Aristotle: Above the Mean

Aristotle: Above the Mean

With the strict oppression of thought by religion and government in the 2nd century B.C.E., it's a surprise in itself that Aristotle, a man with such revolutionary thoughts and ideas was able to let his thinking be known to the entire world (as it was known back then). It is therefore even more surprising that his idea's have survived these many centuries though books, a medium of writing that has a notorious reputation of being burned when something in its contents doesn't match the current beliefs of the established system of government or the church. We can certainly all be thankful that his idea's have survived thus far because of the tremendous impact that they have had on thought, government, and the way of life throughout the entire world in general. Aristotle was a revolutionary thinker whose ideas have no rival from anyone in his own school of thought.

In book Two of Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle lets out arguably some of his best work. The idea that in life, people shouldn't strive to be the best, but instead aim for the middle, or the mean as Aristotle calls it, was something new and innovative not only then, but even to some people today. He further backs his assumption up by supplying more than enough examples. To start out, Aristotle first defines what is "good" and what is "bad". He does this by providing examples of several things that have both a good side along with a bad side. One example he gives is lawmakers. A lawmaker can have a positive effect on society or a negative one. Judging by the effect his laws have on the people, he is then determined to be either a bad lawmaker or a good one. Moreover, the lawmakers themselves have the power of making people into either good or bad citizens. This is done by instilling either good or bad habits into the citizens through the legislation that the lawmakers pass (Pg. 99). This once again, in turn, dictates whether the lawmakers themselves are good or bad lawmakers. Aristotle's idea of this is (to use a clichÐ"©) is "Right on the money". Even in today's world, people are judged by their actions. That is to say, if someone does something good in their life, they are considered a good person, conversely, if a person is known for a failure, the people around them regard that person as a failure; or as Aristotle would simply put it, "bad". Applied to today's standards, Aristotle's ideas would be a great judge of character. This system could be used for a variety of things; anywhere from evaluating your friends, to hiring people at interviews, to even electing the President of the United States. Looking at the way Aristotle sees his system of judgment, there aren't many things work with it. It is a very simple system where if someone does something well, they are rewarded for it by being seen as a successful person, where as if someone does something wrong, they are penalized by being looked at as a failure in that specific area.

Another idea that is clearly defined is the idea of aiming for the mean. Aristotle conveys through his book that people shouldn't strive to be the best, but they should completely give up on their endeavors either. Instead, they should aim for the middle, or the mean as he calls it. According to Aristotle, the mean is the best place to be because on one extreme, there is excess, where as on the other extreme, there lies deficiency. The mean would be located in the middle of the two. One of the examples that Aristotle gives would be courage. The man who shuns and fears everything and never stands his ground becomes a coward, whereas a man who knows no fear at all and goes to meet every danger becomes reckless (Pg. 200). Looking at this statement, anyone can see that Aristotle is right. As a matter of fact, this idea of aiming for the mean ties in with his notion of whether someone is either a good or bad person. This is because if someone is on either extreme, either deficiency or excess, they are seen as a failure or an "over-achiever". Consequently, they are deemed a bad person by society. Conversely,