Nicomachean Ethics on Moral Virtue Essay

Aristotle believes that sexual abstention, or excellence, rearwards tooth be baronial into both different types. One macrocosm intellectual virtue, and the other being righteous virtue. Aristotle encompasses intellectual virtue as being philosophical wisdom, mind and practical wisdom. He considers good virtue to be of liberality and temperance. Aristotle distinguishes mingled with the two types using his previous argumentation about the ludicrous element. Aristotle shows that the irrational element is comprised of a vegetative element as well as a desiring element, while the rational is separate from the vegetative.The floor that Aristotle makes is that the irrational can be composed of subdivisions and each could have an impact on the other. The selfsame(prenominal) idea is carried into his argument about virtue being distinguished into two types. Intellectual virtue comes from a sense, logical reasoning, or rational thought. The power to understand and act in harmony with that which is held to be thoroughgoing(a). Aristotle defines the split amid intellectual and example virtue in its perception of how it is obtained. Intellectual virtue is obtained through teaching requiring time and experience.This goes hand in hand with his translation for logical reasoning and rational thought. How can one distinguish betwixt that which is considered arrant(a)? Since it is the person who must(prenominal)iness decide what is utter(a) and that which is not, they must verify on life teachings to understand the difference. Aristotle claims example virtue fuck offs a end point of habit. Aristotle relates moralistic virtue with record. personality has a certain course of serve, which must be followed. Anything contradicting the course of nature would be classified as non-uniform. use the examples of throwing a b either.Its vivid acres is to come down and no look how practically you throw the ball up, it leave behind never go against its nat ure to come down. Moral virtue arises in us from nature, it does not sine qua non to be taught externally, it is born with us, and it is through habit that we atomic number 18 able to everlasting(a) our moral virtue. Moral virtue becomes a trait that is acquired through activity. In practice it becomes perfect, and by nature we be all accessible to it. Aristotle uses the parity of builders having to build to become good builders. The same concept applies to the phylogenesis of moral virtue. Moral virtue can then(prenominal) be carryd to assume through action.It is action, which will then define how well we display levels of moral virtue. Aristotle uses this point to lead way into his next argument about the development of states of source. As stated earlier, moral virtue is a way of nature. Nature implies that actions must be of a certain kind or grammatical caseistic. In application to the states of character, Aristotle claims that it is the differences, which define the states of character. therefrom sum of moneyment of a persons state of character lies on the ability to see the differences between a persons action and how far that action is from a natural course of action.The natural course of action becomes the next argument, for how does one measure the natural state of character or the norm? Aristotle begins by tackling this argument by defining what is considered not the normal. With this Aristotle gives rise to moral vices. Moral vices become defined as the extremes of moral action. In tramp to re-enforce this Aristotle uses examples of health and giveing. If a person is hungry, they can choose how much to eat, but what is considered a goodish amount to eat? There are now two extremes present, to eat nothing, or to all overeat.In the case of eating nothing this would constitute as bad for the health, for in that respect are no nutrients to fuel the body. Conversely in the argument, if one were to eat too much, this whitethorn lead to obesity which then gives high rise to a greater number of cardiovascular issues spark advance to a downfall in health. The point of this argument is to define that there are extremes and that these extremes can have adverse affects toward the goal in question. Vices hence have adverse affects towards goals. In order to build up moral virtue they must not follow vices.Aristotle points out that it becomes the mean, which becomes that which one should follow. Relating back to moral virtues being that of habit, it can be said that as actions are carried out, character is being create based on these actions. As character builds, they become more and more likely to do the same actions over and over, because it is defined in that characteristic state. For example if I were to run 2 miles every single day, for the first few days I would liveliness sore and unacquainted with running, but as time goes on, my muscles will naturally become set to the running environment, and will not caus e me much pain.However if I were to stop running all in all after months of habitually running then I would begin to bechance myself feeling out of shape and un-fit and my muscles would once again to begin to adapt to my laziness. In order to build character, one must stay outdoor(a) from vices, and stick to preservation of the mean, and during this process, they must stay with the mean, and not deviate, for its these deviations away from the mean, in which a character would begin to follow a building of unmoral virtue. Therefore it is the mean action that will define what constitutes as a moral virtuous action.Aristotle begins to further his argument over moral virtue by explaining virtue in terms of actions. Though there has to be some(prenominal) underlying constitution, which states that these actions are of valid in terms of building moral virtue. Aristotle claims that a person who lacks virtue may perform a virtuous action. Their actions will hold no sustenance if they do n ot postdate with the lead things which Aristotle points out must be held true in order to perform a virtuous action. A virtuous action consists of three things they must have accreditledge, choice of the action, and must do so from an invariable character.Actions, which will arise from a person who follows these, are indicative of a person who is in character and have developed a state of character. In order to differentiate between a person who is virtuous and a person is non-virtuous, they must meet the criteria above. For an action is simply an action, and it may be a good action, however if the person does not know what they are doing, and it does not follow in a state of accordance with their character then that person is not doing the virtuous action for the interest of being virtuous.A person who does a virtuous action will perform actions that they view as being virtuous and having knowledge of the actions themselves as being virtuous and it is because that person is doi ng this action in character that they are virtuous. They have habitually grown into a virtuous character because their state of character had already been previously built from previous virtuous actions. Aristotles arguments over the debate of virtue is that it becomes a slight enigma.For a character to become virtuous they must first perform virtuous actions. The paradox comes in that if a character were to become virtuous, that means that they are outset from a state of un-virtue. If this is the case, then it would contradict Aristotles third point of performing a virtuous action. Virtuous action being built upon a character that is un-virtuous would therefore contradict the third requirement for an action to virtuous. The third requirement being that it must come from a trustworthy and unchangeable character.If a character is unchangeable then the question remains, how does a person become virtuous? For now it can be concord upon that it is over the course of time and nature t hat a person is virtuous, they must perfect it through habit, and doing what is virtuous. In other words, if a person so desires to be virtuous they must habitually work towards performing virtuous actions. Therefore a state of character can be changed as time progresses based on actions that are performed.