To be morally correct is to be concerned between what is right and wrong, to always search for an ethical solution for any complications. Yet, what constitutes for what is truly a commendable action and what is reprehensible? The doctrine of the mean is considered a viable option to determine what is morally good in any context and for any human being. It emerges in the work of Aristotle, particularly in Nicomachean Ethics, which explains that moral virtues are a mindset of a proper manner, neither excessive nor deficient, but a medium between the two extremes. However, this is naively idealistic and is difficult to apply in real life situations.
Aristotle’s first mention of the doctrine of the mean can be found in Book II 1104a12. …show more content…
He says that a person with practical wisdom is able to define what is in the mean. Having practical wisdom doesn’t come easy, you have to learn from others and need a virtuous character and a lot of time. So a person with practical wisdom would know what to do. This means that a person without practical wisdom would not. Therefore, if one doesn’t have practical wisdom, he wouldn’t know what a virtuous person would do. So we can conclude that not everyone can have the knowledge of good. Basically, if you aren’t virtuous, Aristotle doesn’t give any guidance to help you. Now let us think about moral dilemmas. We are to learn from the way virtuous people act. But many of the so called virtuous people take different stances on an issue like abortion. What would be the “virtuous” stance on issues like this?
Another issue is Aristotle’s definition of virtuous acts and a virtuous person. According to Aristotle a virtuous person does virtuous things. This doesn’t necessarily mean a person who commits virtuous acts is a virtuous person. A virtuous person has to choose to act virtuously for selfless reasons. The issue is that this is similar to how someone might explain what a word means by using the same word in the definition. We will never know if an act is virtuous if we don’t know that a virtuous person would do it. We also won’t know if a person is virtuous without knowing that they do virtuous
Aristotle’s first mention of the doctrine of the mean can be found in Book II 1104a12. …show more content…
He says that a person with practical wisdom is able to define what is in the mean. Having practical wisdom doesn’t come easy, you have to learn from others and need a virtuous character and a lot of time. So a person with practical wisdom would know what to do. This means that a person without practical wisdom would not. Therefore, if one doesn’t have practical wisdom, he wouldn’t know what a virtuous person would do. So we can conclude that not everyone can have the knowledge of good. Basically, if you aren’t virtuous, Aristotle doesn’t give any guidance to help you. Now let us think about moral dilemmas. We are to learn from the way virtuous people act. But many of the so called virtuous people take different stances on an issue like abortion. What would be the “virtuous” stance on issues like this?
Another issue is Aristotle’s definition of virtuous acts and a virtuous person. According to Aristotle a virtuous person does virtuous things. This doesn’t necessarily mean a person who commits virtuous acts is a virtuous person. A virtuous person has to choose to act virtuously for selfless reasons. The issue is that this is similar to how someone might explain what a word means by using the same word in the definition. We will never know if an act is virtuous if we don’t know that a virtuous person would do it. We also won’t know if a person is virtuous without knowing that they do virtuous