[ad_1]
To the philosopher Aristotle, there were many types of virtues and they came in many forms. He viewed virtue as the habit of the soul. It was the mean between two vices: one of deprivation and one of excess. And this mean was defined through reason as the prudent man would define it. He was careful in his analysis of mankind and all the basic components that should make the species as is. To Aristotle, virtue was the sign that meant the man and his soul was at happiness, which was the ultimate goal of life. Although he carefully examined many virtues, one of the more interesting and analytical in his studies is his perception on the merit of courage.
Aristotle's view of bravery and courage is a unique look at a characteristic in mankind. It is very situational and personal by definition. Each being has its own interpretation of how to be brave and how to overcome the mortal fears, whether naturallyistically scared or at least logically defended. There is no defense for fears that have no real threat or act of bravery to overcome. So the first point of understanding Aristotle's status in the matters is to know that there is a wrong definition for being brave, meaning that there is no true act of bravery for the mortal man to overcome, and a right definition for being brave, where it is a natural and / or logical fear that is understood and enhanced by the individual. Once one can recognize the specifics of Aristotle's assessments, they can aim at the requirements to become brave.
The brave man, to Aristotle, is a wise man. For even in being brave and courageous one must still have fears. It is a part of human kind to understand and acknowledge this. It is almost in a way like a humble, although in some cases not so evidently humble, manner of recognizing your own mortality and imperfection in life. If one did not have fear or fears, then one could not overcome them and certainly never achieve greater peace or self-accomplishment in life. And it is required to not only have the fear, but also to be able to recognize the fear. The individual must be able to know what it is that he fears before he can over it. So there is some intellect and self-awareness necessity in being brave. Once the person can admit to their own being that they do indeed fear like all humans and that they can identify what it is to fear, they can proceed in the steps to overcome their fear.
The problem with this is that it there is a fine line between the instinctive sense of courage and the intellectual sense of courage. Aristotle looks down on those who rush in to overcome their courage and do not fully assess what it is that they should be brave against and for. It is not in their wisdom that they do such acts and therefore do not understand that they are truly being brave. On the other hand, though one may act almost fool-heartedly when put in a situation requiring bravery, it does not necessarily mean that the person has a vice of excess in the value, which is what on even grounds Aristotle's work looks to express. The problem arrives that the man really needs to consciously recognize the act of bravery or can instinctively his mind and body realize this without making it consciously aware? If so, then he destroys any other factors in his decision to be courageous and is not being manipulated or influenced by any forces other than his own conscious. This gives expression that there is also a vice of over-thinking.
As stated, Aristotle clearly expresses an act of intellectualism and reason being a part of bravery. To what extent this goes is what splits his definition of the merit into paths of interpretation. Man requires reason to exist as man. This part is clear in all forms and analyzes, but that reason can be an innate feature at times, acting as an instinctive part of man's being. By looking at it in this way, courage would require mainly just being able to overcome the fear and a certain amount of analysis of it. Lack of analysis would mean incorrect reason and recognition of reality, while over analysis would inevitably bring in other elements and components other than the pure act of overcoming a fear and being brave. So courage relays on a means between two vices of reason. One would fail at truly gaining the value of courage if they were to be fool-hearted and not fully understand what it means to be courageous, and also one would fail if they were over-analytical and let the influence of other elements include their own judgment and conscious persuade their acts and being.
So we can gather this from the end analysis: the merit of courage is an act of understanding man's own mortal fears, both natural and logical, and the ability to keep the act of overcoming fear, of being courageous, between two vices of reason where one is the lack of judgment and intellect while the other is the excess of judgment and analysis. This leaves Aristotle's view on courage in an unly path. Although he clearly expresses the power of reason, it is this same reason that creates a vice if used to much. There seems to be some expression that reason is a force that is innate to man and so in saying so one one does not need to overexert themselves to use it. Thus, reason is the understanding of life, mortality, and value, and is the creation of all things expressed in a balanced form within mannish.
In the end, Aristotle's view on courage seems to leave one important fact: it is not by our own choice that we have it. Not to say that man does not recognize his fear and welcome it, but in definition to say that we have the conscious power not to express the value other than the conscious power to express it. In other words, it is natural for man to achieve this value of courage, but to not achieve it by his own actions and determinations. This is in a sense a contradiction to his teachings of choice and freedom of action. There is this instinctive essence to courage that Aristotle emphasizes. It comes from the very definition of man being a reasonable, analytical and intelligent creature. Although man must make some efforts to be able to properly use the powers of reason, man is defined as the only creature to have reason and there before it is a power within man that is connected and not an outside force to rely on. The value of courage therefore requires the power to recognize that man possesses it and not the power to reach its goal. Sustaining the means between the vices of deficiency and excess in reason is the endavor that manned endures to reach a virtue. It is the function of the human being to reason.
To Aristotle, everything aims at a great Good. This Good is not some unseen God (s) to worship and follow, or the goal to change the world and make it a "better place" without any clear, unbiased view on what would be indeed better. It is simply to reach the state of Happiness. And to do so, man needs the virtues to fully understand his place in the world. The value of courage is no different. It is the way for one to overcome the difficulties and suffering of life. Without it, man would not be so vibrant in life. It is the virtues, this balance of the soul between deprivation and excess, from reason that allow man to be what it is. Aristotle clearly understood this in his wisdom and was kind enough to share it with the world.
[ad_2]
Source