Aristotle Excess And Deficiency Analysis

1098 Words5 Pages
Aristotle explains that the mean is extremes of excess and deficiency. Aristotle first explains this by comparing it to health and food. It was explained in medical terms that we ruin our health if we eat too little or too much. For instance, it is ruined by excess and deficiency. The mean is divided into three categories; extreme of deficiency (being a coward), mean (bravery or courage), and extreme of excess (rashness, reckless). Though, a virtuous person will be in the mean which lies between extremes of excess and deficiency. That person will neither be a coward or reckless. This ability doesn’t come inherently, and the person will need persistent teachings and logical control over their feelings. After these accomplishments are met, then…show more content…
69)”. I think this is nicely used for any individual and would be an exception to be relative to a person. However, this also meets their happiness and yet if their goal isn’t for the good and is for selfishness reasons, how are they considered to be virtuous. Just because someone is happy for fulfilling their happiness should not immediately imply that they are in fact…show more content…
Virtue in his term is one that can meet the highest point of happiness; rich, fame, power, etc. In today’s society, it is kindness, intelligence, friendlessness, courage, etc. He would consider a celebrity to be at the highest peak of virtue and gain happiness, however, the happiness is normally attained even at that height. Someone who is poor and is sacrificing their food and money to help another poor family is someone to be considered as a true virtuous person. Aristotle didn’t think of how differently society would be then and now. Lastly, doctrine of the mean seems to be a very well thought out system on how society functions. However, I don’t think that someone who is a coward is automatically considered bad as we don’t know why they are a coward. Maybe being a coward is what saves not only themselves but others as well. I also didn’t see Aristotle provide examples of what a coward, courageous, or reckless person may resemblance to. As for someone who is reckless might actually provide happiness or security for some people in different communities and achieve the goals of what they all wanted. Overall, Aristotle is not a relativistic person as he didn’t think of how it might compare to a relative person. I think this has to do with the fact that he is a victorian morality and didn’t really get to experience situations
Open Document