Do you suppose it may be that, in Nic. Eth., IV, 1-3, the virtues are
liberality, magnificence and pride, means between prodigality and
meanness, vulgarity and niggardliness, and vanity and humility,
respectively. They are clearly aimed at the well-off.
As to the American notion, I think de Toqueville noted something like
when the citizens learn that they can tap into public funds, the American
way is over. We see politicians trying to buy votes, and lobbyists buying
politicians. There is clearly a lack of virtue, and it is doing the
country no good. We find that the rascal with the biggest TV budget can
win, though the better educated (in the traditional sense, not that of
narrow specialization) would see through the humbug.
Dave
On Sat, 13 May 2006 22:18:38 -0400 "David Opderbeck"
<dopderbeck@gmail.com> writes:
Aristotle's ethics (and virtue ethics generally) is an elitist ethics; it
is profoundly undemocratic and assumes inequality among persons.
Interesting -- why is this? Is this much different than the American
founders' idea that democracy requires an educated and virtuous public?
Received on Sun May 14 22:39:35 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun May 14 2006 - 22:39:36 EDT