[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
and with what each of them is concerned, and we have said that each is
the virtue of a different part of the soul.
12
Difficulties might be raised as to the utility of these qualities of mind.
For (1) philosophic wisdom will contemplate none of the things that will
make a man happy (for it is not concerned with any coming into being),
and though practical wisdom has this merit, for what purpose do we
need it? Practical wisdom is the quality of mind concerned with things
just and noble and good for man, but these are the things which it is the
mark of a good man to do, and we are none the more able to act for
knowing them if the virtues are states of character, just as we are none
the better able to act for knowing the things that are healthy and sound,
in the sense not of producing but of issuing from the state of health; for
we are none the more able to act for having the art of medicine or of
gymnastics. But (2) if we are to say that a man should have practical
wisdom not for the sake of knowing moral truths but for the sake of
becoming good, practical wisdom will be of no use to those who are
good; again it is of no use to those who have not virtue; for it will make
no difference whether they have practical wisdom themselves or obey
Nicomachean Ethics/103
others who have it, and it would be enough for us to do what we do in
the case of health; though we wish to become healthy, yet we do not
learn the art of medicine. (3) Besides this, it would be thought strange if
practical wisdom, being inferior to philosophic wisdom, is to be put in
authority over it, as seems to be implied by the fact that the art which
produces anything rules and issues commands about that thing.
These, then, are the questions we must discuss; so far we have only
stated the difficulties.
(1) Now first let us say that in themselves these states must be wor-
thy of choice because they are the virtues of the two parts of the soul
respectively, even if neither of them produce anything.
(2) Secondly, they do produce something, not as the art of medicine
produces health, however, but as health produces health; so does philo-
sophic wisdom produce happiness; for, being a part of virtue entire, by
being possessed and by actualizing itself it makes a man happy.
(3) Again, the work of man is achieved only in accordance with
practical wisdom as well as with moral virtue; for virtue makes us aim
at the right mark, and practical wisdom makes us take the right means.
(Of the fourth part of the soul the nutritive there is no such virtue;
for there is nothing which it is in its power to do or not to do.)
(4) With regard to our being none the more able to do because of
our practical wisdom what is noble and just, let us begin a little further
back, starting with the following principle. As we say that some people
who do just acts are not necessarily just, i.e., those who do the acts
ordained by the laws either unwillingly or owing to ignorance or for
some other reason and not for the sake of the acts themselves (though, to
be sure, they do what they should and all the things that the good man
ought), so is it, it seems, that in order to be good one must be in a certain
state when one does the several acts, i.e., one must do them as a result of
choice and for the sake of the acts themselves. Now virtue makes the
choice right, but the question of the things which should naturally be
done to carry out our choice belongs not to virtue but to another faculty.
We must devote our attention to these matters and give a clearer state-
ment about them. There is a faculty which is called cleverness; and this
is such as to be able to do the things that tend towards the mark we have
set before ourselves, and to hit it. Now if the mark be noble, the clever-
ness is laudable, but if the mark be bad, the cleverness is mere smart-
ness; hence we call even men of practical wisdom clever or smart. Prac-
tical wisdom is not the faculty, but it does not exist without this faculty.
104/Aristotle
And this eye of the soul acquires its formed state not without the aid of
virtue, as has been said and is plain; for the syllogisms which deal with
acts to be done are things which involve a starting-point, viz., since the
end, i.e., what is best, is of such and such a nature, whatever it may be
(let it for the sake of argument be what we please); and this is not evi-
dent except to the good man; for wickedness perverts us and causes us
to be deceived about the starting-points of action. Therefore it is evident
that it is impossible to be practically wise without being good.
13
We must therefore consider virtue also once more; for virtue too is simi-
larly related; as practical wisdom is to cleverness not the same, but
like it so is natural virtue to virtue in the strict sense. For all men think
that each type of character belongs to its possessors in some sense by
nature; for from the very moment of birth we are just or fitted for
selfcontrol or brave or have the other moral qualities; but yet we seek
something else as that which is good in the strict sense we seek for the
presence of such qualities in another way. For both children and brutes
have the natural dispositions to these qualities, but without reason these
are evidently hurtful. Only we seem to see this much, that, while one
may be led astray by them, as a strong body which moves without sight
may stumble badly because of its lack of sight, still, if a man once
acquires reason, that makes a difference in action; and his state, while
still like what it was, will then be virtue in the strict sense. Therefore, as
in the part of us which forms opinions there are two types, cleverness
and practical wisdom, so too in the moral part there are two types,
natural virtue and virtue in the strict sense, and of these the latter in-
volves practical wisdom. This is why some say that all the virtues are
forms of practical wisdom, and why Socrates in one respect was on the
right track while in another he went astray; in thinking that all the vir-
tues were forms of practical wisdom he was wrong, but in saying they
implied practical wisdom he was right. This is confirmed by the fact
that even now all men, when they define virtue, after naming the state of
character and its objects add that (state) which is in accordance with
the right rule ; now the right rule is that which is in accordance with
practical wisdom. All men, then, seem somehow to divine that this kind
of state is virtue, viz. that which is in accordance with practical wis-
dom. But we must go a little further. For it is not merely the state in
accordance with the right rule, but the state that implies the presence of
Nicomachean Ethics/105
the right rule, that is virtue; and practical wisdom is a right rule about [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl akte20.pev.pl
and with what each of them is concerned, and we have said that each is
the virtue of a different part of the soul.
12
Difficulties might be raised as to the utility of these qualities of mind.
For (1) philosophic wisdom will contemplate none of the things that will
make a man happy (for it is not concerned with any coming into being),
and though practical wisdom has this merit, for what purpose do we
need it? Practical wisdom is the quality of mind concerned with things
just and noble and good for man, but these are the things which it is the
mark of a good man to do, and we are none the more able to act for
knowing them if the virtues are states of character, just as we are none
the better able to act for knowing the things that are healthy and sound,
in the sense not of producing but of issuing from the state of health; for
we are none the more able to act for having the art of medicine or of
gymnastics. But (2) if we are to say that a man should have practical
wisdom not for the sake of knowing moral truths but for the sake of
becoming good, practical wisdom will be of no use to those who are
good; again it is of no use to those who have not virtue; for it will make
no difference whether they have practical wisdom themselves or obey
Nicomachean Ethics/103
others who have it, and it would be enough for us to do what we do in
the case of health; though we wish to become healthy, yet we do not
learn the art of medicine. (3) Besides this, it would be thought strange if
practical wisdom, being inferior to philosophic wisdom, is to be put in
authority over it, as seems to be implied by the fact that the art which
produces anything rules and issues commands about that thing.
These, then, are the questions we must discuss; so far we have only
stated the difficulties.
(1) Now first let us say that in themselves these states must be wor-
thy of choice because they are the virtues of the two parts of the soul
respectively, even if neither of them produce anything.
(2) Secondly, they do produce something, not as the art of medicine
produces health, however, but as health produces health; so does philo-
sophic wisdom produce happiness; for, being a part of virtue entire, by
being possessed and by actualizing itself it makes a man happy.
(3) Again, the work of man is achieved only in accordance with
practical wisdom as well as with moral virtue; for virtue makes us aim
at the right mark, and practical wisdom makes us take the right means.
(Of the fourth part of the soul the nutritive there is no such virtue;
for there is nothing which it is in its power to do or not to do.)
(4) With regard to our being none the more able to do because of
our practical wisdom what is noble and just, let us begin a little further
back, starting with the following principle. As we say that some people
who do just acts are not necessarily just, i.e., those who do the acts
ordained by the laws either unwillingly or owing to ignorance or for
some other reason and not for the sake of the acts themselves (though, to
be sure, they do what they should and all the things that the good man
ought), so is it, it seems, that in order to be good one must be in a certain
state when one does the several acts, i.e., one must do them as a result of
choice and for the sake of the acts themselves. Now virtue makes the
choice right, but the question of the things which should naturally be
done to carry out our choice belongs not to virtue but to another faculty.
We must devote our attention to these matters and give a clearer state-
ment about them. There is a faculty which is called cleverness; and this
is such as to be able to do the things that tend towards the mark we have
set before ourselves, and to hit it. Now if the mark be noble, the clever-
ness is laudable, but if the mark be bad, the cleverness is mere smart-
ness; hence we call even men of practical wisdom clever or smart. Prac-
tical wisdom is not the faculty, but it does not exist without this faculty.
104/Aristotle
And this eye of the soul acquires its formed state not without the aid of
virtue, as has been said and is plain; for the syllogisms which deal with
acts to be done are things which involve a starting-point, viz., since the
end, i.e., what is best, is of such and such a nature, whatever it may be
(let it for the sake of argument be what we please); and this is not evi-
dent except to the good man; for wickedness perverts us and causes us
to be deceived about the starting-points of action. Therefore it is evident
that it is impossible to be practically wise without being good.
13
We must therefore consider virtue also once more; for virtue too is simi-
larly related; as practical wisdom is to cleverness not the same, but
like it so is natural virtue to virtue in the strict sense. For all men think
that each type of character belongs to its possessors in some sense by
nature; for from the very moment of birth we are just or fitted for
selfcontrol or brave or have the other moral qualities; but yet we seek
something else as that which is good in the strict sense we seek for the
presence of such qualities in another way. For both children and brutes
have the natural dispositions to these qualities, but without reason these
are evidently hurtful. Only we seem to see this much, that, while one
may be led astray by them, as a strong body which moves without sight
may stumble badly because of its lack of sight, still, if a man once
acquires reason, that makes a difference in action; and his state, while
still like what it was, will then be virtue in the strict sense. Therefore, as
in the part of us which forms opinions there are two types, cleverness
and practical wisdom, so too in the moral part there are two types,
natural virtue and virtue in the strict sense, and of these the latter in-
volves practical wisdom. This is why some say that all the virtues are
forms of practical wisdom, and why Socrates in one respect was on the
right track while in another he went astray; in thinking that all the vir-
tues were forms of practical wisdom he was wrong, but in saying they
implied practical wisdom he was right. This is confirmed by the fact
that even now all men, when they define virtue, after naming the state of
character and its objects add that (state) which is in accordance with
the right rule ; now the right rule is that which is in accordance with
practical wisdom. All men, then, seem somehow to divine that this kind
of state is virtue, viz. that which is in accordance with practical wis-
dom. But we must go a little further. For it is not merely the state in
accordance with the right rule, but the state that implies the presence of
Nicomachean Ethics/105
the right rule, that is virtue; and practical wisdom is a right rule about [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]