Talk:Nicomachean Ethics

message: * pleasure, honor & reason as ways of achieving happiness (NEEDS WORK under the separate virtues.)
* golden mean (NEEDS WORK in The Golden Mean: it seems to be getting long--perhaps some bits could be moved to specific virtues)
* justice (NEEDS WORK in Justice)
* a summary
WhiteC 20:53, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: To do list

message: If you want some help, I can write something on the Nicomachean Ethics. Let me know - TM
:Thanks for the offer, TM.  If you want to add something to the existing introduction, go ahead.  Or, if you want to start on a particular section, go ahead.  Of course, if you are impatient, you could just start writing the article.  If you want to write a large part yourself, I'll probably put in several additions to it.  Let me know which bits you are working on, if you want to work together on this.  I want to have some headings in there to give the article some structure, so it doesn't spend forever on one point and neglect others.
:I am still thinking about sections/points that I want to make about the Nicomachean Ethics.  The reason this is taking a while is that although I have read many summaries/commentaries of the NicEth, I hadn't actually read the entire thing before... I just started and it will take a few days more to finish, and then I will start putting these headings into the article and actually doing some writing on them.  WhiteC 20:46, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a few points to your plan, I don't know if you consider them relevant at all, let me know Tom M 01:10, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: They look good in general.. I agree that we need to put in a bit about friendship, since it is covered quite a bit in the NicEth.  I assume a 'bovine' life means an unexamined one (not just physically lazy).  I finished reading NicEth (finally), so now I feel ready to start writing.  WhiteC 16:12, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: To do, discussion

message: In the article, I added the bekker number for the quote you wrote in, so that people can find the quote if they have a copy of the Nicomachean Ethics. - Tom M
:Actually that quote was in the stub when I started looking at it.  Thanks for finding it; I added the book & chapter numbers.  I also put in the source w/ the bekker numbers copied in from the Aristotle page.
:Perhaps a small note in the article on what bekker numbers are as well.  Not sure if that belongs here or under Aristotle, though.
I've just created a stub on Bekker numbers - I'd be interested to find out exactly why they're called 'Bekker', I've always assumed it was the name of the editor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bekker_numbers Tom M 01:02, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Bekker numbers

message: Can someone more versed in Aristotle help me out here?  Obviously it helps if any new quotes have some reference to where they came from (any reference is better than none), but ideally...
What is the appropriate method for referring to a quote?  The Bekker number is precise, and I want to keep the book and chapter numbers in so that people unfamiliar with Bekker numbers will have a better idea where to look.  Should each quote mention the translation too (if we know it), or is it enough to just list different translations at the bottom of the article?
WhiteC 22:55, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll put in as much info as possible with each quote.  As a sidenote, I will also eventually add references to where each subject is discussed in the NicEth (Book, Ch) somewhere in each section. WhiteC 04:05, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: I changed a couple of quotes to better reflect the version I have in front of -- some of what was cited seems to move a little far away from the Aristotelian text itself (e.g. the removal of the conditional from the citation of 1.7/1098a14-15). Could someone maybe point me to where, more precisely, 3.2 says "choice or purpose implies calculation and reasoning" -- I don't doubt its there, I just couldn't find anything similar in two translations (and am loathe to pick through the Greek myself without a Bekker number... it just takes a while). Even though you're last comments are old, I think the style you suggest i.e. (Book, Ch.) is good, but supplemented with (approximate) Bekker numbers (since this is the traditional method of citing Aristotle, and is helpful for those who may read the text in a foreign languge (and also helps to compare translations quicker). Ig0774 07:29, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Quotes from the Nicomachean Ethics

message: I cut this out of the Essence and function of being human.  I'm pasting it in here in case it comes in useful in some other part of the article.
"Only through man's ability to recognize and accept his own attributes and limitations can any one man excel. The measure of a man is not to be found according to the abilities useful to peers or a particular society/culture; rather, one could argue that a man can only be excellent when the internal activity is fully understood. Aristotle’s virtue cannot be achieved through habit; a person cannot just be virtuous for one day, for to be such would imply an internal contradiction between natural thoughts and the urge to conform one's natural pattern to one determined by others."
WhiteC 04:05, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleted bits that might be useful

message: Thumbs up to WhiteC for his good work on this article :). Thue | talk 19:28, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good to know I have readers, thanks. :)  WhiteC 06:33, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Good work

message: I just wanted to leave a brief note here saying that I was surprised to come across such an extensive, well-written article on the Nicomachean Ethics. The people on this page have done excellent work. --Todeswalzer|Talk 17:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Excellent Article!

message: Many thanks for putting this in, Arcadian.  Particularly the links the Perseus project.
What follows is some changes I will probably put in, which are relatively minor (compared to getting the order in in the 1st place), but feel free to yell if you disagree with any of them.  I'm not sure whether books 2 thru 6 (various types of virtue) each merit individual sections--I think there should be an overview of virtue in general, and then perhaps subsections under that.  Book 2 is moral virtue only.  Book 10 should be divided into pleasure, then politics.  Book 7 should be divided into evil, then pleasure (which Aristotle inconveniently put into 2 separate areas of the Ethics).  WhiteC 06:32, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Ordering by Book, Chapter

message: The eudaimonia article had, as a part of it, a list of bullet points which summarized how to achieve eudaimonia according to Aristotle's ethics.  I copied in some of the arguments from it.
Note that some parts were not directly related to eudaimonia, and were more related to Aristotle's ethical arguments generally.  Some parts have gone into "The essence and function of being human", others into "Eudaimonia" (which was split off from the former section which was getting quite long), and other parts have gone into different sections of the article (such as intellectual virtue).  
WhiteC 20:36, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: stuff added from the Eudaimonia article

message: I moved the general information to a new article on Aristotelian ethics.  It makes more sense to have this be a subset of that, a more general topic that includes Aristotle's other works and ideas on ethics.  Uriah923 05:05, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good.  I agree (now that I've had time to look at it) that this presents the appropriate levels of detail more clearly.  I copied some of the information about the name 'Nicomachean Ethics' back across into a new Naming section.  I put Aristotelian ethics into the See Also section, but I think that the intro here should be tweaked so that it is obvious that Aristotelian ethics is now the place to go for a general summary.  WhiteC 16:06, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a little blurb in the first paragraph.  I think that helps some, but if you want to edit further, go for it.  Uriah923 18:12, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aristotelian ethics 

message: I have an issue with the following:
"The excellent archer will find the mean between the two extremes when trying to hit the target, and he will not aim with force in excess like Machiavelli states to do in his book The Prince, “Let him act like the clever archers who, designing to hit the mark which yet appears too far distant, and knowing the limits to which the strength of their bow attains, take aim much higher than the mark, not to reach by their strength or arrow to so great a height, but to be able with the aid of so high an aim to hit the mark they wish to reach.” A follower of Aristotle will seek to find the mean in every action whether it deals with pleasure, honor, or expression of reason because they will understand that virtue is a mean. In order to seek the good they must also use reason as a guide to seek the virtue/mean."
The author of this paragraph misinterprets Machiavelli. Machiavelli does not suggest an excess of force, like using a cannon to knock down a straw hut. This particular passage reflects Machiavelli's beliefs that we often fall short of our aims, just as an archer falls short of a distant target. Machiavelli suggest that to correct for this tendency by aiming to use excessive force, as this will result in moderate and appropriate force. 
Also, the rest of the paragraph is redundant in light of the rest of the article, and the example of the archer is not particularly illustrative.
24.17.211.229 03:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Machiavelli comparison 

message: Can the epithet 'golden' be dropped from references to 'the mean' in this article? It suggests that Aristotle invented/used such a terminology where he does not - 'golden' is a later addition to the concept.
82.32.198.119 (talk) 18:54, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Golden Mean

message: Can we work on a full summary of all the books? For example book 1 is only summarized up to chapter 6.  Dirtbike spaceman (talk)
Yes, I think that is the aim.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:19, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Full Summary

message: Does anyone have a good source on the date or time in Aristotle's life when Nicomachean Ethics were written.  The article is blank on this and I think it would be a useful addition to the article.  What do scholars say?  N2e (talk) 19:07, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date when written 

message: Remarks on this talk page show that others must surely agree with me that this article needs a lot of work. But probably like me others find it difficult to start, because there is already a lot of material, not all of which is all that bad, but it is such a hopeless state of mixed up confusion that in the end a lot of it will need to be removed, if only in order to avoid "keeping bits of the old" becoming a major distraction to the higher priority of making the best possible article. Massive deleting is not a nice thing to do, and is likely to get reactions from people assuming arrogant intentions. So in order to help I am setting up a draft at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Andrew_Lancaster/Drafts/Nicomachean_Ethics. I invite others to work on it also. It means we can work on big blocks without shocking people too much, hopefully.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:47, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Andrew.  I agree that the article needs a lot of work.  I have removed substantial sections of the Book 7 section, that have been fact-tagged for nearly two years.  This stuff might be true, or might not.  But without verifiable, reliable secondary-source citations, it doesn't belong in Wikipedia.  Much more of the existing article should be deleted, unless it is cited.  The draft you are working on should have all material correctly cited before bringing it back in to the main page.  Alternatively, if there is a particular claim you think is correct but you just haven't located citation support for it, you should integrate it back with properly dated (as originally dated)  so that all the uncited material does not get a free date reset.  Good luck on your project.  Cheers.  N2e (talk) 00:03, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is taking time, and other things have interrupted. Any comments at the draft might be helpful. I have started with an intro and book 1 summary. My approach to the individual books is to make neutral compressed summaries which can therefore uncontroversially be sourced. I am aware that citing secondary commentators for this particular work is a bit of a landmine. At the very least it must come after at least having a skeletal outline, which do not yet have.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 20:07, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Have pushed ahead and completed the intro and book 1 summary, and then transferred them. The summary for Book I may seem long, but it is an extremely important passage in terms of all literature.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 22:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

text: I'll delete the material in the draft that has been moved, but keep the page open for writing other sections. People wanting to edit what has been moved should edit here on the article now, as I will also.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:21, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Have been working directly on the main article, Book 2. I have deleted most of what was there originally when I reached the point that everything really in Book 2 was covered. I think the rest also has to be deleted. Much of the article as it now stands is someone's personal commentary, without sourcing.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 18:06, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Given the urgency of the work needed,  the fact that I might otherwise loose track and need to give up, I have been editing straight into the article, trying to make sure each saved version still makes as much sense as possible. I apologize that I have not been very consistent about marking edits. I am hoping the aim and need for the edits is always pretty self evident.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:04, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

text: I've had to take a few long breaks which has unfortunately left things undone. I've therefore spent some time getting tags in place at least as a reminder to myself about what section is in what state. Until now I have not completed my basic aim of trying to summarize the main parts of the book, and so compressing it back down, which is more difficult and controversial, is still even more steps away.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This needs work, I am going to start a draft 

message: <moved from above>
Just a small point about the article's reference to the inscription at the Delphic Oracle in the section on the Golden Mean. You suggest that it says "nothing to excess" but I always thought it said "Know thyself". Which is correct?
RS
:Answer: the Delphic oracle said more than one thing.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 16:34, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Delphic Oracle question

message: * Priam picture and discussion: seems to be the opposite of what Aristotle explicitly says. Frippo (talk) 03:54, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you explain what you mean? Aristotle says of Priam (in the relevant place) that he lived a happy life, but also that his last year was unhappy. The picture shows the unhappy part. Is that the opposite?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:35, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Priam]] picture 

message: "In chapter 11 Aristotle goes through some of the things said about pleasure and particularly why it might be bad, but in chapter 12 he says that none of these things does not show that pleasure is not good nor even the best thing can be shown two ways: first that what is good or bad need not be good or bad simply but can be good or bad for a certain person at a certain time, and secondly that a good or bad thing can either be a "being at work" (energeia) or else a stable disposition (hexis) and there are pleasures which come from being settled into a natural hexis, and also pleasures which come from being in a stable hexis already, such as contemplation; and thirdly, pleasures are ways of being at work, ends themselves, not just a process of coming into being aimed at some higher end."
Can someone who understands what the above is saying please reword it. --81.153.150.126
:I will try. Of course sometimes Aristotle just says complicated things, but I enjoy the challenge!--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 14:44, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: incomprehensible

message: Doing a brief evaluation on this entry for a class. From what I can tell, this page seems fairly well fleshed out and I haven't found any flaws that a non-Aristotelian Scholar would find. Tone is neutral, sources are direct and unbiased, and links are still working. No obvious grammar or spelling mistakes either. Kudos people!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wahey24 (talk • contribs) 00:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that would be more for the article on Aristotelian Ethics? Remember that this particular article is about one work only. But as a more general point the article has to work with a dilemma concerning secondary literature, in that there is so much. Like the bible (but much less so) every chapter has had commentaries written about it for literally 1000s of years. That is why it is for now more or less a summary, with the least controversial secondary types of comments only, which is a little unusual. Probably the article might one day have spin off articles, or arguably it already does. For example concerning Aristotle's understandings of pleasure, happiness, justice, knowledge etc.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:47, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seems Solid 

message: Good article it help me understand Aristotle's EthicsScottB10 (talk) 00:19, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good Job With Nicomachean Ethics 

message: OVerall I believe "Nichomachean Ethics" has a good flow to it in respect to the subject matter. I liked that it included Aristotles written work such.Could not find any erros to the page.Tirsa.truji35 (talk) 01:40, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nichomachean ethics  

message: Breaking each section section down by book and the main theory in each section was excellent. The use of tables to describe the ideal virtues is helpful for the visual learners. A ceja1994 (talk) 19:23, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excellent Structure 

message: I plan to edit this page as part of a class assignment.
Wikiriker (talk) 07:15, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing Planned 

message: Good job on all of the hard work everyone has put into this page. I know it took a lot of effort into making it. I was able to use it as a reference when I was writing something to post and don't have anything bad to say about it. Carissa Raines 19:17, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good Job 

message: There seems to be a little error in this very helpful article: the term "eudamonia" is only introduced in I.4, and not in I.3 as is suggested.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.131.64.47 (talk) 13:18, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor mistake