A sentence that I couldn't understand from the Nicomachean Ethics- Aristotle
Every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim. But a certain difference is found among ends; some are activities, others are products apart from the activities that produce them. Where there are ends apart from the actions, it is the nature of the products to be better than the activities. Now, as there are many actions, arts, and sciences, their ends also are many; the end of the medical art is health, that of shipbuilding a vessel, that of strategy victory, that of economics wealth. But where such arts fall under a single capacity- as bridle-making and the other arts concerned with the equipment of horses fall under the art of riding, and this and every military action under strategy, in the same way other arts fall under yet others- in all of these the ends of the master arts are to be preferred to all the subordinate ends; for it is for the sake of the former that the latter are pursued. It makes no difference whether the activities themselves are the ends of the actions, or something else apart from the activities, as in the case of the sciences just mentioned.
--
If, then, there is some end of the things we do, which we desire for its own sake (everything else being desired for the sake of this), and if we do not choose everything for the sake of something else (for at that rate the process would go on to infinity, so that our desire would be empty and vain), clearly this must be the good and the chief good.
Hi my friends:
The beginning of the second chapter: I have to admit that I am lost in the relative clauses and the words like this, its own sake etc. I'm really stuck, I cannot name which this refers to what. Can you please make the sentence a little bit easier? Thanks a lot!
2 Answers
For its own sake.
I might like painting a picture for the sake of the picture. Another might enjoy the very act of painting. So he would like painting for its own sake.
The whole clause refers to "end"
If, then, there is some end of the things we do, which we desire for its own sake
Its refers to end
If, then, there is some end of the things we do, which we desire for its own sake
First this refers to end
If, then, there is some end of the things we do... (everything else being desired for the sake of this)
Second this likely refers to end
If, then, there is some end of the things we do...clearly this must be the good and the chief good.
That last "this" I find a bit doubtful, too. But I do think it refers to the first "end." I think he is saying the ultimate end for which we do all things must be the "chief good."
But, honestly, the bridle maker usually makes bridles not for the victory of the strategy nor for his unfailing love of bridles or of bridle-making, but just to make money with which to provide for himself and/or his family.
You can use the bridle for what you will.
If, then, there is some end of the things we do, which we desire for its own sake (everything else being desired for the sake of this), and if we do not choose everything for the sake of something else (for at that rate the process would go on to infinity, so that our desire would be empty and vain), clearly this must be the good and the chief good.
If everything we do has a purpose, that is helps to accomplish something we desire for it's own sake (all of the steps towards this goal being desired only because they help accomplish this goal), and if there are some things that we do actually desire for their own sake (because otherwise, everything would be a step towards something else, and in the end we would not desire anything because we would not have a final goal), then clearly this goal must be "the good" and "the chief good".
