why Aristotle is not a relativist

Relativism, Aristotelian ethics, Problem of universals

Why Aristotle is not a realativist.

Some philosopher's say Aristotle's ethics are occasionally "situational" mostly because

Aristotle acknowledges as true that the particulars are absolutely vital in activity directing such

that a universal is seldom adequate to direct an activity. , most actions or conclusions pursue a

method of assessing exact places utilizing universals, and the ethical worth of an activity

generally enumerations on position. In Aristotle's phrases, "action is about particulars"(Aristotle

1141b.15-20), thus understanding, or "a state...concerned with action about human

goods"(Aristotle 1140b.20-25), are not "only about universals"(Aristotle 1141b.15-20). In

another part of Aristotle's text, he explains that having a virtuous feature is to have the right

sentiments "at the right times, about the right things, the right persons, for the right end, and in

the right way" (Aristotle 1106b.15-25). Besides the last two constituents, the other components

are all situational constituents, showing that what kind of feeling one should have is reliant on

time, object of anxiety, and individual's present. In supplement, Aristotle displays an example of

how good is reliant on place: while a certain allowance of food is good for somebody, there's the

possibility it's too much or too little for another person (Aristotle 1106b.1-5). allocated this

account of Aristotle's ethics, some claim that Aristotle's ethics is really relativist. In this period

paper, I will try to contend that Aristotle's ethics is actually far from relativist for several

determinants: he actively gives out unconditional main headings for certain activities, his anxiety

of a reason is the equal for all agencies, and his ethics is an elitist ethics.

Presume a relativist ethics is one that does not have predefined directions for activity

directing, it is rather clear that Aristotle's ethics is not...
tracking img