BLWith new text and full apparatus criticusThe Eudemian Ethics was one of two ethical treatises which Aristotle wrote on the subject of ethica or `matters to do. Donor challenge: Your generous donation will be matched 2-to-1 right now. Your $5 becomes $15! Dear Internet Archive Supporter,. I ask only. Note: Ethica eudemia and de virtutibus et vitiis are translated by J. Solomon. Physical Description: xxiii, p. ; 23 cm. Locate a Print Version: Find in a library .
|Published (Last):||3 January 2010|
|PDF File Size:||18.12 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||14.77 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
This has no parallel in the Nicomachean Ethics. In addition some are hardly extensive or consistent enough to be independently significant: But the readings, whether scribal error or not, do have a certain sense in the context. Within that life honor and wealth and victory are preferable in themselves, at least up to the point the political life needs.
EN has not raised the question so the answer ethicaa not be applied to it. That is why it is a human thing. EE does not return to the question of regimes and ends instead with a discussion of the fully virtuous man, the kalokagathos, the gentleman, who devotes himself to the worship of the god.
Kb then is plausibly seen as having here suffered a contamination of traditions that properly are separate.
Philosophers are precisely theoretically and not just practically inclined, while legislators, the presumed audience of EN, would not have this theoretical interest, or not qua legislators. The Great Ethics of Aristotle.
The main justification is the way the first option is stated being wronged is involuntary as wronging is involuntaryfor it associates being wronged and wronging in the same class of the involuntary. But neither in EE nor in EN is the political or legal just said to be contrary etica nature.
Is all being wronged involuntary as all wronging is involuntary? But the change at the very end is in EE alone. The answer, if there is one, would seem to be precisely that the EE version is not considering the voluntariness or involuntariness of being wronged by itself, but rather the relation of its voluntariness or involuntariness to the voluntariness or involuntariness of wronging.
The incurably bad are beyond hope and should have nothing, for whatever they have they will abuse. This entry has no external links. The Eudemian Ethics Greek: The EN version may be formalized as follows: Ethics books Works by Aristotle.
An Oct of the EE R. The question, then, turns rather on whether the different readings make sense in their contexts, for if so scribal error will cease to be the only, or the only plausible, explanation.
Most people have the goods in a way that varies between too much and too little, and here there is justice or a need to balance sudemia the distribution of goods. There is nevertheless a certain going up and down involved.
Of course, if they vary, they need not always be the one or the other always both the same or always eydemia opposite ; they might sometimes be the same and sometimes opposite. What are the theoretical options if wronging and being wronged are taken together?
The latter exists in the case of those who share together a way of life aimed at self-sufficiency, who are free and equal, whether in proportion or number. Eudemiia there are some for whom it is possible to have an excess of them, as the gods perhaps, and others, the incurably bad, for whom no share can be of any benefit but it all harms eudemmia, and others for whom [a share is of benefit] as far as this is human.
Nevertheless legislators can still rightly regard them as preferable in themselves in the context of legislation, and so in the context of EN, where the political life is a happy life, though a secondary one Eudwmia But EN, unlike EE, then descends back into politics Note however that these eudemix are also found in some EN mss.
Conclusion On the basis of the above considerations, the overall conclusion to draw would seem to be etgica the text of the common books as the mss. They would seem to be the semi-divine philosophers of EE 8. The point of the passage seems to be that questions of justice and injustice only arise ethicx the case of goods that people can share too much or too little of.
If we so proceed we would, interestingly, return to what the earliest printed texts of Aristotle did, the Aldine and the Basel Erasmian, both of which! For these words make it clear that what is decisive is not having more but being a distributor. The upshot will be to endorse the latter of his two general judgments and to cast some doubt on the eudemmia. Note then a further passage in the same context, at b2, which in both EN and EE eudeia reads: Individual passages will still have to be examined, of course, because scribal error cannot be excluded in advance.
He spent most of his time from in Italy, and died in That the EE version adds nothing of legislative relevance is clear also from the fact that the discussion in the next lines which are the same in both the EE and the EN versions answers the EE and EN list of options in one and the same way and without express discussion of the excluded members.
EE is, as it were, going off at something of a philosophical tangent. The ethixa in this interpretation is that the division does not concern being wronged by itself but being wronged and wronging together. A third article, published in ,5 is about a ms.