Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nicomachean Ethics

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 160 posts

Re: Nicomachean Ethics

#11

Post by philipov »

guerrilla wrote: post #9
soufron wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe you were too young ;) And maybe such complex problems don't come with very clear solutions. Re-read it :D

Aristotle is notoriously a terrible writer. A lot of these books are thought to just be lecture notes and things like that pieced together. Compare that to something like Plato's and it's a big difference. I imagine nobody will ever beat Kant in the terrible writing department though.

Many writers are terrible by accident, but Kant elevated it to an artform.

Re: Nicomachean Ethics

#12

Post by hkt »

mbrock wrote: post #10
hkt wrote: post #5

This book is the foundation of my worldview. The message I took away from it is that there is a skill of being good at being a person, and that goodness in terms of what we now consider to be ethics will follow from that. Worthy of note in particular is eudaimonia as a concept, especially the debate between whether it is happiness or goodness. I read it (somewhat loosely) as being the process by which a person's beha…

Have you also read Alasdair MacIntyre's "After Virtue" from 1981? As I understand it basically revived Aristotelian virtue ethics as a viable philosophical theory, indeed by thoroughly criticizing modern (post-Enlightenment) justifications of morality. It's probably my favorite book of modern philosophy.

I have not, but that sounds awesome. Recommending in turn "natural goodness" by Philippa Foot, also a revival of virtue ethics.

Re: Nicomachean Ethics

#13

Post by toxicFork »

philipov wrote: post #11
guerrilla wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aristotle is notoriously a terrible writer. A lot of these books are thought to just be lecture notes and things like that pieced together. Compare that to something like Plato's and it's a big difference. I imagine nobody will ever beat Kant in the terrible writing department though.

Many writers are terrible by accident, but Kant elevated it to an artform.

Now I want to really read his writings

Re: Nicomachean Ethics

#14

Post by 0xddd »

guerrilla wrote: post #9
soufron wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe you were too young ;) And maybe such complex problems don't come with very clear solutions. Re-read it :D

Aristotle is notoriously a terrible writer. A lot of these books are thought to just be lecture notes and things like that pieced together. Compare that to something like Plato's and it's a big difference. I imagine nobody will ever beat Kant in the terrible writing department though.

> Aristotle is notoriously a terrible writer.

Is this really uncontroversial? I can't say I've heard that said before, or found Aristotle more difficult than other texts of that time. Obviously there are stylistic differences between this and Plator's dialogues, but I imagine a large part of your impression could be due to the particular translations you read.

Re: Nicomachean Ethics

#15

Post by aestetix »

guerrilla wrote: post #9
soufron wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe you were too young ;) And maybe such complex problems don't come with very clear solutions. Re-read it :D

Aristotle is notoriously a terrible writer. A lot of these books are thought to just be lecture notes and things like that pieced together. Compare that to something like Plato's and it's a big difference. I imagine nobody will ever beat Kant in the terrible writing department though.

Derrida and Foucault are far worse than Kant. At least Kant has substance ;)

Re: Nicomachean Ethics

#16

Post by pfortuny »

guerrilla wrote: post #9
soufron wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe you were too young ;) And maybe such complex problems don't come with very clear solutions. Re-read it :D

Aristotle is notoriously a terrible writer. A lot of these books are thought to just be lecture notes and things like that pieced together. Compare that to something like Plato's and it's a big difference. I imagine nobody will ever beat Kant in the terrible writing department though.

Oh, but they are just lecture notes. I am quite a bad lecture-note writer (and, honestly, anything else) but for lecture notes, the Nichomachean Ethics is splendid.

Re: Nicomachean Ethics

#18

Post by aestetix »

As an aside, I strongly recommend reading Thucydides. Once you know the story of the Peloponnesian War, everything that Socrates and Aristotle talked about will have a much deeper meaning.

Re: Nicomachean Ethics

#20

Post by TeMPOraL »

alangibson wrote: post #6

I read HN because it's the only place on the Internet where a link to a Wikipedia page on Nicomachean Ethics could hit the #1 position.

I read HN because not just that happens, but also the comments will usually provide several other insights or links of equal value!
Post reply on HN