The Modern Era is choked with modified emotions with virtues of dismal and absurdity of goodness in us. But actually were regarded as ethics primarily narrated by Aristotle many centuries ago. The year 2022 was the year marked by the 2,800th anniversary of the birth of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle (384–322 BCE). Along with his teacher Plato, Aristotle is the most remarkable representative of ancient philosophical thoughts. His impact on subsequent generations is huge, and perhaps only Plato could compare with Aristotle in significance. Although modern science and philosophy have come a long way since Aristotle’s era, and our scientific and philosophical knowledge have significantly altered since Aristotle wrote his Metaphysics—the first major work in the history of philosophy—his methods continue to have a deep influence on philosophical and scientific thought. Aristotle was the maiden Western thinker to divide philosophy into branches, such as logic, metaphysics, natural philosophy, philosophy of mind, rhetoric, politics, and ethics. Not only are these branches still recognizable today, but the philosopher himself made major contributions in all these fields.
Aristotle persuades ethical theory as a field distinct from the theoretical sciences. He interprets ethics as neither something akin to mathematics (which is very certain and clear) nor something like rhetoric (which is not certain at all). Ethics lies between those two. It must be understood in terms of the acquisition of certain good habits or “virtues” such as courage, temperance, justice, and wisdom. It is worth noticing that Aristotle does not promote the theoretical study of ethics; rather, he tells us to “examine the nature of actions, namely how we ought to do them.” For him, the aim of ethics is not theoretical but practical. He clearly states that “the present inquiry does not aim at theoretical knowledge like the others (for we inquire not in order to know what virtue is, but in order to become good since otherwise, our inquiry would have been of no use).” This, however, does not mean that ethics might make one good.
The basic difference between Aristotelian ethics and more modern versions is that contrary to modern moral theories that have been largely concerned with determining how to act in particular situations, according to Aristotle, ethics is not about finding a decision procedure by means of which to resolve moral problems or dilemmas. Instead, it enables one to understand what goodness is, and in this way may perhaps influence one’s conduct as well as the way one raises one’s children. We study ethics in order to improve our lives, and therefore its principal focus is on the nature of human well-being. Aristotle is thus concerned with delineating a morally appropriate character, a good human being; and he is doing this by focusing on virtues, both intellectual and moral.
One of the most unsettled issues concerning Aristotelian ethics is the question of its internal composition and content completeness. Many may think that they can get by without one but chances are that they are egoists and do have a principle that is guiding them. If it makes me feel good, if it makes me happy, if I like it and can live with it then it is all right for me to do it. That may seem like an attractive principle by which we can make decisions until one starts to think about it. As a guide for all people that principle would lead and does lead to many conflicts.
The most common stereotype with regard to ancient ethics and modern morality concerns the vital issue that ancient ethics is only about the question “What is the good life” and that modern moral theories only deal with the question “What should one do” or “How should one act”. Many stereotypes certainly depict some truth, but there is almost always a lot of room for a better understanding of the differences and similarities of the particular issue. An ethical virtue, according to Aristotle, needs to be completely internalized by its agent through many actions of the same type so that the person is able to accomplish a firm disposition. In other words, a brave person who has the virtue of courage has to perform many brave actions in the area of fear and confidence in order to accomplish a brave disposition. Performing the appropriate actions is the only way one can do this.
Indeed, modern moral theories are rather focused on the question of what should one do in a particular situation, and usually, ethicists do not pay much attention to the question of living a good life. Ancient ethicists, instead, believe that one cannot separate both issues.
According to ancient ethics, a completely virtuous person, who is the bearer of all ethical virtues, is unable to act in a non-virtuous way. If a person bears one virtue, he thereby bears all other virtues as well (that is the thesis of the unity of the virtues). In modern morality, utilitarianism, for example, convincingly distinguishes between the evaluation of the character of a person and his or her actions. It can easily be the case, according to utilitarianism, that a morally bad person performs a morally right action or that a morally good person performs a morally wrong action. This distinction is impossible to draw for proponents of (classic) virtue ethics because an ethically right action always presupposes that the person has an ethically good character.
The upshot is, however, that the vital question of how to live a good life cannot be separated from the essential question of how one should act. Conceptually and phenomenologically, both questions are intimately interwoven and a complete ethical theory will always be concerned with both issues, independently of whether the theory is of ancient or modern origin.
