Aristotle & Driver

What is the ultimate good of human life according to Aristotle?

It is happiness (eudaimonia), understood as living well, flourishing, and perfecting oneself.

Aristotle argues we all pursue some good in every action, and if there were no final end, our desires would form an infinite regress that leaves us empty. Therefore, happiness must be the intrinsic, complete, self-sufficient good that we pursue for its own sake.

How do we achieve the ultimate good according to Aristotle?

By living in accordance with our unique human function, rational activity, performed excellently (virtue). Because every being’s good lies in performing its function well, human good lies in reasoning well and structuring our lives around rational virtuous activity.

What is Aristotle’s argument for why the path to the ultimate good is virtuous rational activity?

Aristotle argues that:
Every action aims at some good; without a final good, all desire becomes empty.

The good of anything is found in its ergon (function).

The human function is rational activity, since lower functions (nutrition, perception) are shared with other beings.

Any function is done well when performed with excellence (arete).

Therefore, human flourishing must be excellent rational activity, i.e., living virtuously.
Thus, happiness = activity of the soul exhibiting excellence.

What does Aristotle mean when he says virtues arise “neither by nature nor contrary to nature… but are made perfect by habit”?

Aristotle means humans are naturally capable of developing virtue, but we do not possess virtue automatically. Instead, we acquire virtue by repeatedly performing virtuous actions until they become stable traits. Nature gives us the capacity, but habit perfects it.

How do we acquire moral virtue?

Through practice, habituation, and intentional action. By performing just, temperate, and brave actions repeatedly, we shape our desires and judgments until virtue becomes second nature. Upbringing, habituation, and following good role models support this development.

What is intellectual virtue, and how is it developed?

Intellectual virtue concerns truth, reasoning, and understanding universal principles. It is cultivated through teaching, experience, and time, not just habit. It perfects the rational part of the soul and supports wise judgment.

What does Aristotle mean by saying “virtue is a mean… aiming at what is intermediate”?

Aristotle means that moral virtue is the balanced equilibrium between two vices: one of excess and one of deficiency. Virtue requires feeling and acting at the right time, toward the right people, with the right motive, and in the right way, showing a context-sensitive balance that achieves excellence rather than mediocrity. This “intermediate” is praised because it succeeds in aligning reason, emotion, and action.

How do we find the mean?

We find the mean through reasoned judgment, aiming at what a wise and virtuous person would choose in the situation. Because situations differ, the mean is relative to us, not a mathematical average. It requires sensitivity to context and the disciplined shaping of one’s emotional responses.

What is the role of the virtuous person in finding the mean? Are there issues with this advice?

The virtuous person acts as a moral exemplar who reliably chooses the mean, helping beginners see what balanced action looks like. A potential issue is that beginners may misidentify who is truly virtuous, or cultural biases may shape who is seen as virtuous. However, Aristotle might reply that practical wisdom improves through corrected experience.

How does our function (rational activity) connect to moral virtue?

Our function is rational activity, and moral virtue is the excellent performance of rational choice and emotion regulation. Acting at the mean requires reason governing desire, which is exactly the fulfillment of our human function.

Is the mean the same for everyone?

No. The mean is relative to the individual and situation; what counts as “too much” or “too little” depends on personal tendencies, abilities, and circumstances. Virtue requires judgment, not a fixed rule.

What does Aristotle mean when he says humans have an “essence,” and do we have to agree?

Aristotle claims humans have a defining essential nature, namely rational activity, which grounds moral evaluation. One may support this by saying humans uniquely deliberate and form reasons. However, critics argue that human identity may be chosen rather than fixed, or that defining goodness strictly through reason risks excluding other valuable traits. (Exam requires your stance; this is the conceptual summary.)

What is the difference between virtue and continence?

For Aristotle and Driver, a virtuous person:
knows the right thing,

does it for its own sake,

wants to do it,

and feels pleasure in doing what is right.
A continent person also chooses the right action but still struggles internally, desires conflict with reason. Continence shows self-control, while virtue shows harmony. Habit and practice help one move from continence to full virtue by shaping desires until they align with rational choice.

What does Doris argue, and is this a good criticism of Aristotle? (Claim → Explanation → Reason)

Claim: Doris argues that stable character traits, as Aristotle describes them, do not exist.
Explanation: Psychological studies suggest people behave differently depending on situations (e.g., someone honest about exams may lie about height), so behavior lacks the consistency required for virtue.
Reason: If situations, rather than fixed traits, explain moral behavior, Aristotle’s model of stable, unified virtues may not accurately describe human psychology.

Should psychological findings matter when evaluating ethical theories?

One argument says yes, because an ethical theory should realistically reflect human capacities. Another argues no, because ethics may set normative ideals that go beyond empirical psychology. (Your exam answer should take a stance.)

Why do some people say virtue ethics is insufficiently action-guiding?

Critics say it gives vague advice like “aim at the mean” or “be like the virtuous person,” which does not tell us what to do in concrete dilemmas (e.g., how honest? how kind?). Virtues may conflict, leaving unclear guidance about specific actions.

Is this a good criticism? (Claim → Explanation → Reason)

Claim: The action-guidance objection raises a genuine challenge but does not defeat virtue ethics.
Explanation: While virtue ethics lacks strict rules, it provides practical wisdom for navigating complex cases, which many rule-based theories oversimplify.
Reason: Moral life often requires contextual judgment, so a flexible, character-based approach may capture moral reality better than rigid formulas.

What does a truly morally virtuous person look like?

They have a fixed, stable character where reason and desire fully align. They know the right thing through practical wisdom, act for the right reasons, take pleasure in doing what is good, and experience no internal conflict. Their actions express harmony between rational judgment and emotion.

What are the strengths of Aristotle’s virtue ethics?

It offers a holistic picture of human flourishing, emphasizes moral development, explains the importance of habits, integrates emotion with reason, and avoids rigid rule-following. It reflects how people actually deliberate in everyday life. (Slides encourage personal reflection.)

What are key issues Driver raises for Aristotelian virtue ethics?

Issues include:
-lack of precise action-guidance,
-doubts about stable character traits (Doris),
-potential bias in selecting exemplars,
-concerns about essentialism (is reason truly the essence of humanity?)
-and the difficulty beginners face in identifying true virtue.