, Research Paper
In this essay I will be depicting the virtuousness of courage. I will foremost specify what
Aristotle thinks virtuousness is, explicate the virtuousness of courage, and so eventually reflect this virtuousness
on my personal experience in the Shaw vicinity.
Aristotle breaks down virtue into four facets which are: a province that decides in
mean, dwelling in a mean, the average relation to us, which is defined by mention to
ground ( 1107a ) . He besides states that there are two sorts of virtuousness: one of idea or
mind and one of character or actions. He besides states that virtuousness is a province of character
and is achieved by wont.
Aristotle uses several illustrations to specify a the courage virtuousness. He say that as
worlds we fear all bad things such as, bad repute, povery, illness, friendlessness,
and decease. However he says that these things do non concern a brave individual. Fearing this
things are non all neccesarily bad though. Fearing something like a bad repute is good
and shows that you are nice and decently prone to dishonor, unlike if you do non fear this
you have no feeling of shame. Person who has no fright of this might be considered
brave by some people. However there are some things that are incorrect to fear such as
poorness or illness, things that are caused by ourselves, people who do non fear these
things are non considered brave. Sometimes person who is non fearful of things caused
by ourselves may be considered weather when compared to person who is cowardly in
wartime or person faced with losing money ( 1115a 10-25 ) . Aristotle besides comes to the
decision that a courageous individual is merely concerened with decease in the finest conditions.
These sort of deceases are found in war and fortunes when it is honored by metropoliss and
sovereign.
Aristotle? s following measure is to specify a brave individual? s province of character. He asks the
inquiry, What does a courageous individual happen terrorization? He answers with, a courageous individual is
frightened by the same things any human can happen irrisistible, but the difference is that he
will stand house against it until the terminal, and he is non frightened by things which are are non
irrisistable. ? Hence whoever stands house against the right things and fears the right things,
for the right terminal, in the right manner, at the right clip, and is correspondingly confident is the
weather person. ? ( 1115b 15-20 )
Aristotle so explains that a courageous individual purposes at what is all right. What is all right to a
weather individual is bravery. Therefore the terminal is all right, since each thing is defined by its terminal.
A brave individual shows what courage is by standing house and through his actions.
A courageous individual who goes to excess is one who is overly unafraid. They are
overly confident about scaring things, doing them roseola. Sometimes this individual
may be a bragger and a Pretender to bravery. A roseola individual will move that they are unafraid
and look to hold qualities of the courageous individual but they ne’er stand house against anything
terrorization. A rash individual wants for dangers to come, but when they do he cowers, but a
weather individual is eager in action and keeps quiet until so.
A courageous individual that has lack is a coward. He fears the incorrect things in the
incorrect manner. He has a lack in assurance and he is afraid of everything, while the
weather individual is hopeful which is one of the terminals of assurance.
? Hence the coward, the roseola individual and the brave individual are all concerned with
the same things, but have different provinces related to them ; the others are inordinate or
faulty but the brave individual has the intermediate and right state. ? ( 1115a 5-7 )
Aristotle so distinquieshes between some misconception of what most people
presume courage is, when in all actuality these are non echt courage ; courage of citizens,
experience and expertness, emotion, hopefulness, ignorance.
He says that citizen? s courage comes foremost because they stand house against dangers
with the purpose to avoid legal jobs or deriving awards. He besides says the bravest seem to
be, ? those who hold cowards in dishonor and make honour to weather people. ? ( 1116a 20-23 )
He states that a batch of the clip this category of people are compelled to be courageous because of
their higher-ups, when they should be brave when it is all right and non merely when they are
complelled.
The 2nd experience and expertness he explains is a alleged province of courage
because in the illustration of the soldier who say has been to war more than one time, will be
appear more courageous than one who is traveling into conflict for the first clip. These same people
are besides the 1s who are the 1s with the most capable in onslaught and defense mechanism. This does
non do them weather it merely makes them strongest and physically superior. However these
people are the first to go cowardly when the danger overstrains them, and them are
more afraid of being killed than making something black which is non of a brave individual? s
character.
The following province of alleged courage he explains is emotion. He says that for those
who act on emotion are considered are courageous, such as the animal who attacks after it has
been wounded. He uses a quotation mark from Homer to exemplify the importance of emotion in
the human experience, ? put strenth in his emotion? , ? aroused strength and emotion? , ? lament
strength in his anterior naris? , and? his blood boiled? . ( 1116b 28-30 ) He besides distiqueshes from his
illustration of the animate being who was wounded and the human experience by saying that brave
people act because of what is all right and therefore their emotion cooperates with them, while
animals are non needfully weather because hurt and emotion thrusts them in an unprompted
haste to run into danger. Finally he explains that emotion is merely similar to bravery and that if
you must contend to be brave, it must be because of what is all right.
The following alleged province of courage he explains is hopefulness. He says their
courage comes from a series of triumphs over many oppositions which so makes them
confident. He says that they are similar but their confident for the incorrect ground being that
they feel they are stronger and nil could go on to them, and when things turn for the
worse they run.
The concluding province of alleged courage is ignorance. They are similar to the hopefull
people, nevertheless they lack their self-pride. He says that the hopefull people will stand
house for some clip while the nescient people if deceived and them realize or suspect
something is different they run.
In the concluding desciption of courage Aristotle relates courage to assurance and fright,
pleasance and hurting. He says that a individual is courageous if he is in a right province about these as
appose to being in a province with animating assurance. He one time once more explains that it is
courage when person stands against something painful because it is harder than to stand
against something which is pleasant. However, in the terminal courage seems to stop and
pleasant things as appose to what surrounds it until the terminal.
I will stop this portion of the paper with a quotation mark which I thinks sums up what Aristotle
is stating, ? Hence it is non true that the active exercising of every virtuousness is pleasant ; it is
pleasant merely in so far as we attain the end. ? ( 1117b 19-17 )