Tough stuff I know guys but maybe over the weekend after I tweak my notes for the text, I will post them to help you out.
In the end though, just try to summarize the rest of book III and unpack Aristotle's view of courage.
Cheers and have a great weekend,
Dr. Layne
I can't believe I'm saying this, but I kind of agree with Aristotle on this one. Aristotle believes that courage and fear must me held in syncretism with each other, so one fears what should be feared. He asserts his belief that courage is achieved through a noble end, since all things are defined by their ends. Sorry, never mind the whole "agreeing with Aristotle" thing I said earlier. Aristotle discusses courage/bravery in the context of being rash, passionate, and ignorant. Since these traits affect the raw courage in the person, a person who exhibits these traits cannot be considered courageous, but only appears courageous. "It is harder to face what is painful than to abstain from what is pleasant." I like it. Wow, interesting point that the bravest are the ones whose death would be most disappointing, requiring an even greater amount of bravery. Perhaps this makes an argument for the need for exertion of courage? Well spoken. I'm very excited to discuss this on Monday!
ReplyDeleteThis section was a bit easier, if I understood it correctly, because A seems to be moving away from the abstract "virtue" to the slightly more concrete "courage" and "temperance," which seems to be tacked on to the end of the reading, and I assume is not really part of our discussion. Anyways, he discusses courage, and he gives concrete examples, five of them, I believe, to convey what is true courage and what is not. He considers courage, as all virtue, to be a form of moderation. He calls it "the middle" between rashness and cowardice (From an online translation, citation available, book3, section 7). This seems to follow, intellectually. Its a difficult concept, because I consider courage to be extreme bravery, adrenaline pumping Michael Bay type crap, but, philosophically and intellectually, I tend to agree- in a sense. However, I don't necessarily think courage is necessarily virtuous- I think the rash man is still courageous, but that does not make him virtuous. This goes contrary to the idea that "discretion is the better part of valor." Sure, strategy is necessary, but rashness is relative. One could call Bill Gates dropping out of school and starting his own company rash; I consider it courageous. And the American Patriots starting a war against the world lone super-power over a tax that amounted to, inflation included, a penny a day seems pretty rash to me. But still courageous. But that's about all I have...oh! and he also makes the point that courage is not the absence of fear, but acting in spite of it, which I firmly believe. And he also calls Hector courageous, in section 8.
ReplyDeleteFirst, Aristotle begins with defining bravery, by saying that a brave individual must fear the right things, as well as face them for the right reason in the right way. Next, Aristotle discusses cowardice in comparison to this previous definition of bravery as an individual who fears the wrong things, but also as someone who faces his fears for the wrong reasons.
ReplyDeleteHe then looks at five examples of times in which courage can be found, but shows that in them, there are always exceptions, from the trained solider, who often faces death because he believes turning to be a cowardice act, to those who are passionate, but can react in animalistic ways.
He continues his discussion by claiming that the braver people face those that inspire fear, rather than challenging those that inspire confidence.
The last few chapters discuss the idea of temperance. Here Aristotle claims that self-indulgence is a base act, one that basically reduces us to animals and brutes, by using many examples of different creatures that behave in such a manner. Book III closes with an in-depth discussion of a life balanced by moderation.
I definitely found myself understanding more of this passage, and agreed with many specific examples that he made of courage when listing the five different circumstances in which it is found.
From what I understand, Aristotle describes courage in relation to fear and confidence. An important point I believe he raises is that to be fearful does not mean that you are necessarily a coward. In fact he discusses a certain degree of fear to be noble if one acts in spite of that fear for the sake of honor. He stresses though that fear of everything is cowardly, but just the right amount prevents us from being overly-confident, rash and boastful; the things that give us a false sense of courage. When a person has a false sense of courage that person appears to be brave and tends to give the impression that they can handle anything but at the first sign danger and pain they are quick to withdraw from a situation. Therefore in Aristotle’s opinion a brave man is seen in action; it is facing what is painful and dangerous that makes for true bravery. In essence if bravery came so easily then it might not be so revered and noble after all and for this I wholeheartedly agree with Aristotle.
ReplyDeleteAristotle also discusses courage in relation to death, once it is for a noble cause eg. a soldier at war. To die to escape pain is not brave but cowardly as this can be compared to giving up. It is evident that courage is contextual, not only looking at the actions of a person but the reasons why and the context in which these actions take place. Aristotle discusses that if someone does a courageous act because they were compelled to, this does not constitute bravery. This makes the act involuntary and definitely not virtuous as the action is not in accordance with the will of the person.
Another final point that stood out to me was that Aristotle stated that the soldier that fights best in a battle is not necessarily the one that is the bravest it just means that they are physically the strongest, which we differentiated from courage in a previous class. This same soldier may be hasty to retreat when the danger overrides his physical strength as he fears death more than disgrace. This leads us back to the discussion whether or not Hector was a coward when he retreated against Archilles as he also in the end feared death more than disgrace?
The ________ Man…
ReplyDeleteRash = pretends to be brave. Is fearless when he ought not to be. Looks forward to dangers beforehand but retreats when they appear.
Coward = fears when he ought not to. May fight, but only in fear of a greater evil.
Brave = endures evil for the sake of honor, even to death. Fearless when he ought to be, endures fear when he ought to. Does not wish for dangers, but fights through them when they appear. Aided by passion, but with choice and motive taking lead. Fearless not so much in expected situations as in unforeseen ones, such that it is a trait of one’s character and not of one’s knowledge. Faces what is painful rather than what is pleasant.
Strong = is confident in his strength and knowledge over others, but when outnumbered or outgunned, he retreats.
Passionate = attacks fiercely (out of fear) when wounded, and performs other actions out of ignorance and lack of forethought.
Sanguine = is optimistic out of past good experiences. Overly confident. Retreats when things don’t go his way.
Ignorant = unaware of the dangers. Retreats at the first sign that things are not as he suspected.
Temperate = is abstinent from bodily pleasures. Not pained by the absence of pleasant things. Dislikes what the self-indulgent man likes, and does not enjoy the things that he should not, nor anything in excess. Desires moderately, and as he should, things that lead to good health or condition. Appetitive element harmonizes with the rational principle.
Self-indulgent = enjoys the smell of food because it reminds him of eating food. Enjoys touch and taste of food and drink and sexual intercourse. Loves these sensations above all other things. Each man craves his own preference of sensations. Delights in the wrong things, more than others do, and in the wrong way. Pained more than he ought at not getting pleasant things. Craves for all pleasant things, or those that are most pleasant, to the point of hindering a good or noble end. More voluntarily in his state than a coward. Very much childish in this fault, as it is irrational and brutish to let appetite oppose the rational principle.
This part was a bit easier to understand, but since I like to be succinct, I'm going to try to sum up each section in a few sentences each.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Aristotle, a wish is "good". It can be good depending on how good or bad a person is. To measure this, you have to figure out how virtuous they are, but since humans are naturally biased towards good or bad, people's conception of "good" varies greatly.
Actions where the means are justified by the ends are intentional. Therefore, it means the action is voluntary.
Habits seem to be the medians between a voluntary and involuntary action. While it is involuntary that you give into your pathos to continue the habit, it was voluntary to start the habit and in the end actually do the action. Therefore, it is usually voluntary.
Bravery begins to be discussed with its relation to courage and its application. A brave man is described as a person who faces his fears for the right motive, reason, and time. He then examines different types of bravery and concludes that bravery usually comes together with pain.
Aristotle finally talks about temperance and explains its correlation to pleasure. He also discusses how it is practically involuntary.
Actions cannot be blamed upon character, because character develops from repeated actions and activities. Certain vices of the body are within control and are worthy of blame, while some aren't and are worthy of pity. Virtues and vices are equal; if one's virtues can be accounted to the individual, so must the vices. If one's vices are not attributed to the individual, then the virtues must too. The explanation that a man chooses good and but chooses evil because he fails to see the result of evil actions messes with the fact that man has free will.
ReplyDeleteCourage is related to confidence and fear. Courage is not the absence of fear, for it is wise to fear some things. Well-placed fear, in fact, defines a courageous individual. However, that person must act accordingly in the face of fear. The end product of all actions must be noble. Therefore, courage is more than an action--going through the motions is not enough. Courage must be a way of life, a middle ground between the rash and cowardly. Aristotle sees the purest courage in the pursuit of honor and under the influence of shame. However, acting courageous out of fear is a form of bravery, but is not true courage. Contrary to Socrates, courage is not necessarily knowledge. Courage is not passion--though passion is a secondary quality that accompanies courage. Courage is not rashness. It is a balance between rashness and cowardice.
Temperance is related to pleasure and pain. Taste and touch are most concerned with this virtue. While pleasure can be drawn from the senses, one is rarely criticized for seeing, hearing, or smelling too much. The temperate individual is not pained for a lack of certain pleasure and is fine in abstaining from it. The individual must not be too wanting of the pleasure either. One's pleasures must satisfy a greater need than simply pleasure. For example, food cannot just be eaten because it tastes good; it must also act as a replenishment for the body.
I found this part an easier read, and I find that I agree with Aristotle on most of what he's saying. Interesting things about the text that I noticed: a differentiation between "shame" and "fear" (I'd never really thought of that before) and the fact that the temperance discourse reminded me a lot of the Ten Commandments, with the "thou shalt not commit adultery" and "thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife." And it makes sense, I think. It isn't just enough to not do something. Even if you're not physically cheating on your boyfriend, it's not a good idea to have a consuming want for someone else.
The Second half of the text is very straightforward and isn't dependent on premises presented in previous books. Each chapter provided one point (usually stated in the last sentence) all of which aid the purpose of clearly defining the attributes of man and clarifying the qualifications of each (the attributes that this particular book examines are sincerity, courage, and temperance).
ReplyDeleteIn chapters six through nine Aristotle explains when and why we show courage, what makes a man brave, that bravery is not needed for courage, and that the nature of courage is not hard to obtain. In ten through twelve he takes up the virtue of temperance and, in chapter ten, explains the opposite of temperance (self indulgence) to better define it. In eleven aristotle connects the ideas of courage, from chapters six through nine, to the principle of temperance he presents in chapter ten. He explains that some forms of courage (explained in chapter eight) are the result of a lack of temperance. In twelve Aristotle ties all his premises together and declares that self indulgence is more voluntary than cowardice and that in order to achieve temperance one's desire for pleasure needs to be subject to rational principal.
Aristotle goes into bravery, courage and temperance in the second part of book III. To start off explaining bravery, he goes into the correct things to fear. He explains the different types of terrible. To be truly brave, one must fear the right things, and face them for honor's sake. One must also feel confident although he may be afraid of the terrible things he faces. He explains that courage has to do with facing what is painful. One fights through the pain for honor. He also states that one does not necessarily need courage to be brave because facing fears is not always painful as much as terrible. Aristotle goes into temperance being the opposite of self-indulgence.
ReplyDeleteI apologize this aint my thing.
Aristotle continues on the exploration for the definition of courage, and its relation to fear, in the second part of the book. He notes that courage is not synonymous with fearlessness or bravery. The latter two imply that one does not show fear or cowardice towards adversity in life. In order to be courageous, one must know fear as well. He gives multiple examples of this, including fighting for fear of dishonor, or fear for one's own safety. The difference between fighting for something and fighting for fear of something is, of course, the fear. It prevents a man from being ignorant of his goals and becoming hotheaded or "sanguine".
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, Aristotle gives the distinction between a reasonable man and a sanguine man (analogous to a desperate animal). A sanguine man, or an animal in this case, fights with blind passion. Aristotle does argue that passion contributes to courageousness, but only insofar as contributing. It is never a core part of courageousness. He gives the example that passion is what drives an animal to hunt for food. It is a passion that longs for food, that hunger that tells the animal it MUST gather sustenance. He then relates this to a sanguine man, or a drunken man, for they are similar to this animal that lacks reason. They fight without thinking, they fight in order to satisfy a passion, and their will to fight is fueled by passion and overconfidence.
Aristotle then goes on to say that fear should not be regarded as all that contributes to courage, because too much fear means cowardice. Too little contributes to overconfidence and rashness.
After a discussion on courage, Aristotle then discusses passion for pleasures, or in other words, lust and mindless self-indulgence (A REALLY COOL BAND d(^_^)z). A man who lusts will take great pleasure in getting what he wants, but great pains when he doesn't. A temperate man will feel pleasure in only the things he needs, as in those that will do him good in health and life. Therefore, if he does not experience a pleasure, he does not feel as much pain as a lustful person does.
All in all this text was all Greek to me (har har har) -.- it was difficult to understand.
Aristotle begins by explaining bravery and courage in relationship to fear, stating that the right kind of fear is needed for courage, and then goes into five instances of "courage," describing brave men and those thought to be brave. He then goes on to write that courage requires pain, stating that "it is harder to face what is painful that abstain from what is pleasant."
ReplyDeleteAristotle then goes on to write on temperance, which he says "must be concerned with bodily pleasures." He then goes on to describe the self-indulgent man, who exemplifies everything that temperance does not.
Self-indulgence, he then claims, is more a voluntary state than involuntary, but no one craves to be self-indulgent.
Being merely confident is not enough to be called brave; at the same time, expressing fear in certain situations does not make one a coward. Brave men are concerned with death, but only in noble circumstances, such as in battle. Basically, if you are afraid or confident in a 'noble' context, you are brave.
ReplyDeleteThere are three kinds of men: rash men, brave men, and cowards. The rash man fears nothing, even the things he should; The coward fears both the things that he should fear and harmless things; The brave man fears some things and shows confidence in whatever way would make him most noble (enduring life even if it is painful rather than dying to avoid the pain).
Passion is a characteristic of being brave, but passion alone does not make one brave. If someone is hungry, he is not brave because he faces danger in order to get food. Also, sanguine fighters might not be considered brave while fighting, because they are experienced and are fairly certain that they won't be harmed while fighting inexperienced soldiers. Passion can only be linked with bravery if someone is passionate about being noble; basically, being passionate for the right reasons.
"It is harder to endure pain than it is to abstain from pleasure". Courage involves pain.
Self-indulgence is bad, because it links us with animals. To love the pleasures of touch and taste above all else is "brutish".
If you delight in the wrong things, or more than most men do, or in the wrong way, you are a...bad person (?), or self-indulgent.
Self-indulgence is voluntary. A man's desires should harmonize with rational principle.
Discussion topic (?): Jack (for example) tries to make decisions based on what he thinks is noble. Suppose he is put into a situation where he wants to make one decision, but knows it won't be the noble decision. Is it out of fear of what other people will think that he picks the other, nobler option? I guess only he really knows, but the point is that everyone has a knowledge of what they 'ought' to do, of what would be the 'right' decision, and this knowledge in itself will have an impact on the decisions we make. Does this mean that every 'brave' action might have only been made to preserve one's image in society?
Aristotle discusses two main themes in the latter part of book 3: bravery amd temperance. To be very brief Aristotle says that fear in the right circumstance is proper. we are meant to fear things like death or illness. A cowardly perosn is one that runs from fearul things or acts shamefully because of them. A brave person feels fear but is brvae because he stands stout i the face of fear. Only a fool feels no fear. These are rash people and are pretenders of bravery.
ReplyDeleteTemperance is a virtue concerened with bodily pleasures not pleasures of the soul like love of honor or stories. the bodily pleasures specifically concerned in temperance are those of touch and taste. A temperate person is one whose appetite for such pleasures is within reason, according to what one's body needs. The intemperate person is the glutton who partakes in too much bodily pleasure, be it food, drink, or sex.
Aristotle may be tougher to read than Plato, but his ideas seem to fit much better with humanity. He does not seek a universal truth but instead recognizes that truth will be unique to a people.
Basically, Aristotle says that courage is not something that can be forced or happened upon by chance. He claims that someone is not courageous if they are ignorant of the situation, over confident, or they are afraid of what may happen if they are not courageous. He also asserts that bravery is not courage. Courage requires bravery, but bravery can be one act, whereas courage is a virtue. As a virtue, it is one of the most difficult to define because of these complexities. Courage is not an act, but a characteristic.
ReplyDeleteThe rest of book 3 is about temperance and the denying of too much physical pleasure.
Aristotle begins with stating that “the things we fear are terrible things” and man shouldn’t fear the things that are not able to be controlled by man. A brave man is one who is truly fearless when he faces a noble death or a situation that will ultimately lead to death. These “terrible” things mentioned earlier cannot be grouped in a single category. There are some that are beyond human strength, which appear terrible for all sensible men. On the opposite end, there are things that are not beyond human strength which differ in their magnitude and degree. A brave man will fear both things but will react accordingly. According to Aristotle, he fears the right things with the right motive in the right way at the right time. If he does this with confidence than he is truly brave. However, one can possess too much confidence, making him rash and often (though not always) cowardly. A rash man wishes to appear brave.
ReplyDeleteA solider should be brave not because it is expected of him but because to die would be noble. Though passion is found in brave men, it must be accompanied by choice and motive. Sanguine people think they are superior to others (Aristotle even compares it to drunkenness) but flee at the first sign of failure, surely not the mark of bravery. Those who are ignorant of danger are not brave but actually have no self-reliance.
A coward has more of an excess of fear than a lack of confidence. Courage is concerned with what actually inspires fear. Bravery is facing what is painful. It is harder for a brave man to die because he, from living virtuously, would have more to lose.
My fortune cookie today said "Confidence begets confidence" which I thought was a bit coincidental.
As simply as I can put this: Courage is obtained by choosing (as opposed to being forced to) do something because of a desire to, rather than an aversion of.
ReplyDeleteThe idea is that, if you do something good despite potential negative incentives, and you have full acknowledgement of those incentives, and the potential problems with your action, and you do this over and over again as a matter of character instead of in an isolated incident, you are courageous.
Aristotle describes courage as relating to fear and confidence. He further breaks this down into knowing when is the appropriate time to be fearful and when is the appropriate time to have confidence. He says a brave man is one who will face his fears for the sake of honor and acts in a way befitting of courage. He then describes how a brave man is the middle ground between a rash man (one with too much confidence) and a coward (one with too much fear).
ReplyDeleteHe then describes five types of people that can be misidentified as brave: the citizen-soldier, the knowledgeable man, the passionate man, the sanguine man, and the ignorant man. Citizen-soldiers are not always brave because they act brave because they are compelled by a higher force and not because it is the noble thing to do. The next category is not always brave because sometimes they flee when they know the facts. Nor are the passionate courageous because they act solely on emotion and do not always include reason. The sanguine are also not always courageous because they may flee in the face of something unexpected. Finally, the ignorant are not brave either as they may flee when they find out the truth.
Aristotle further defines courage as facing what is painful. Though they end may be pleasurable, a brave man will be willing to face pain as a means to obtain a pleasurable end.
The next sections, define temperance. According to Aristotle, temperance only involves physical pleasure, namely touch. Those without temperance are self-indulgent and succumb to excessive appetites. The temperate man should want things in moderation, and not want what he should not, when he should not.
Then Aristotle discusses the difference between self-indulgence and cowardice. He comes to the conclusion that self-indulgence is more voluntary than cowardice. Cowards avoid pain, which is more damaging than the pleasure sough by self-indulgent people, so it is more excusable.
Aristotle closes with the idea that a temperate man should balance in appetite with rational principle. The same could be said of courage. In order to be courageous, one must balance their fears with rational thought.
Aristotle says that there are certain things that brave men hould fear, and certain things that they definitly shoudln't. And if a man is fearless in teh face of death, he shall be considered courageous. There are things that are universally terrifying according to Aristotle, or at least terrifying to any "sensible man." One particular quote that stuck out and summed up the meaning of courage for me was; "rash men are precipitate, and wish for dangers beforehand but draw back when they are in them, while brave men are seen in the moment of action, but quiet beforehand." There are five kinds of courage; that of the citizen-soldier, "experience with regard to particular facts", passion, "drunken" courage, and ignorance. The last two and possibly third-to-last are actually examples of those who only appear to be courageous. A truly brave man will fear death because he is virtuous and appereiciates life and knows that by dying, he is losing all that is meaningfull. He then goes on to discuss temperance and self-indulgence, saying that indulgence only involves the senese of taste and touch, becuase people who delight in music, for example, are not considered self-indulgent. Eating because one is hungry, however, is of course not considered indulgent. He also says that self-indulgence is more voluntary and cowardice. I'm not even exactly sure why he's comparing the two...how exactly do they correspond?
ReplyDeleteIn the second half of Book III, Aristotle, satisfied that he has defined the virtues, decides to specifically illuminate what makes the virtues of courage and temperance.
ReplyDeleteTo define both virtues he takes the classic Greek approach of the 'middle ground'- first defining two extremes on either end of the virtue, then explaining how the virtue is the middle ground between them.
Courage is then defined as having a wise and proper attitude towards fear, and actively making a choice to act in the face of danger for a rational reason or noble goal. Rashness is the extreme of pure fearlessness without wisdom and rationalizing, and cowardice is the extreme of retreating from all danger. He also goes through several examples of men who appear courageous but truly are not, mostly involving ignorant courage or fearlessness for the wrong reasons.
Temperance is the middle ground between self-indulgence and insensibility (which Aristotle interestingly defines as rare and "not human"). In this discussion he again emphasizes the importance of choice and deliberation in the making of the virtue, mostly through emphasizing that self-indulgence is voluntary, so temperance must be defined by the choice to not be self-indulgent.
I really like his emphasis on choice, but he seems to contradict himself because earlier he argued that all acts are defined by their outcomes. I would call an act virtuous if it was precipitated by a proper and virtuous choice, but Aristotle at times seems to feel that if such an act leads to a bad outcome, despite to doer's intentions, the act must lose its virtue. I disagree. The virtue is entirely in the deliberation.
In the second part of the text, Aristotle starts to talk to about many aspects of courage. He starts with bravery and speaks about who is or is not courageous in the same situation and why that person is viewed in that manner from his point of view. He shows through several examples that a brave would behave differently from a coward and that even if they take the same action in a situation, that a brave person will do it for a different reason than someone who is a coward.
ReplyDeleteAristotle then discusses temperance and self-indulgence by saying that it deals with the senses that we share with animals. He also explains that self-indulgent people are in pain when they do not have their pleasures fulfilled while temperate do not care as much because they only desire things that they know they can get pretty quickly and be of a benefit to him. Aristotle further explains that self-indulgence in fact worse than cowardice because you can always to choose to be a self-indulgent person while you may be forced to act as a coward.
From what I read, I believe the best way to think of what Aristotle thinks of courage as not only performing the correct action but to also do it for the right reasons (haven’t we been told this so many times before).