ARISTOTLE'S ESSAY ON THE NATURE OF ETHICS
Action, art, inquiry and pursuit aim at some good, so Aristotle begins the essay as long as the ends are meaningful and, in a sense, greater than the individual parts. "Where there are ends apart from the actions, it is the nature of the products to be better than the activities" (p. 339). In other words, all these activities have to lead somewhere that is greater, perhaps more universal, than the individual actions. A specific action in medicine, or science, for instance is "good" by this definition, if that action leads to, say a cure for cancer, or an alleviation of pain, or a longer life. The action pf politics can lead to a greater good if the end result is the happiness and stability of the citizens of that state.
Aristotle seems to worry concerning politics that "in view of the fact that all knowledge and every purpose aims at some good, what it is that we say political science aims atà " (p.340) It seems he is trying to find some reason for politics to provide the sort of "good" that knowledge, art, and inquiry aim to achieve. In general, one could say that Aristotle was far more willing to concede the intellect and virtue of people than most of his predecessors. After all Socrates had to drink hemlock for refusing to change his beliefs, and Plato admitted that his ideal "Republic" was too ideal to ever really exist. Aristotle seemed to place his faith in the good intentions of ordinary people, which he seems to indicate as "the universal good" (p. 341). In this view, Aristotle seems to want to do away with some of the "classes" into which people (especially in Athens) had been placed, according to both their birth, their wealth, and their intellect. "The life of money-making is one undertaken under compulsion, and wealth is evidently not the good we are seeking" (p. 341). Perhaps, we ought to make copies of that sentiment and e-mail it to the Donald Trumps and Rupert Mu...