all the best game is the game

The problem is Aristotle's Golden Mean

Aristotle's virtues inherent in what he calls the "Golden Middle". This essentially means avoiding extremes. If we have a set of {1,2,3}, then {2} would be the average. Aristotle believes that man as a rational animal can justify this average. Aristotle's moral virtue is the attachment to the Golden Middle. Man has to focus on all his emotions and actions.

This looks great on paper, but it's easier to say than it does. Despite Aristotle's criticism of Plato's abstract thinking, the teaching of the Golden Mean seems to me to be as abstract as anything Plato has ever written. How can we apply "middle ground" in all situations? If a wealthy doctor steals an apple from the store, it will become part of the family of products in the most extreme category of the underworld. But if a homeless man steals the same apple for his hungry child, the extremes are far less clear. Aristotle was a philosopher and scholar, and he liked to incorporate everything in his own "small holes" into his own ordinary systems. But ethical dilemmas can not be categorized into the right categories; especially if the Golden Middle is such an abstract. Although he points out that this is "relative to himself", he still does not explain what virtue really is. Aristotle's moral criteria seem to be great for the privileged class he was a member of, but while teaching Sándor Nagy to help prepare for the Hellenistic era, [Aristotle] he may have considered the lower classes perhaps somewhat neglected, possibly unable to search "middle" . Next PagePrevious Page

Similar Posts

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *