Aristotle Virtue of Character analysis

Thinking about the reading, I cannot help but wonder if greater familiarization of the people to the ideas espoused in it could transform the world into a more virtuous home for the humanity. Aristotle was actually responding to a major question regarding virtue, notably, is it teachable, or a consequence of persistent practice? Moreover, he wished to explore if virtue could possibly not be a consequence of learning or practice, but instead, innately human. Trying to get my mind around the questions, the age-old dilemma of nature versus nurture engulfs me. I am persuaded to think that Aristotle was similarly attempting to unravel the mystery of nature vs nurture, albeit on the realm of morality and virtues just as myriads of people have wrestled with the matter on other subjects like leadership, gender and sexuality.

Today, the subjects of virtues and morality arise in many philosophical spheres including ethics, politics, literature, business, and education. Aristotle asserts, “It was not from repeated acts of seeing or hearing that we acquired the senses but the other way around: we had these senses before we used them; we did not acquire them as the result of using them” (Thomson 2). Similarly, in my view, just as virtues are learned, the unvirtuous character can also be internalized. It, therefore, appears that the development of morality is reliant on learning and practicing. Eventually, Aristotle points out that virtues are sustained by striking an equilibrium that ensures that excesses or deficiencies in conduct are avoided. Referring to it as The Doctrine of the Mean, he explains that the Mean varies from one person to another and it is up to the individual to identify the balance of character that helps him or her emerge as a person of good character (Thomson 3).

Cordoning these behaviors often leads to severe disasters that lead to significant losses and environmental degradation that harms everybody as well as stress and various forms of harm to the victims. Unethical activities and behaviors also hurt the people around the perpetrator psychologically. Unfortunately, as evidenced by media headlines, unethical behavior is increasingly becoming commonplace even though the society usually holds in disdain the perpetrators. Possibly, unethical behaviors present certain rewards, monetary or psychological, to the perpetrators that continuously entice them towards such unacceptable behavior. Indeed, the motivation to act unethically is the gain made by the perpetrator at the expense of others, the victims. In my view, utilitarianism is representative of efforts to define sources of morality, conveniently declaring that ethics and morality ought to originate from the desire to attain wellness for all.

Simply put, utilitarianism’s agenda is to create a bedrock for ethics and morality, just as Aristotle did in the Virtue of Character. Of greatest interest, however, is the impact Aristotle’s sentiments have on a society. I will not be hesitant to admit that with regard to the origins and development of intellect and character, I am compelled to agree with his position. Indeed, character, like many other human values and behaviors, right or wrong, are a consequence of the influence of social interactions. Still, the role of learning in inculcating morals and values is so enormous that, I feel, it supersedes any genetic predisposition. I mean, humanity can still salvage his morality and ethics by employing a two millennia old idea. It is not supposed to be trouble-free and effortless especially considering the capability of the media and similar influences, but neither is it a pursuit in futility.

I find Aristotle’s thoughts as expressed in the Virtue of Character quite intriguing. I feel that the argument he develops regarding the development of intellect and character is not only accurate but also relevant today, and in the distance future.  The Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle. Athens: n. pag. Print. Smeyers, Paul.