{"id":25,"date":"2021-03-22T12:38:30","date_gmt":"2021-03-22T12:38:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/chapter\/3-exactness-not-permitted-by-subject-nor-to-be-expected-by-student-who-needs-experience-and-training\/"},"modified":"2025-08-15T00:46:13","modified_gmt":"2025-08-15T00:46:13","slug":"3-the-nature-of-this-inquiry","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/chapter\/3-the-nature-of-this-inquiry\/","title":{"rendered":"Section 3: The standard of precision for this inquiry and who is competent to engage in it"},"content":{"raw":"

The standard of precision in ethics and political wisdom<\/h3>\r\nOur discussion will be sufficient if it has as much clarity as the subject-matter admits of, for we should not seek for the same kind of precision in all discussions, any more than in all products of the crafts.\r\n\r\nNow noble and just actions, which political wisdom investigates, admit of so much variety and [15]<\/sub> difference of opinion that they seem to exist only by convention, and not by nature. And good things give rise to a similar variability because in many cases they result in harm; for example, some people men have been destroyed because of their wealth, and others because of their courage.\r\n\r\nWe must be content, then, in speaking of such subject-matters to indicate the truth roughly and in outline, [20]<\/sub> and in speaking about things which are only for the most part true and with premises of the same kind to reach conclusions that are no better. In the same way, therefore, we should take each of the things we say. For it is the mark of an educated person to look for precision in each class of things just so far as the nature of the subject allows. [25]<\/sub> It is evidently foolish to accept plausible explanations from a mathematician and to demand rigorous demonstrations from a rhetorician.\r\n

Who is competent to study ethics and political wisdom<\/h3>\r\nNow everyone judges well the things he knows, and of these he is a good judge. And so the person who has been educated in a subject is a good judge of that subject, and the person who has received a well-rounded education is a good judge in general. [1095a1]<\/sub> Hence a young person is not a proper hearer of lectures on political wisdom; for he is inexperienced in the actions that occur in life. In political wisdom the discussions start from, and are about, the actions that occur in life.\r\n\r\nMoreover, since a young person tends to follow his feelings, his study will be pointless and unbeneficial, because the goal of our inquiry is not [5]<\/sub> knowledge but action. And it makes no difference whether he is young in years or immature in character; the defect does not depend on time, but on whether he lives and pursues each thing as his feelings direct. For to people who are weak-willed and lack self-control, knowledge about such matters is not beneficial. [10]<\/sub> But to those who desire and act in accordance with reason, such knowledge is a great benefit.\r\n\r\nThese remarks about the student, the sort of treatment to be expected, and the purpose of the inquiry, may be taken as our preface.","rendered":"

The standard of precision in ethics and political wisdom<\/h3>\n

Our discussion will be sufficient if it has as much clarity as the subject-matter admits of, for we should not seek for the same kind of precision in all discussions, any more than in all products of the crafts.<\/p>\n

Now noble and just actions, which political wisdom investigates, admit of so much variety and [15]<\/sub> difference of opinion that they seem to exist only by convention, and not by nature. And good things give rise to a similar variability because in many cases they result in harm; for example, some people men have been destroyed because of their wealth, and others because of their courage.<\/p>\n

We must be content, then, in speaking of such subject-matters to indicate the truth roughly and in outline, [20]<\/sub> and in speaking about things which are only for the most part true and with premises of the same kind to reach conclusions that are no better. In the same way, therefore, we should take each of the things we say. For it is the mark of an educated person to look for precision in each class of things just so far as the nature of the subject allows. [25]<\/sub> It is evidently foolish to accept plausible explanations from a mathematician and to demand rigorous demonstrations from a rhetorician.<\/p>\n

Who is competent to study ethics and political wisdom<\/h3>\n

Now everyone judges well the things he knows, and of these he is a good judge. And so the person who has been educated in a subject is a good judge of that subject, and the person who has received a well-rounded education is a good judge in general. [1095a1]<\/sub> Hence a young person is not a proper hearer of lectures on political wisdom; for he is inexperienced in the actions that occur in life. In political wisdom the discussions start from, and are about, the actions that occur in life.<\/p>\n

Moreover, since a young person tends to follow his feelings, his study will be pointless and unbeneficial, because the goal of our inquiry is not [5]<\/sub> knowledge but action. And it makes no difference whether he is young in years or immature in character; the defect does not depend on time, but on whether he lives and pursues each thing as his feelings direct. For to people who are weak-willed and lack self-control, knowledge about such matters is not beneficial. [10]<\/sub> But to those who desire and act in accordance with reason, such knowledge is a great benefit.<\/p>\n

These remarks about the student, the sort of treatment to be expected, and the purpose of the inquiry, may be taken as our preface.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":249,"menu_order":3,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[48],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-25","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry","chapter-type-numberless"],"part":20,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/25","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/249"}],"version-history":[{"count":13,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/25\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":822,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/25\/revisions\/822"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/20"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/25\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=25"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=25"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/nicomacheanethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=25"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}