Practical philosophy, according to Aristotle, includes ethics, the laws of the individual moral life ; ceconom- ics, those of the family ; and politics, those of man in the state. His "inquiry starts from the conception of a sovereign good and final end. The final end (rs- Xor) is happiness (evScu/iovia, iinrpaZia), which is the result of the energies of the soul (Iv fiiy Ti\tii[j) in a perfect life (Eth. Nic. i, 1-7 ; x, 5, 6); to it appertains true dignity, as being the highest thing. This perfect exercise of reason is virtue, and virtue is the perfec- tion of speculative and practical reason ; hence the subdivision of intellectual virtue (oiavorjriK)) aptTif) and moral (>)6ik)), Eth. Nic. i, 13; ii, 1). The first be- longs, in its entire plenitude, to God alone, and confers the highest felicity, or absolute beatitude ; the second, which he also styles the human, is the constant per- fecting of the reasonable will (f £<c, habitus), the effect
ARISTOTLE
399
ARITHMETIC
of a deliberate resolve, and consequently of liberty (yrpoaiperiierj), of which Aristotle was the first to dis- play its psychological character, and of which the sub- jective form consists in always taking the mean be- tween two extremes (7-0 psoov, fitaortjc'). Aristotle may be said to have been the first to analyze Trpoaipi- <tic, or deliberate free choice (Etk. Nic. ii, G). Ethical virtue presents itself under six principal characters, having reference to the different objects of desire and avoidance (the cardinal virtues), namely, courage (dv- Spia), temperance (<rai0po(7tw;), generosity (tXtvOe- piorqe), delicacy (jityaXoirptTrtia), magnanimity and a proper love of glory (Etk. Nic. v, i, 6 sq.), (jxtya- \o^«x*a)i gentleness and moderation. To these are added the accessory virtues, such as politeness of man- ners (eliTpcnrtXia), amiability, the faculty of loving and being beloved (tpiXia), and, lastly, justice (Siicaio- ovvrj), which comprises and completes all the others, and on that account is called perfect virtue (TeXeia). Under the head of justice Aristotle comprehends right also. Justice he regards as the special virtue (applied to the notion of equality, to 'iuov) of giving en ry man his due; and its operation may be explained by apply- ing to it the arithmetical and geometrical proportions conformably to the two species, the distributive and corrective, into which he subdivided the virtue. To these must be added equity, which has for its end the rectification of the defects of law. Under the head of right (Sikcuov) he distinguishes that appertaining to a family (piicovofiiKov) from that of a city (ttoXituoov), dividing the latter into the natural Qpvoucov) and the positive (yofUKOv). A perfect unity of plan prevails throughout his ethics, his politics, and his ceconomics. Both the latter have for their end to show how the ob- ject of man's existence defined in the ethics, viz. vir- tue combined with happiness, may be attained in the civil and domestic relations through a good constitu- tion of the state and household. The state (iroXic) is a complete association of a certain number of smaller societies sufficient to satisfy in common all the wants of life (Pol. i, 2). Mental power alone should prepon- derate. The science of politics is the investigation of means tending to the final end proposed by the state. Its principle is expedienc3r, and its perfection the suit- ableness of means to the end. By this principle Aris- totle would prove the lawfulness of slavery. (W. T. Krug, Be Aristotele Servitutis Defensore (Lips. 1813, 4to); C. G. Gottling, Commentatio d>. Notione Servitu- tis apud Aristotelem (Jen. 1821, 4to) ; Wallon, Hist, de VEsclavage dans Antiquite (Paris, 1847, 3 vols. 8vo) ; Tennemann, Manual Hist. Phil. § 147, 148.) Professor Shedd (History of Doctrines, bk. i, ch. i) adopts, per- haps too closely, Eitter's reconciliation of Plato and Aristotle, going so far as to say that "Platonism and Aristotelianism differ only in form, not in substance." While we cannot agree to this broad statement, there is yet, as to the points named, reason for what he says, viz. that, in reference to the principal questions of phi- losophy, " both are found upon the same side of the line that divides all philosophies into the material, the spiritual, the pantheistic, and the theistic. There is a substantial agreement between Plato and his pupil Aristotle respecting the rationality and immortality of the mind as mind in distinction from matter, re- specting the nature and origin of ideas, respecting the relative position and importance of the senses, and of knowledge by the senses. But these are subjects whicli immediately reveal the general spirit of a phil- osophic system. Let any one read the ethical trea- tises of Plato and Aristotle, and he will see that both held the same general idea of the Deity as a moral governor, of moral law, and of the immutable reality of right and wrong." But the fundamental difference of the two systems still remains, viz. that Plato re- gards the "ideas" or eternal archetypes of things as forming the true substance of the latter, and as having their existence in themselves, independent of the ma-
terial things, their soulless shadows ; while Aristotle was of opinion that the individual thing contained the true substance, which forms whatever is permanent in the flux of outward appearances.
For a long time the Aristotelian philosophy re- mained in Greece a rival of the Platonic, but at last the latter gained the ascendency. In Pome Aristotle found but few adherents. The fathers of the ancient Church were, on the whole, not favorable to Aristote- lianism, but it was cultivated with great zeal by sever- al sects, especially those which were inclined toward a kind of rationalism. (Comp. Lecky, History of Ration- alism, i, 417.) Thus the Artemonites were reproached with occupying themselves more with the study of Aristotle than with that of the Scriptures. The Ano- mceans of the school of Eunomius were called by the fathers "young Aristotelians" (see, on the opinions of the Greek fathers respecting this point, Launoy, De varia Aristotelis in Acad. Par.fortuna, in his Opera omnia, iv, 175 sq. Col. 1732; Kuhn, Katholische Dog- matic, i, 2, 369). Nevertheless, the influence of Aristo- tle commenced to spread in Christian philosophy dur- ing the 4th and 5th centuries, especially in the West. Previously the Neo-Platonic philosophy, which tried to reconcile Aristotle with Plato, had given a new im- pulse to the study of Aristotle, and called forth a num- ber of commentaries, of which that of Porphyry is the most celebrated. Among the Christian Aristotelians of those times was Nemesius, bishop of Emesa, A.D. 400, whose work on " the Nature of the Soul" is based on the Aristotelian anthropology, and remained long in use and influence in Christian philosophy. JEneus of Gaza, toward the end of the 5th century, and Zacharius Scholasticus (first half of 6th century), op- posed Aristotle, especially with regard to the world, and approached nearer the doctrine of Plato. Of greater significance was Johannes Philoponus, who called himself " Grammaticus," and is supposed by modern writers to have lived in the first half of the 6th century. He combated the Platonic philosophy, and followed Aristotle so closely as even to deviate from the commonly received doctrines of Christianity. Thus, applying the Aristotelian doctrine that individ- ual things are substances, he changed the doctrine of the Trinity into a kind of Tritlieism. John Damasce- nus, the chief theologian of the Greek Church, knew and used the dialectics of Aristotle, but made no at- tempt to thoroughly blend it with the doctrines of Christianity. A new era in the history of the Aristo- telian philosophy within the Christian Church begins after the Christianization of the Germanic tribes, for the treatment of which see Scholasticism.