Aristotle’s Middle Way

“That moral virtue is a mean, then, and in what sense it is so, and that it is a mean between two vices, the one involving excess, the other deficiency, and that it is such because its character is to aim at what is intermediate in passions and in actions, has been sufficiently stated. Hence also it is no easy task to be good. For in everything it is no easy task to find the middle, e.g. to find the middle of a circle is not for everyone but for him who knows; so, too, anyone can get angry­ that is easy­ or give or spend money; but to do this to the right person, to the right extent, at the right time, with the right motive, and in the right way, that is not for every one, nor is it easy; wherefore goodness is both rare and laudable and noble.” Nicomachean Ethics, Book II, Section 9

Discussion

On a nice patio on a late sunny afternoon, friends and I discussed this well­worn concept from Aristotle. The middle way. The mean between extremes. The ‘golden mean’. Moderation. It goes by many names. But what does it really mean?

Today, we are enamoured with extremes. It is a kind of Nietzschian ubermensch for the masses. We all want to be famous writers, singers, actors, celebrities, philosophers…the list goes on and on. What exactly does Aristotle say and is it really all that different from this desire to be the best in the world?

Yes and no. “It is no easy task to be good,” Aristotle states. This is because aiming for the middle between excess and deficiency, for example courage which is the middle way between an excess of anger and a deficiency of cowardice, is not a precise task. There is no strict formula on how to be courageous. But it does require a great deal of self­knowledge and, in particular, a knowledge of what it means to be in control of oneself.

Without getting too technical, by self­control, Aristotle did not mean to repress the passions. Instead, the key was to infuse them with rationality so that they could be at your disposal, so to speak. For Aristotle, to be ruled by passions means not to know who you are. You are pulled this way and that, willy­nilly. You don’t know what you want from one day to the next and no one comes to know who you are because there is no stable person there to get to know. As such, this is not a happy life and indeed, could very well lead to a very wicked (tyrannical) one. On the other hand, passions are key to making us happy. We are not satisfied with merely fulfilling our needs in stoic fashion. We want more: good plays to make us laugh and cry, good restaurants in which to eat richly satisfying food, good music, good sex, good lovers and friends to share our lives with, the list goes on and on.

Now Aristotle’s point is that, by all means, these passions are the spice of life. But we can’t simply live on spice. Bowl of black pepper anyone? What makes spice so wonderful is the basic food it is sprinkled over. Does it match the food? Did we put on enough? Too much? Too little? A great chef knows. And he knows because he has knowledge about the spices, their properties, what foods they go with, how much should generally be put in. At the same

time, he experiments. In each dish, the amount and the taste matches vary. He’ll take some risks to make the tastes even more magnificent, but it always comes back to that basic knowledge he has of food and spices. It is the same with the greatest musicians, learning the technique of playing the piano is crucial to play Beethoven with panache and beauty.

And this brings us back to the middle way. We have not strayed as far as it seems! “…any one can get angry­ that is easy­ or give or spend money; but to do this to the right person, to the right extent, at the right time, with the right motive, and in the right way, that is not for every one, nor is it easy; wherefore goodness is both rare and laudable and noble.” Moderation is both calming and peaceful (i.e., not extreme) AND extraordinary, even magnificent in the Nietzsche ubermensch sense. Aristotle is not defending mediocrity. He is advocating for a life most fully lived. And to live is to harness the passions, doing so in such a way that our life is consciously enriched by their spice. Most importantly, to live is to act ‘aright’ in every context. This means both: stably / moderately and passionately. One certainly should not stand indifferent in the face of war. But nor should one act as a murderous thug…unless of course the situation is so extreme that this is the only possible way that one can act with courage. Bottom line, one must KNOW how to act in every given situation. And how does one know? Self­control. Not instinct but thinking rules action. Not a novel concept surely, but difficult, extremely difficult to do. An ideal almost. Ethical surely.

Does this begin to make sense? Every situation in life must be lived anew. At the same time, it is not as if the rug is being pulled out from under your feet every time you are confronted with a new situation. Confidence increases as one gets to know oneself. Experience teaches us to get a ‘feel’ for our capabilities in general and makes us aware of the effect of what we do on others. But we must also be prepared to be taught. We must listen and learn from our experience, from the failures as well as the successes, from the tragedies as well as the comedies.

Laugh at life, says Nietzsche. Aristotle would agree. But he would also say that be careful that that laughter does not turn to mockery. Remember who you are and what you can do. And most importantly, remember that as you strive to be good—to be that great poet, musician, human being, there are others in your context of striving who must be taken heed of, each and every time.

My god – this middle way is probably the biggest ethical ideal we’ve ever had! And yet, despite that, it is so human. As human as relishing that first bite of a fabulously rare filet mignon. Bon appétit…