that are goods for us, and if we know about them, we shall hit on them. §15 This argument certainly has some plausibility, but it would seem to clash with the sciences. For 5 each of these, though it aims at some good and seeks to supply what is lacking, leaves out knowledge of the Idea; but if the Idea were such an important aid, surely it would not be reasonable for all craftsmen to know nothing about it and not even to look for it.

§16 Moreover, it is a puzzle to know what the weaver or carpenter will gain for his own craft from knowing this Good Itself, or how anyone 10 will be better at medicine or generalship from having gazed on the Idea Itself. For what the doctor appears to consider is not even health [univer- sally, let alone good universally], but human health, and presumably the health of this human being even more, since he treats one particular patient at a time.*

So much, then, for these questions.

7

[An Accoun t of the H u man G ood]

But let us return once again to the good we are looking for, and con- 15 sider just what it could be.* For it is apparently one thing in one action or craft, and another thing in another; for it is one thing in medicine, another in generalship, and so on for the rest. What, then, is the good of each action or craft? Surely it is that for the sake of which the other things are done; in medicine this is health, in generalship victory, in house-building 20 a house, in another case something else, but in every action and decision it is the end, since it is for the sake of the end that everyone does the other actions.* And so, if there is some end of everything achievable in action, the good achievable in action will be this end; if there are more ends than one, [the good achievable in action] will be these ends.*

§2 Our argument, then, has followed a different route to reach the same conclusion.* But we must try to make this still more perspicuous.* 25 §3 Since there are apparently many ends, and we choose some of them (for instance, wealth, flutes, and, in general, instruments) because of something else, it is clear that not all ends are complete.* But the best good is apparently something complete. And so, if only one end is com- plete, the good we are looking for will be this end; if more ends than one are complete, it will be the most complete end of these.* 30

§4 We say that an end pursued in its own right is more complete than an end pursued because of something else, and that an end that is never choiceworthy because of something else is more complete than ends that

7

David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
Book I, Chapte r 7 §4 AR I STOT LE

1 097a are choiceworthy both in their own right and because of this end. Hence an end that is always choiceworthy in its own right,* never because of something else, is complete without qualification.

§5 Now happiness, more than anything else, seems complete without 1097b qualification.* For we always choose it because of itself,* never because of

something else. Honor, pleasure, understanding, and every virtue we cer­ tainly choose because of themselves, since we would choose each of them even if it had no further result; but we also choose them for the sake of hap-

s piness, supposing that through them we shall be happy.* Happiness, by con­ trast, no one ever chooses for their sake, or for the sake of anything else at all.

§6 The same conclusion [that happiness is complete] also appears to follow from self-sufficiency. For the complete good seems to be self-suffi­ cient.* What we count as self-sufficient is not what suffices for a solitary

10 person by himself, living an isolated life, but what suffices also for par­ ents, children, wife, and, in general, for friends and fellow citizens, since a human being is a naturally political [animal].* §7 Here, however, we must impose some limit; for if we extend the good to parents' parents and children's children and to friends of friends, we shall go on without limit; but we must examine this another time.

15 Anyhow, we regard something as self-sufficient when all by itself it makes a life choiceworthy and lacking nothing; and that is what we think happiness does. §8 Moreover, we think happiness is most choicewor­ thy of all goods, [since] it is not counted as one good among many.* [If it were] counted as one among many,* then, clearly, we think it would be more choiceworthy if the smallest of goods were added; for the good that is added becomes an extra quantity of goods, and the larger of two goods

20 is always more choiceworthy.* Happiness, then, is apparently something complete and self-sufficient,

since it is the end of the things achievable in action.*

§9 But presumably the remark that the best good is happiness is apparently something [generally ] agreed, and we still need a clearer statement of what the best good is.* §10 Perhaps, then, we shall find

25 this if we first grasp the function of a human being. For just as the good, i.e., [doing] well, for a flautist, a sculptor, and every craftsman, and, in general, for whatever has a function and [characteristic] action, seems to depend on its function,* the same seems to be true for a human being, if a human being has some function.

30 §11 Then do the carpenter and the leather worker have their functions and actions, but has a human being no function?* Is he by nature idle, without any function?* Or, just as eye, hand, foot, and, in general, every [bodily] part apparently has its function, may we likewise ascribe to a human being some function apart from all of these?*

§12 What, then, could this be? For living is apparently shared with 1098a plants, but what we are looking for is the special function of a human

8

N I COMAC H EAN ETH I CS Book I, Chapte r 7 §20

being; hence we should set aside the life of nutrition and growth.* The life 1 09Ba next in order is some sort of life of sense perception; but this too is appar- ently shared with horse, ox, and every animal.*

§13 The remaining possibility, then, is some sort of life of action* of the [part of the soul] that has reason.* One [part] of it has reason as obey- ing reason; the other has it as itself having reason and thinking.* More- 5 over, life is also spoken of in two ways [as capacity and as activity], and we must take [a human being's special function to be] life as activity, since this seems to be called life more fully.* §14 We have found, then, that the human function is activity of the soul in accord with reason or requiring reason.*

Now we say that the function of a [kind of thing]-of a harpist, for instance-is the same in kind as the function of an excellent individual of the kind-of an excellent harpist, for instance. And the same is true with- 10 out qualification in every case, if we add to the function the superior achievement in accord with the virtue; for the function of a harpist is to play the harp, and the function of a good harpist is to play it well.* More- over, we take the human function to be a certain kind of life, and take this life to be activity and actions of the soul that involve reason; hence the function of the excellent man is to do this well and finely. 15

§15 Now each function is completed well by being completed in accord with the virtue proper [to that kind of thing].* And so the human good proves to be activity of the soul in accord with virtue,* and indeed with the best and most complete virtue, if there are more virtues than one.* §16 Moreover, in a complete life.* For one swallow does not make a spring, nor does one day ; nor, similarly, does one day or a short time 20 make us blessed and happy.

§17 This, then, is a sketch of the good; for, presumably, we must draw the outline first, and fill it in later.* If the sketch is good, anyone, it seems, can advance and articulate it, and in such cases time discovers more, or is a good partner in discovery. That is also how the crafts have improved, 25 since anyone can add what is lacking [in the outline].

§18 We must also remember our previous remarks, so that we do not look for the same degree of exactness in all areas, but the degree that accords with a given subject matter and is proper to a given line of inquiry.* §19 For the carpenter 's and the geometer 's inquiries about the 30 right angle are different also; the carpenter restricts himself to what helps his work, but the geometer inquires into what, or what sort* of thing, the right angle is, since he studies the truth. We must do the same, then, in other areas too, [seeking the proper degree of exactness], so that digres- sions do not overwhelm our main task.

§20 Nor should we make the same demand for an explanation in all 1098b cases. On the contrary, in some cases it is enough to prove rightly that [something is true, without also explaining why it is true]. This is so, for

9

David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
N I COMAC H EAN ETH I CS Book I, Chapte r 8 §1 7

may be in a state that achieves no good-if, for instance, he is asleep or 1099a inactive in some other way-but this cannot be true of the activity; for it will necessarily act and act well. And just as Olympic prizes are not for the finest and strongest, but for the contestants-since it is only these who 5 win-the same is true in life; among the fine and good people, only those who act correctly* win the prize.

§10 Moreover, the life of these active people is also pleasant in itself.* For being pleased is a condition of the soul, [and hence is included in the activity of the soul]. Further, each type of person finds pleasure in what­ ever he is called a lover of; a horse, for instance, pleases the horse-lover, a spectacle the lover of spectacles. Similarly, what is just pleases the lover of 10 justice, and in general what accords with virtue pleases the lover of virtue.

§11 Now the things that please most people conflict,* because they are not pleasant by nature, whereas the things that please lovers of the fine are things pleasant by nature. Actions in accord with virtue are pleasant by nature, so that they both please lovers of the fine and are pleasant in 15 their own right.

§12 Hence these people's life does not need pleasure to be added [to virtuous activity] as some sort of extra decoration; rather, it has its plea­ sure within itself.* For besides the reasons already given, someone who does not enjoy fine actions is not good; for no one would call a person just, for instance, if he did not enjoy doing just actions, or generous if he did not enjoy generous actions, and similarly for the other virtues. 20

§13 If this is so, actions in accord with the virtues are pleasant in their own right. Moreover, these actions are good and fine as well as pleasant; indeed, they are good, fine, and pleasant more than anything else is, since on this question the excellent person judges rightly, and his judgment agrees with what we have said.

§14 Happiness, then, is best, finest, and most pleasant, and the Delian 25 inscription is wrong to distinguish these things: 'What is most just is fin- est; being healthy is most beneficial; but it is most pleasant to win our heart's desire.'* For all three features are found in the best activities, and we say happiness is these activities, or [rather] one of them, the best one.*

§15 Nonetheless, happiness evidently also needs external goods to be added, as we said, since we cannot, or cannot easily, do fine actions if we lack the resources.* For, first of all, in many actions we use friends, 1099b wealth, and political power just as we use instruments. §16 Further, deprivation of certain [externals]-for instance, good birth, good chil- dren, beauty-mars our blessedness. For we do not altogether have the character of happiness* if we look utterly repulsive or are ill-born, soli- tary, or childless; and we have it even less, presumably, if our children or 5 friends are totally bad, or were good but have died.

§17 And so, as we have said, happiness would seem to need this sort of prosperity added also. That is why some people identify happiness with good fortune, and others identify it with virtue.

1 1

David
Cross-Out
Book I, Chapte r 9 §1 AR I STOT LE

9

[ H ow I s H app i ness Ach ieved? ]

1099b This also leads to a puzzle: Is happiness acquired by learning, or habitua- 10 tion, or by some other form of cultivation? Or is it the result of some

divine fate, or even of fortune?* §2 First, then, if the gods give any gift at all to human beings, it is rea­

sonable for them to give us happiness more than any other human good, insofar as it is the best of human goods. §3 Presumably, however, this question is more suitable for a different inquiry.

15 But even if it is not sent by the gods, but instead results from virtue and some sort of learning or cultivation, happiness appears to be one of the most divine things, since the prize and goal of virtue appears to be the best good, something divine and blessed. §4 Moreover [if happiness comes in this way] it will be widely shared; for any one who is not deformed [in his capacity] for virtue will be able to achieve happiness

20 through some sort of learning and attention. §5 And since it is better to be happy in this way than because of for­

tune, it is reasonable for this to be the way [we become] happy. For what­ ever is natural is naturally in the finest state possible. §6 The same is true of the products of crafts and of every other cause, especially the best cause; and it would be seriously inappropriate to entrust what is greatest and finest to fortune.*

25 §7 The answer to our question is also evident from our account. For we have said that happiness is a certain sort of activity of the soul in accord with virtue, [and hence not a result of fortune]. Of the other goods, some are necessary conditions of happiness, while others are naturally useful and cooperative as instruments [but are not parts of it].

§8 Further, this conclusion agrees with our opening remarks. For we 30 took the goal of political science to be the best good; and most of its atten­

tion is devoted to the character of the citizens, to make them good people who do fine actions.*

§9 It is not surprising, then, that we regard neither ox, nor horse, nor uooa any other kind of animal as happy; for none of them can share in this sort

of activity. §10 For the same reason a child is not happy either, since his age prevents him from doing these sorts of actions. If he is called happy, he is being congratulated [simply] because of anticipated blessedness; for,

5 as we have said, happiness requires both complete virtue and a complete life.*

§10 It needs a complete life because life includes many reversals of for­ tune, good and bad, and the most prosperous person may fall into a terri­ ble disaster in old age, as the Trojan stories tell us about Priam. If someone has suffered these sorts of misfortunes and comes to a miserable end, no one counts him happy.

1 2

David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
Book I, Chapte r 1 2 §4 AR I STOT LE

1101b how it appears. For the gods and the most godlike* of men are [not 25 praised, but] congratulated for their blessedness and happiness. The

same is true of goods; for we never praise happiness, as we praise justice, but we count it blessed, as something better and more godlike [than any­ thing that is praised].

§5 Indeed, Eudoxus seems to have used the right sort of argument in defending the supremacy of pleasure.* By not praising pleasure, though it

30 is a good, we indicate-so he thought-that it is superior to everything praiseworthy ; [only] the god and the good have this superiority since the other goods are [praised] by reference to them.

§6 [Here he seems to have argued correctly.] For praise is given to vir­ tue, since it makes us do fine actions; but celebrations are for achieve­ ments, either of body or of soul. §7 But an exact treatment of this is

35 presumably more proper for specialists in celebrations. For us, anyhow, it 1102a is clear from what has been said that happiness is something honorable

and complete. §8 A further reason why this would seem to be correct is that happi­

ness is a principle; for [the principle] is what we all aim at in all our other actions;* and we take the principle and cause of goods to be something honorable and divine.

1 3

[ I n t rod uct ion to the Vi rtues]

5 Since happiness is a certain sort of activity of the soul in accord with complete virtue, we must examine virtue; for that will perhaps also be a way to study happiness better.* §2 Moreover, the true politician* seems to have put more effort into virtue than into anything else, since

10 he wants to make the citizens good and law-abiding. §3 We find an example of this in the Spartan and Cretan legislators and in any others who share their concerns. §4 Since, then, the examination of virtue is proper for political science, the inquiry clearly suits our decision at the beginning.*

§5 It is clear that the virtue we must examine is human virtue, since 15 we are also seeking the human good and human happiness. §6 By

human virtue we mean virtue of the soul, not of the body, since we also say that happiness is an activity of the soul. §7 If this is so, it is clear

20 that the politician must in some way know about the soul, just as some­ one setting out to heal the eyes must know about the whole body as well.* This is all the more true to the extent that political science is better and more honorable than medicine; even among doctors, the cultivated ones devote a lot of effort to finding out about the body. Hence the politician as well [as the student of nature] must study the soul.* §8 But he must

25 study it for his specific purpose, far enough for his inquiry [into virtue];

1 6

David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
N I COMAC H EAN ETH I C S B o o k I , C hapte r 1 3 §1 8

for a more exact treatment would presumably take more effort than his 1102a purpose requires.*

§9 [We] have discussed the soul sufficiently [for our purposes] in [our] popular works as well [as our less popular],* and we should use this dis­ cussion. We have said, for instance, that one [part] of the soul is nonra- tional, while one has reason. §10 Are these distinguished as parts of a 30 body and everything divisible into parts are? Or are they two [only] in definition, and inseparable by nature, as the convex and the concave are in a surface? It does not matter for present purposes.*

§11 Consider the nonrational [part]. One [part] of it, i.e., the cause of nutrition and growth, would seem to be plantlike and shared [with all liv- 1102b ing things]; for we can ascribe this capacity of the soul to everything that is nourished, including embryos, and the same capacity to full-grown liv- ing things, since this is more reasonable than to ascribe another capacity to them.*

§12 Hence the virtue of this capacity is apparently shared, not [specif- ically] human. For this part and this capacity more than others seem to 5 be active in sleep, and here the good and the bad person are least dis- tinct; hence happy people are said to be no better off than miserable peo- ple for half their lives. §13 This lack of distinction is not surprising, since sleep is inactivity of the soul insofar as it is called excellent or base, unless to some small extent some movements penetrate [to our aware- 10 ness], and in this way the decent person comes to have better images [in dreams] than just any random person has. §14 Enough about this, however, and let us leave aside the nutritive part, since by nature it has no share in human virtue.

§15 Another nature in the soul would also seem to be nonrational, though in a way it shares in reason. For in the continent and the inconti- 15 nent person we praise their reason, that is to say, the [part] of the soul that has reason, because it exhorts them correctly and toward what is best; but they evidently also have in them some other [part] that is by nature some- thing apart from reason, clashing and struggling with reason. For just as paralyzed parts of a body, when we decide to move them to the right, do 20 the contrary and move off to the left, the same is true of the soul; for incontinent people have impulses in contrary directions. §16 In bodies, admittedly, we see the part go astray, whereas we do not see it in the soul; nonetheless, presumably, we should suppose that the soul also has some- thing apart from reason, countering and opposing reason. The [precise] 25 way it is different does not matter.

§17 However, this [part] as well [as the rational part] appears, as we said, to share in reason. At any rate, in the continent person it obeys rea­ son; and in the temperate and the brave person it presumably listens still better to reason, since there it agrees with reason in everything.*

§18 The nonrational [part], then, as well [as the whole soul] appar- ently has two parts. For while the plantlike [part] shares in reason not at 30

1 7

David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
David
Cross-Out
Book I, Chapte r 1 3 §1 8 AR I STOT LE

1102b all, the [part] with appetites and in general desires* shares in reason in a way, insofar as it both listens to reason and obeys it. This is the way in which we are said to 'listen to reason' from father or friends, as opposed to the way in which [we 'give the reason'] in mathematics.* The nonra­ tional part also [obeys and] is persuaded in some way by reason, as is

1103a shown by correction, and by every sort of reproof and exhortation. §19 If, then, we ought to say that this [part] also has reason, then the

[part] that has reason, as well [as the nonrational part], will have two parts. One will have reason fully, by having it within itself; the other will have reason by listening to reason as to a father.*

5 The division between virtues accords with this difference. For some virtues are called virtues of thought, others virtues of character; wis­ dom, comprehension, and prudence are called virtues of thought, gener­ osity and temperance virtues of character.* For when we speak of someone's character we do not say that he is wise or has good compre­ hension, but that he is gentle or temperate. And yet, we also praise the

10 wise person for his state, and the states that are praiseworthy are the ones we call virtues.

BOOK I I

[VI RTU E OF C HARACTER]

[ H ow a Vi rtu e of Cha racte r Is Acq u i red ]

1 5 Virtue, then, is of two sorts, virtue of thought and virtue of character. Vir­ tue of thought arises and grows mostly from teaching; that is why it needs experience and time. Virtue of character [i.e., of ethos] results from habit [ethos] ; hence its name 'ethical', slightly varied from 'ethos'.*

§2 Hence it is also clear that none of the virtues of character arises in 20 us naturally. For if something is by nature in one condition, habituation

cannot bring it into another condition. A stone, for instance, by nature moves downwards, and habituation could not make it move upwards, not even if you threw it up ten thousand times to habituate it; nor could habituation make fire move downwards, or bring anything that is by nature in one condition into another condition. §3 And so the virtues

25 arise in us neither by nature nor against nature. Rather, we are by nature able to acquire them, and we are completed through habit.*

§4 Further, if something arises in us by nature, we first have the capac­ ity for it, and later perform the activity. This is clear in the case of the

30 senses; for we did not acquire them by frequent seeing or hearing, but we already had them when we exercised them, and did not get them by exer­ cising them. Virtues, by contrast, we acquire, just as we acquire crafts, by