For those seeking to live a more meaningful life, the vast amount of philosophical knowledge available can often feel overwhelming. It is essential to return to the basics, such as Aristotle’s philosophy and the concept of the Golden Mean, to truly benefit from these teachings. Understanding this principle can profoundly impact how we apply philosophy in our quest for a meaningful existence. This article will examine Aristotle’s philosophy, the Golden Mean, and their significance in the philosophical pursuit of a purposeful life.
Key features of Aristotle’s philosophy
Aristotle’s philosophy is rooted in the idea of observing the world and understanding it through reason and logic. He believed that everything in nature has a purpose, which he called “final cause,” and that true knowledge can be obtained by studying the world around us. Unlike his teacher Plato, who focused on the world of ideal forms, Aristotle emphasized studying real objects and experiences to gain insight.
One of Aristotle’s key contributions is his concept of the “Golden Mean,” which encourages balance in life. He argued that virtues, like courage or generosity, lie between two extremes — for instance, bravery is the balance between recklessness and cowardice. This idea became central to his ethical system, guiding individuals to live virtuous and fulfilling lives.
Aristotle also made significant advancements in logic, developing systems for categorizing and analyzing arguments. His work formed the basis of formal logic, underpinning much of modern scientific inquiry. Additionally, he made important contributions to politics, categorizing governments into three main types — monarchy, aristocracy, and polity — and discussing their strengths and weaknesses.
Overall, Aristotle’s philosophy is about seeking knowledge, understanding natural processes, and living a balanced, virtuous life guided by reason. His ideas continue to influence multiple fields like science, ethics, and politics even today.
What is the Golden Mean?
Aristotle’s concept of the Golden Mean is a central idea in his ethical philosophy. It refers to the idea that virtue lies at a balance point between two extremes of behaviour. According to Aristotle, every character trait or action has two opposite ends, which are excess and deficiency. The Golden Mean represents a middle ground between these extremes. However, this balance is not about strict moderation in every aspect of life. Instead, it depends on the situation and the individual involved. Aristotle believed that the right course of action is one that aligns with reason and is appropriate to the circumstances. The Golden Mean is not the same for everyone, as different situations or individuals may require different levels of balance. Aristotle’s idea emphasizes the importance of practical judgment in finding this middle path, rather than blindly adhering to rules or extremes.
This example highlights the essence of this philosophical perspective. Consider a person faced with the decision of how much courage to show in a dangerous situation. Imagine someone who exhibits too little courage, perhaps retreating in extreme fear—this would be an example of deficiency, resulting in cowardice. On the other hand, someone who acts with excessive bravery, rushing recklessly into danger without any thought, demonstrates an extreme excess, which could be seen as foolhardiness. The balanced approach would be a person who considers the situation carefully and acts with the right amount of courage—neither too timid nor overly bold. This balanced response reflects a harmonious middle ground. Such an example reflects Aristotle’s belief in finding moderation in actions, avoiding extremes, and aiming for the appropriate response for each situation faced in life.
Challenges to Aristotle’s view about the Golden Mean
Some philosophers object to or reject Aristotle’s concept of the Golden Mean for several reasons, often rooted in its limitations when applied to real-life ethical scenarios. One common criticism is that the Golden Mean oversimplifies the complexity of moral decision-making by reducing it to finding a balance between extremes. Critics argue that moral life is more intricate than such a formula allows, and not all virtues or actions can be neatly categorized on a spectrum. For example, there are instances such as dealing with injustices or systemic oppression where moderation may seem inappropriate or even unethical, as they require decisive action rather than a middle ground.
Another objection is the subjective nature of identifying what constitutes the “mean” in specific situations. Philosophers contend that what might appear as the virtuous middle for one person could differ for another due to cultural, personal, or situational factors. This variability undermines the universality of the Golden Mean as a guiding principle. It also raises questions about who determines the appropriate mean and whether such decisions are influenced by biases or societal norms that might not always promote genuine virtue.
Additionally, some argue that Aristotle’s framework assumes a level of moral and practical wisdom (phronesis) that many individuals may not possess. Critics point out that expecting everyone to consistently identify and choose the mean is unrealistic, especially when faced with complex or high-pressure situations. People often make decisions driven by emotions, misinformation, or flawed reasoning, which can lead to significant deviations from what might be considered virtuous behaviour.
Lastly, certain virtues, like justice or integrity, are seen by critics as incompatible with the Golden Mean. These virtues often demand absolute commitment rather than a moderated approach. For instance, one cannot morally justify “moderate” dishonesty as a form of balance between honesty and deceit.
Overall, while Aristotle’s Golden Mean might provide a framework for thinking about ethical behaviour, many philosophers find it too rigid or simplistic to encapsulate the complexities and nuances of moral life. These objections highlight the need for alternative theories that account for the diverse and often unpredictable nature of human experience.
Why the Golden Mean is important to Aristotle’s philosophy
Understanding the concept of the Golden Mean is essential to grasping Aristotle’s philosophy for several key reasons.
- Balance as a Guiding Principle
The concept of the Golden Mean emphasizes the importance of balance in human behaviour and decision-making. This idea encourages individuals to avoid extremes and instead strive for moderation in their actions. By promoting the idea that virtues lie between deficiencies and excesses, it provides a practical framework for understanding how to live a fulfilled and harmonious life. For example, courage is seen as the balance between cowardice and recklessness. This focus on balance makes the Golden Mean a relatable and accessible concept, offering a way for individuals to reflect on their choices and find a middle path that aligns with personal growth and ethical living. The emphasis on moderation helps demonstrate how people can develop positive habits and avoid destructive patterns in their lives.
- Relevance to Personal Development
The Golden Mean plays a crucial role in understanding personal growth and self-improvement. It shows how individuals can cultivate virtues by practising moderation and conscious decision-making. This approach suggests that each person has the potential to refine their character through observation and effort, highlighting that a good life is not about strict rules but about thoughtful choices. By learning to recognize and avoid extreme behaviours, individuals can lead lives that are balanced and aligned with their values. This approach fosters self-awareness and responsibility, encouraging people to take active steps toward achieving their full potential. The idea of gradual improvement resonates with how many understand the process of becoming better versions of themselves.
- Practical Application in Daily Life
One reason the Golden Mean is significant is its practical application in everyday life. This philosophical idea provides a framework for navigating complex situations by avoiding the pitfalls of excess or deficiency. For instance, in relationships, the Golden Mean might guide someone to balance being overly demanding with being too passive, fostering healthier interactions. Its simplicity allows people to adapt it to a variety of contexts, making it a useful tool for ethical decision-making. The flexibility of the concept ensures that it remains relevant regardless of the specific circumstances, demonstrating its capacity to guide human behaviour in a logical and meaningful way. By focusing on a practical approach, the Golden Mean offers timeless wisdom that can be applied across culture and time.
Contrasting Aristotle’s philosophy with Jean-Paul Sartre
Aristotle’s concept of the Golden Mean and Jean-Paul Sartre’s existentialist philosophy highlight two very different approaches to life and decision-making. The Golden Mean emphasizes balance and moderation, suggesting that the best course of action lies between two extremes—neither excess nor deficiency. This focus on a measured and harmonious life contrasts sharply with Sartre’s existentialism, which places a heavy focus on individual freedom and responsibility. Sartre believed that people create their own values and meaning in life through their choices, without any predefined path or universal guideline.
The key difference is that Aristotle’s philosophy suggests there is an ideal middle ground for human behavior that contributes to a fulfilling life. It implies that there is some inherent structure or purpose to be followed. Sartre, on the other hand, rejects the idea of predetermined meaning or moral guidelines. For Sartre, each individual must define their own purpose and confront the anxiety that comes with total freedom. Where Aristotle looks for balance within a framework of reason, Sartre emphasizes the limitless nature of personal freedom and the weight of creating one’s own moral compass without an external guide. These two approaches, though both deeply philosophical, offer distinct paths for understanding how humans can live meaningful lives.
The Golden Mean, Aristotle’s philosophy and the philosophy of life
Reflecting on Aristotle’s ideas, particularly the concept of the Golden Mean, is a valuable exercise when developing your own philosophy of life, even if you don’t entirely agree with his views. The act of engaging with these ideas encourages introspection and critical thinking—two skills that are essential for personal growth and self-awareness. By questioning, analyzing, and reflecting on these concepts, you are better equipped to make deliberate choices about the kind of life you want to lead.
One of the most practical benefits of reflecting on a philosophy like Aristotle’s is that it urges you to think about balance in your life. Modern life is full of competing priorities—work, relationships, health, and personal ambitions—all demanding attention and energy. Understanding how to find your unique equilibrium can help you avoid extremes that may lead to burnout, dissatisfaction, or conflict. Whether or not Aristotle’s specific framework resonates with you, the idea of striving for balance is a timeless and universally relevant pursuit.
Furthermore, reflecting on Aristotle’s philosophy promotes the habit of evaluating your values and actions. It challenges you to ask yourself questions such as, “What kind of person do I want to be?” or “How do my choices align with my principles?” These questions are not always easy to answer but are crucial for living a purposeful and fulfilling life. Articulating a philosophy of life grounded in intentional thinking, rather than simply reacting to circumstances, can empower you to face challenges with clarity and confidence.
Finally, engaging with such philosophical ideas connects you to a larger tradition of human thought. You become part of a dialogue that spans centuries, drawing from timeless wisdom to address modern dilemmas. While you may not agree with everything Aristotle proposed, his work serves as a foundation for exploring concepts like ethical living, personal growth, and authenticity. This reflective practice serves as a reminder that the pursuit of a meaningful life is a personal and evolving process, one that benefits from revisiting and reconsidering diverse perspectives.
Further reading
Aristotle. (2009). Nicomachean ethics (W. D. Ross, Trans.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published ca. 350 BCE)
Broadie, S. (1991). Ethics with Aristotle. Oxford University Press.
Curzer, H. J. (2012). Aristotle and the virtues. Oxford University Press.
Grant, A. (1885). The ethics of Aristotle. Longmans, Green, and Co.
Hursthouse, R. (1999). On virtue ethics. Oxford University Press.
Irwin, T. H. (1985). Aristotle’s first principles. Oxford University Press.
Rorty, A. O. (Ed.). (1980). Essays on Aristotle’s ethics. University of California Press.
Sherman, N. (1989). The fabric of character: Aristotle’s theory of virtue. Oxford University Press.
Urmson, J. O. (1988). Aristotle’s ethics. Basil Blackwell.