Summary: Nicomachean Ethics
The Nicomachean Ethics is traditionally believed to be dedicated to Aristotle's father or son, both named Nicomachus. In this treatise, Aristotle seeks to determine the ultimate good. He concludes that this good is happiness, but how can it be achieved? Aristotle examines the different ways of life and presents insightful reflections on friendship and justice.
Other works: Physics Metaphysics On the Soul Poetics
Book I
Aristotle begins by giving his famous definition of the good as that which all things aim at
1. Every pursuit, action, science, and art aims at its own proper good.
The good is, therefore, an end, and as there are various actions and fields of inquiry, there are different ends. For example, health is the end of medicine, and victory the end of strategy.
There is a hierarchy of sciences: particular sciences are subordinate to a master (or architectonic) science. For example, the study of horses and weapons is subordinate to military science.
Likewise, there is a hierarchy of ends: some are pursued for the sake of others, which in turn are pursued for others, and so on. There must be a supreme end because otherwise we would get lost in infinity and our tendencies would become empty of content and without effect
2.
Since the good is an end, the highest end must be the highest good. If we can grasp what it is, we will know what is right to do
3.
Two questions then arise: what is the nature of this good, and to which science does it belong?
For Aristotle, it falls within the political science, which is the master science, since it organises all the others by determining which sciences are to be taught in the city. After all, does politics not legislate on the ends to be pursued by the state? Yet the good of the state is greater than the individual good of each citizen:
The good is certainly desirable when it concerns a single individual, but it is nobler and more divine when it applies to a people and to entire states.
The science that studies the supreme good is, therefore, indeed politics. Accordingly, Aristotle presents The Nicomachean Ethics as a political treatise.
This science, however, is not characterised by absolute certainty. Indeed, it must be acknowledged that we do not find the same degree of precision across disciplines: The beautiful and the just involve very wide divergences of interpretation and are so liable to error that they appear to have their being only by law and not by an effect of nature
5.
Aristotle illustrates these divergences with the example of wealth: wealth can save one person’s life but cause another’s death. Such situations make the formulation of absolute truths particularly problematic.
We must, therefore, be content with general truths, valid in most cases: When we are only talking about general facts and consequences, conclusions can only be general
6.
Knowing how to discern the appropriate level of precision in a given science is a mark of intellectual refinement. It would be misguided to expect probable reasoning from a mathematician or scientific demonstrations from a rhetorician.
After describing the object and the degree of certainty of this science, Aristotle then seeks to identify its audience: mature individuals, for one must have some life experience to engage with a science concerned with human life. Moreover, its conclusions must be put into practice: The aim of politics is not pure knowledge, but practice
7. But the young are governed by their passions and can only grasp the theory without applying it in practice.
This brings us to the essential question: what is the supreme good that constitutes the object of politics?
In fact, it is universally recognised and esteemed as such: it is happiness. Yet, while all agree on its name, many differ regarding its substance: On the very nature of happiness, we no longer agree
8.
1 Nicomachean Ethics, I, 1
2 I, 2
3 ibid.
4 ibid.
5 I, 3
6 ibid.
7 ibid.
8 I, 4