Aristotle and the magnanimous Cubierta y diseño editorial: Éride, Diseño Gráfico Dirección editorial: Sylvia Martínez Primera edición: xxxxxxxx, 2016 Aristotle and the magnanimous © Enrique Morata © nuevosescritores, 2016 Collado Bajo, 13 28053 Madrid nuevosescritores ISBN: Depósito Legal: Diseño y preimpresión: Éride, Diseño Gráfico Imprime: Cualquier forma de reproducción, distribución, comunicación pública o transformación de esta obra solo puede ser realizada con la autorización de sus titulares, salvo excepción prevista por la ley. Diríjase a CEDRO (Centro Español de Derechos Reprográficos, www.cedro.org) si necesita fotocopiar o escanear algún fragmento de esta obra. Aristotle and the magnanimous ENRIQUE MORATA

.– The character of the magnanimous Aristotle wrote in his «Nichomachean Ethics» a theory of Market which still applies on today's Economics. For Aristotle, Men were created by Nature by the principle of developing millions of differences from the basic form of human being. Because it, there are millions of different men on Earth, each one with his distinctive difference from the others, being these differences: his stature, his colour of hair, his body frame, his strength, his talent, his birth, Aristotle and the magnanimous [7] his ability or his wit. Life is the clash among men, in a negotiation of the differences of each one by the principle of who is superior and who is inferior in this or that aspect. Marketplace is where Men clash one against other, resolving their differences by negotiation. Money is just the symbol of the differences among Men. Money is the symbol of the value of a given man, when at the marketplace he realises his own value («Nichomachean Ethics», IV, 1119 b). There is a negotiation when sailing at the sea and relationships among Men are a negotiation too. When dealing with the other Men, there is a searching for the «Distributive Justice» or middle way between the excesses (such lavishness) [8] Enrique Morata and the flaws (such avarice). All men incur in excesses and flaws and at the Marketplace they polish them by the intercourse with the others. Aristotle devotes most of his book on Ethics to describe the many forms by which human beings are exposed to excesses and flaws. So the lavish is a wreck himself, leading to bankruptcy his fortune and he is useless to society: he only gives but he doesn't gain. The magnanimous, instead, uses well his money as he knows how to spend it and how to gift it and this is beautiful, good and useful for the City. Prostitutes, gamblers, thieves, usurers and cynics only think in their private profit Aristotle and the magnanimous [9] and don t contribute to the relationships among Men, they are «out of the World» as those that live alone. Those that don't need to live in a city with other men are either beasts or gods. The magnanimous is worth of the greatest deeds as he follows the «virtue», (not the current concept of virtue understood as to behave correctly, but virtue as it was taught by Aristotle : the search for the highest Good). It is so because the magnanimous doesn't follow the good by interest as the other Men do. The magnanimous is strong in body and mind, he has been instructed in Aristotle s Ethics and knows what is «virtue». The magnanimous loves himself because he loves the Good, and Life is a Good. And his Life is a Good. [10] Enrique Morata He promotes his best, noblest, and most Good part: Reason, and by loving it he loves his Life, because Reason wants to keep on living. And the magnanimous wants to keep on living because he loves his Reason and obeys it. He obeys the best part of him, Reason , and by obeying Reason he gets to act willingly. Those that don't obey their Reason, they act by accident, following their appetites and following Nature's movements. The magnanimous will be useful to the others if he loves himself and his Reason. The magnanimous desires a good, happy and pleasant life. Conscience tells us that we exist, that we see, Aristotle and the magnanimous [11] that we think, that we live and conscience is a Good because it shows us our Life as a Good. Conscience is pleasant because it shows us what is a Good by itself: our Life. The same existence of Life is a pleasure. At the same time, the Life of our friend is a Good too. Few friends are enough, as few spices are enough on food. The Good is limited but a bad life is unlimited because evil, pain and corruption are unlimited («Nichomachean Ethics» 1170 b). Aristotle distinguishes «natural Ethics» or primitive Ethics [12] Enrique Morata from «Civilized Ethics», his own Aristotelian Ethics. Natural Ethics depends on retaliation, action and reaction, vengeance, an eye by an eye, a hand by a hand and a teeth by a teeth and it is the natural, raw form of relationship among all the living beings. It is not a behaviour by deliberation but by instinct. It is an Ethics by accident, by natural laws, not by human laws. Natural Ethics are followed by the living beings without science like the honey, the wine or the plants when they relate among themselves. Natural Ethics is the same everywhere and with the same strength, Aristotle and the magnanimous [13] as fire is (Heraclitus said) and Natural Ethics is not influenced by human beings, their thoughts or their needs. Human Ethics looks for another thing: how must be applied human Justice, to whom and when. Human Ethics is an human invention to get a given civilization, from the refinement of the natural laws or «primitive» Ethics. People without knowledge of Aristotlès Ethics obey them by fear of punishments (by a «dexterity», by a trick or by accident) meanwhile those that know, the magnanimous, follow them by the science of the Good and the virtue. Human Justice puts limits to the World by laws for particular cases, it is different on each country and it is a human agreement, as the political regimes are. [14] Enrique Morata Aristotelian Ethics is Utilitarianism in the sense that its Justice is based on convention and utility, by measures that change following Men's generations and changes (1135 a). Human Justice follows proportions to distribute the common goods (the riches) according to the amounts advanced by each citizen. There is a proportion by adding and substracting, by what is more and what is less, when dealing at the Marketplace. A judge looks to restore equality, substracting from earnings in money or pleasure to give it to those that have loose by loss of members or suffering. A judge is a magnanimous, a person that looks for the middle way, he embodies Justice as the middle way. The magnanimous knows that he is bigger and mightier than the other men Aristotle and the magnanimous [15] but he chooses to do the Good, which in Aristotlès time meant to give money to build great works for the town and to be a hero at the war. The magnanimous spreads money and makes circulate it with his great projects for the town. As he is noble, he reckons to do the best, most enduring, most beautiful and useful works for the town. The magnanimous looks that his works cannot be surpassed (1123 b). The magnanimous is superior physically and because it is impossible that he be foolish. The magnanimous is the best and worth of the greatest deeds. The magnanimous is virtue in its uppermost beauty. The magnanimous are forced to act well [16] Enrique Morata by their same superiority in body and education, they can only act towards the Good. The rest of Men are just plants or beats-like, either by their faulty body or by their lack of training in Aristotle's Ethics. They don't obey laws, they only cringe in front of them by a not voluntary mechanism. They don't know what is Justice as they don't know Aristotle's works. Justice is for Aristotle the right distribution of Men according to their merits which spring from their differences in body and mind. Men check their differences when living in society. Men struggle one against other to «resolve» their differences at the Marketplace. Aristotle and the magnanimous [17] This is the civilized way to do it, Barbarians do it by physical fight and death. Nature benefits from this fight as Men work stead when they compete among them or are stung by rivalry. Nature gets by this mechanism that Mankind fulfill the end for what it was developed (to perform works on this planet?). All men incur in excesses and flaws by the mere fact of being alive. Nature rules Mankind by the mechanism of sending Men to clash among them to find each one his right place on this World. Each man counteracts each other by some excess or flaw, counteracting it by his own excess or flaw. [18] Enrique Morata Chance sends Men to hate each other when they meet at social life, because each man loves his wits and physical features and hates others'. Distributive Justice relates Men and their hates by a reckoning of the excesses and flaws of them, both as human beings and as workers and producers of goods, with money as the symbol of the value of each man. Debtors want that the loaners die, the loaners need that the debtors be alive to return them the loan. Those than do a good wait to receive some other good as an exchange, they act by interest, it is a form of friendship that lasts short time. Most of the trades among Men are of this kind. The magnanimous is noble because his act is lasting and fine although for the passive receiver of his act, it is only useful and lasts shortly. Aristotle and the magnanimous [19] The magnanimous loves to do the Good and this is an act but to be loved is not an act and the passive receiver of the Good done by the magnanimous doesn't act. It is better the one that acts than the one than doesn't act. The new rich cannot be magnanimous as they don`t know Aristotle's Ethics, they spend money just to boast, they are haughty, they love to scorn people and to do what pleases to themselves, without science. New rich are a bad imitation of the magnanimous (1124 b). Concord is not an equality, but an agreement by the people of the town on the same subjects related to the welfare of it. [20] Enrique Morata Men are not even but they agree on the same point at the concord (1167 b). There is a concord when the people and the upper class believe together that the best must rule the town as they all believe that by this way everybody gets a benefit. Concord shows itself as pacts and agreements, it is the form of political friendship among Men. The magnanimous is in concord with himself as he is noble, he doesn`t change every minute or every day and looks for the concord of the town. The bad people look for making more money, working little, turning life a misery to their neighbours, using the force among them until the town collapses. Aristotle and the magnanimous [21] Bad people cannot keep alive a city. The magnanimous polish among themselves when they are friends, according to their excesses and flaws too but educated in Aristotle's Ethics, being each one a model to follow for the others as friendship among magnanimous is a Good desired by all of them. The bad people get worse by relationship among themselves, they hate the bad side on themselves and cannot stand to be alone with themselves and with their bad side, they turn more bad by resembling each other when they gather, they are not constant and act bad, they are mob out of control and equality among them leads to a worsening of their bad nature. The bad hate themselves, they have a divided being, they repent of their pleasures, [22] Enrique Morata they flee from themselves looking for the company of other bad, their bad side suffers, their other side enjoys, they are at war inside themselves, sometimes they want a thing, then they want another one, even if that thing can cause them a harm. The bad are «out of this World» as they are unlimited by flaw meanwhile the Gods are unlimited by excess (they get all the Good without limit). The bad don't have a single Good, not a part a of it, all the Good is a nuisance for them. It seems as if Aristotle were dashing against the Epicureans «avant la lettre» with this speech against the mob as bad people and lower class. Plutarch wrote in his treatises against the Epicureans that they were like beasts, looking to live hidden, Aristotle and the magnanimous [23] they were all flesh without a soul, carrying a life without Reason and without deliberation, a life that debases in time as a stagnant puddle . Plutarch believed that Men have come to this World to use Reason, not to live occult, we come to life to show ourselves with the differences of each one, we are born to being. By this speech against the lower class as «mob», Aristotle forbids a democracy where the mob rules and where it sends the magnanimous to ostracism: equality among the lower class only leads to a whirlpool of evil by the relationships among the bad. For Aristotle, there is no hope of erasing the differences among Men in an Anarchist-like Utopia. [24] Enrique Morata The Natural law is that all Men be different and that only the magnanimous could reach the Good. Also thought Aristotle. The magnanimous is the measure of all things (1166 a). Magnanimous have a big body (1123 b) and crave the greatest things, as they are the most good and fine men. Gods do glorious acts. Magnanimous want to do great acts too but they can only achieve them by being virtuous and good. The magnanimous looks for a few things as he knows it is better the magnanimous that gets the greatest works from moderate resources. The magnanimous talks and walks slowly, he doesn't have haste Aristotle and the magnanimous [25] (but the ambitious rushes by impulse and he is praised in the «Natural Ethics» for his thirst for success) as for the magnanimous nothing is great, useful, fine, glorious and virtuous but the Good (1125 a). When friendship is not even because one of the friends is superior and the other is inferior, the proportion finds an even relationship. Some friendships are by interests, others by pleasure. There is relationship among parents (those that gift life) and sons, among brothers (they are even), among friends and among partners (at the Marketplace). The price of a job is fixed [26] Enrique Morata by the negotiation of excesses and flaws between the buyer and the sales man. Among magnanimous, the price will always be the right. What Aristotle really does is to write a hand-book for the upper class of his time, people with a big body frame, good education and a powerful mind. Either way, Aristotle researches on what is the Good and then after he writes a philosophy on the right behavior for the upper class members, with a definition on what is the right happiness they could wait. In our days, there is no a research on what is the Good, the upper class searches to turn rich, to manipulate the lower class to make money, to find a material happiness of luxury boats, travels by private plane, a good salary, Aristotle and the magnanimous [27] a good job without problems, a luxurious home and a big material life. The middle class, as much as it is an imitator of the upper class, searches the same kind of happiness, but with less money involved. In other words, in our days our Ethics are primitive, without a research on what is the real Good and with a primitive concept of happiness. Utilitarianism with its baseness is the only Ethics of our time and there is no philosopher working on Ethics actually that could be at the level of Aristotle' s deepness. Philosophy on Ethics nowadays is shallow and, to be true, nothing has advanced in Ethics since «Nichomachean Ethics». [28] Enrique Morata The people of our time are new primitives, new barbarians without a developed Ethics, they apply to the everyday ethical problems a primitive, utilitarian Ethics which ensures their material happiness and their lack of conscience's problems. The Universal Declaration of the Human Rights is issued from such a primitive Ethics, as people of our time wants a comfortable life, with no war, no racism, no discrimination, no corruption, transparency at the Political Administration, fair treatment of the rich countries towards the poor countries and respect to the handicapped and aged. All those principles have not a developed Ethics behind them but just the primitive desire of the people of our time to live easily and with a good standard of living without conscience's problems. We live in a neo-barbarian or neo-primitive epoch, where people have not a real Ethics Aristotle and the magnanimous [29] (apart of being a good worker at the factory and not to steal, principles which Aristotle refers to a «Natural Ethics» imposed by fear of punishments to the average people but not a real Ethics assumed by rationality) and people only cares of enjoying the technological gadgets that this time has brought with all its enormous scientific development. But there is not an Ethics comparable to the Aristotle's Ethics. Here the millionaires don t look to help people by donations, by financing great public works for the country or to develop the poor countries. Nowadays millionaires only donate to evade taxes, to become famous as «philanthropists» or if they belong to clubs such Rotary, to clean their problems of conscience for being rich by helping to finish diseases such smallpox in the poor countries. [30] Enrique Morata It is important to realize that we are the products of many centuries of Christian rule in Western countries. Aristotle was manipulated by the Christian philosophers, specially by Thomas Aquinas, offering a childlike vision of the Ethics of the Greek philosopher. Almost every sentence of Aristotle's books has been squeezed out in the last 2.500 years by thousands of philosophers to write their own books, by manipulation of Aristotle's sentences and writing a derivation of them to propose new and false systems of philosophy. Because it, we were educated to do not evil because we would be punished by the police if we did, we were educated to do the good just because the Rulers said that we should do the good or face jail instead, Aristotle and the magnanimous [31] we were educated to not steal, to not kill, to not lie, to not offend old people. But they never told us why we should behave such way, they just told us that, if not behaving correctly, we would be punished. Aristotle considers such kind of conduct as «primitive» and issued from a «trick or dexterity » to avoid punishment from the Government but not issued from a science of Ethics and a rational research on the Good. Almost all the people of our time still behave by fear of punishment from the police and not by a science of Ethics. Therefore, our time is neo-primitive and if it remains staple it is only because most people of our time is [32] Enrique Morata accommodated to the benefits of living in the XXI century with all the electricity, cars, planes and TV . They follow this way of living by a mechanism, and it includes to behave rightly or to be punished. The people of our time regards happiness as: to get a degree, avoiding to enter into conflict with the professors of your University or with the Science on fashion on your time, to get letters of recommendation from them and a good university record, then to get a Master or Doctorate, thenafter to get a good job at some corporation with a good salary, being careful of not making mistakes that could send you to be fired, to not criticize the system, the factory, the managers or the techniques at work and to be not put in the «black list» or you would never find a job again Aristotle and the magnanimous [33] and to be not prosecuted by the police. If you stay inside the rails, you will be happy in our society, you will earn money and everything will be all right in your life. This is the current concept of happiness. But again, as Aristotle would say, it is only a «primitive» behavior issued from fear to punishment and fear to the lack of a job and not issued from an advanced Ethics. This is our epoch. Aristotle, in his short writing: «On long age», says that if the living beings do not relate with the World, they consume themselves until death. For Aristotle, all the living beings must relate among themselves as they have an end in their lives which cannot be fulfilled but by relating all together. [34] Enrique Morata Living beings, if they do not eat outside foods (and therefore relate with the World) consume themselves as they eat their own matter (467 a). In 465 b, he says that all change in living beings come from an opposite as there is a need in Universe that all things must change without rest. The environment supports or blocks those changes. Matter has always opposites, forcing matter to change of place, to grow, to decay or to degrade. The living beings do not know what is the end of it all, as their mind cannot bear the concept of all the Universe with all its living beings, but there is an end in the millions of millions of acts of the Universe's living beings. Aristotle and the magnanimous [35] This end is the concept from which each living being was created and developed in its body and mind. Aristotle says too in «On long age» (467 a) that the trees live long time because they have boughs that die and other boughs that reborn again. So it happens in men, where some parts die meanwhile others are renewed. There is a continuity in this process. Aristotle says that roots and stem are the foundations of the «house» which is the tree and than in men, those roots and stem have grown upside forming the legs, chest and brain. [36] Enrique Morata Aristotle says in his writing: «On young age» that the chest is the middle way between the head and the lower body. The chest is the middle part between the part that takes food from outside and the part that expels the processed food to the outside. The legs are only the parts that carry the chest. Most animals, when loosing their head, live still for a while with their middle part (the chest). The heart is the middle way of the body and relates the upper part and the lower part of the body (469 b) and impulse, heat and sensation depend on the heart. The lower living beings are a sort of several living beings united, each one devoted to a function, but the bigger animals Aristotle and the magnanimous [37] were developed searching the top unity with heart as the middle way of it. He says too that the living beings with some excess look for other living beings or places opposite to its excess as they counterbalance it and conserve the being. Living beings look for a balance of their matters with their excesses and flaws. Sometimes they find a right place that balances them or an opposite living being that balances them (478 a). Aristotle distinguishes between what is the «nature» of each living being from what is its «character» or «custom» («exis»). [38] Enrique Morata He states that each living being conserves better at the places or at contact with other living beings that share its «nature» (which is always the same along its life) but its «character» (which changes and modifies) looks for places or living beings opposite to its excesses to counterbalance them and finding by this a «middle way». The matter («nature») of a living being cannot live in a place or with another living being opposite to it, but the states («character») of that matter can need places and living beings opposite to them. The soul needs a balance too and finds it when it understands the World and finds the middle way between its excesses and its flaws. Aristotle and the magnanimous [39] In the writing: «On generation and corruption» (336 b) Aristotle says that the movement of the Universe is the cause of the changes in the living beings. The Universe moves with two kinds of movement, the continuity and the coming and going. The living beings change by generation and corruption in a complex way because those two movements of the Universe. All the living beings participate in some kind of circular movement or closed circle or circular process as circular movement is the only continuous one. By the corruption of some things come the generation of others. [40] Enrique Morata It is Good and the best that the being be (as this is Life) in all things but the only way to achieve this is by a non ending generation and it is the only way Being can be, embodied as millions of living beings. Perpetual generation is the closest way to become a substance. Generation and corruption follow a circle. Even the straight movement is a kind of circular movement because it imitates a circle when the straight movement comes back to the beginning. Each body is affected by its neighbour body and cannot stay at its natural place long time due to the two movements of the Universe. Aristotle and the magnanimous [41] Death is a limit in the living being and Death comes when the living being has spent the air to breath assigned for its lifetime. For the old man, death is the loss of heat assigned for his lifetime. The smallest change or movement affects the old man and puts at risk the scant fire he stills bears. To live consists on taking air and expelling air without pause by the movement of the lungs along the whole life. This is the basic way by the living beings of relationship with the World, by taking matter from outside [42] Enrique Morata and expelling matter to outside (480 a). Life is this relationship with the World by the exchange of heat, energy, food, air and acts. The middle age in man is the middle way in his life, a middle way between the youth when he lives careless and by passion and the old age when he lives by deliberation but without interest in the worldly affairs. In «On sensation» (446 a) he writes that the air is a «middle way» where the living beings can live and can perceive. In «On generation and corruption» (317 a) he argues against the Atomists because the need to stop the division «ad infinitum» of the bodies because our mind cannot cope with it. Aristotle and the magnanimous [43] Our mind needs to limit the unlimited Universe by the same reason that our eyes cannot see all the horizon but just a limited scope. Generation and corruption stop this limitless Universe by association and dissociation, which are limits. In «On sensation» (439b) Aristotle ponders if colour is a limit of the body or if colour is in the limit of a body. In (445 b) he says that where are extremes there must be limits in the middle, being those limits what separate the middle from the two extremes. He explains it better with the example of the straight line: if we cut the line in three parts, the second and middle line has a limit in contact with the first line (the excess) [44] Enrique Morata and another limit in contact with the third line (the flaw). Aristotle considers that the opposite of the brute man is the divine man. In the middle there are the average men. The divine man was in times of Aristotle an excessive man, too beautiful, too big framed (such Heracles) or too much clever (as the same Aristotle, a crazy horse needing restrain sometimes, said once Plato) or a member of the aristocracy (by his big body or his money). Pericles would represent the «prudent» political man, as never an excessive man at power. In our days, a divine man is an genial actor, a top model with a perfect body, a very fit sportsman or a genius of Art, we accept in our days Aristotle and the magnanimous [45] that people with a well built body must be too a genius as their mind is very clear and sparkling: we call them «divine». For Aristotle, the divine men are an extreme of the Human specie (by excess), as much as the brutal men are on the other extreme (by flaw). Often, divine men are counterbalanced by brutal men, as divine men are never too many (often belonging to he aristocracy) but the brutal men are numbered by thousands and, in political life, they control by their number the excesses of the more scarce divine men, as it happens in the political regime where the mob rules (the democracy). The concept of the middle way comes from Pitagoras and Anaximander, [46] Enrique Morata as it happens in all the work of Aristotle which is a development of the previous Greek philosophers' works, for whom Aristotle acts as one of the first Historians of Philosophy. Many books from Aristotle begin with a review of what the old Greek philosophers said on a given subject, before Aristotle himself came with a more developed theory. For Pitagoras, there were couple of opposites everywhere in the Universe: male-female, unity-multiplicity, Anaximander had said that from this fight of opposites rises an harmony or balance, which Aristotle will call «the middle way». Aristotle is influenced too by the concept of «Dyke» Aristotle and the magnanimous [47] or Need by Parmenides. Aristotle ends many times his research when he meets Goddess Need, he knows that he cannot advance further as he has found the limit to his thought: Need. It is because Goddess Need that all beings must act endlessly and it is because Goddess Need that generation and corruption follow a circle without never becoming the Being or the Substance but Goddess Need allows the living beings to be as close as possible to the Being (and what is possible is deemed by Goddess Need). «Every being finds its own good as it finds its food» (1172 b). [48] Enrique Morata «Things are generated inside the environment that can destroy them». «Ignorance, hopes and remembering don't cause pain». (I disagree, ignorance of the Aristotle's philosophy Causes me a lot of pain!). «The just man cannot feel pleasure if he is not just by acting and after an education about how to act as a just man, the same way a musician doesn't enjoy music if he cannot play and if he has not been trained to play music» (1173 b). Aristotle means that a just man can be only a just man if he has the opportunity to act as a just man on the other people and after being trained on what is Justice, being awarded with pleasure when he gets to act this way. «The temple is a whole, composed by parts Aristotle and the magnanimous [49] and each part is imperfect as a part but it is perfect as a whole or temple» (1174 a). «Pleasure is a whole and it is always in present time, pleasure is not composed by parts that move». «The vulgar people obey the laws by fear to the punishments» (1178 b). The laws are the new Goddess Need and vulgar people obey them as an ox inside the yoke. Vulgar people obey Goddess Need but doesn't know Reason neither obey it (1180 a). «When resting, the cause are the previous acts, [50] Enrique Morata as no living being can act endlessly without resting sometimes. Resting is not an end by itself but only an effect of acting, except in children and tyrants, where it is an end» (1177a). «The most virtuous magnanimous is the one that with the lesser material tools does the most good to the other men» (1179 a). Aristotle praises the magnanimous that with moderate money and properties achieve the highest goal of being useful and good for the City. Aristotle doesn't look with good eyes those millionaires that are so rich that to donate some money to the City public works is easy to them. Aristotle and the magnanimous [51] The slob or peasant is stubborn because he doesn't accept changes, nor in his environment or life neither in his frame of mind. The slob is used to be a God in his field where he is happy with his own small World for himself and under his control, there he gets everything he needs, from water to food. As the slob is a sort of God, he wants to impose to the others his decrees and he hates the other men which he sees as enemies that can come to his field to steal him or to destroy his harvests. He doesn't need relationships with the outer World, he is a God without any dealings with men but, with time, generations of slobs isolated in their inland degenerate turning «centaurus» or half man, half beasts. [52] Enrique Morata The peasant slob is a sample of how men can degenerate by dodging the life in society when they have got a godlike way of life where they don t need a thing from society. It is a fact that life in the towns corrupt men (as the cynics, Rousseau and Thoreau -the representatives of Cynism in the last centuries- have shown) but it is a fact too that Life in the woods without intercourse with society sends people to degeneration. Aristotle would consider both lifestyles as extremes (life in the city is an excess of relationship with too many men and life in the mountains is a flaw by the lack of relationship). Aristotle and the magnanimous [53] Chapter X of «Nicomachean Ethics» is the most «childish» one, as all of us have thought on what Aristotle says here sometimes in our childhood. The tyrants are like children, wanting to get satisfied all their appetites, without a deliberation. Tyrants and children live always in a funny World, they need distractions every minute and they pay and favour those witty men that can entertain them. The other men only look for entertainment when they rest (as they cannot be always in act). The wise man looks after the acts that could be less exhausting and that could be maintained more time as acts. Those acts are the intellectual or mental acts. [54] Enrique Morata In a real greed of the philosopher, Aristotle believes that the acts of the mind are the most excellent ones and the more divine, therefore loved by the Gods which love the wise man too and help him in his life of musing. The acts of the mind are the best as they tire the less? The philosopher is favoured by the Gods and he is helped to carry a pleasant life of thought because the Gods love those that invest their lives in the most akin occupation to them, musing? Or it is all just a greed of the philosopher that doesn't want to loose his life doing «slave jobs» such masonry or smith work? Aristotle defends himself saying that the acts of the mind are those that last more time Aristotle and the magnanimous [55] (and influence and move the other men's lives with the lesser effort) and, subsequently, the philosophers need less resting and can think longer without stopping. Gods don't need men, don't trade with them, don't use money, don't use them to raise a war to show off as brave men and heroes or magnanimous. Men need the other men to apply on them their goodness but Gods don't need men. The killer turns his friends into enemies to have a war where to act, he needs killings (a prick on the Barbarians). [56] Enrique Morata Pleasure has a graduation: we eat popcorn when a movie is boring and we cease to eat popcorn when the movie becomes thrilling again: a greater pleasure leaves aside a lesser pleasure and a greater pain makes us forget a previous pain. Each living being looks after the pleasure that is the most pleasant one for his «nature»: the donkey loves straw, the eagle loves to fly. The slave lives inside the «nature» of other (his master) and no free man would like to live inside the «nature» of another man, because he looks after the pleasure that agrees the most with his own «nature» and not with someone else «nature». Aristotle and the magnanimous [57] The best pleasure for each living being sends him to do the best acts he can do which are at the same time the best ends for his existence. The bad know that they are bad and that there is a Good. Men are so different that what is pleasure for some is pain for others (1176 a): «In Men there are many corruptions and vices», some things are pleasant for some and others are unpleasant for others, there is a «market» too of sensitivities among men, counterbalancing excesses and flaws too in this «market of sensitivities». For the common man, pleasure means: a thing that gives pleasure to his «nature» but for the magnanimous, pleasure means the Good. [58] Enrique Morata Men commit injustices to get more money or properties and they get pain when they have no money or properties. The just man distributes money and opportunities of jobs according to a proportion but the unjust one stays out of any proportion as he looks for an excess of good things for himself and little things for the others meanwhile he dodges the bad things of the City or Life or hides from the City duties such the taxes and the war efforts. Political Justice is not the Absolute Justice. Justice among people which are not even neither free is only an imitation of the Absolute Justice. «We don't allow to be ruled by a man but by Reason, because a man rules in his own profit and turns a tyrant» (1134 b). A judge is rewarded by honour and dignity which are a Good Aristotle and the magnanimous [59] that other men cannot achieve but when judges want to get more and more, they turn tyrants too. The judge restores the equality, but it exists equality in the real World? Nicholas de Cusa thought that there is not such a thing called equality in our World as all things are changing every lapse of time. The judge divides in two halves an unlimited fact, putting limits to those two halves. (1132 b): all the changes mean that you gain something more of what you had, or that you loose something less of what you had. When Men are looking for a situation of balance, nobody gain nor loose. [60] Enrique Morata «The just is to have the same you had, before a change and after it, if this change was not voluntary». (1133 b) The things that are very different can be related and measured only if there is a need on them to trade something with the other (by again the intervention of Goddess Need). (1133 a) A community stays stead if there is a reciprocity in the proportion: the shoemaker exchanges a shoe for a wall done by a mason, a physician exchanges a treatment for a rabbit of a farmer, there is an exchange where someone returns a good by another good (and an evil by another evil) and this trade keeps men united. Aristotle and the magnanimous [61] We return a service, we give a favour to someone, but this can only happen among opposites. As the work of a craftsman has more value that the work of a farmer, it appears the money to even them as money equalizes, measures and makes possible the guilds and partnerships. Money symbolizes too Goddess Need as if Men had no need, it would be no capitalism, no trade and no commerce. If you don't work, you starve, if you don't produce, you don't earn a dime. This is the will of Goddess Need and the first Economics Law. [62] Enrique Morata Money measures Men (their differences, desires, appetites and works which are unlimited but money puts limits to them). There is in Aristotle's Ethics the subject of the Being that stays and doesn't change, a subject that comes from the philosophy of Parmenides. For Aristotle, the «nature» of each living being is this Being that doesn't change meanwhile its «character» («exis») can be modified by time and circumstances. This duality or ambiguity of our Universe is its essence: all living beings have two lives, two bodies, two personalities: we have a permanent «nature» and an elastic «character». We have a soul and a body. Aristotle and the magnanimous [63]

.– The science of the good The research of Aristotle on the Good follows the findings of Plato on this matter. Both looked for something above the material goods that change and bring struggles and discomfort to the people. They believed it should be something further our material life and that could build the basement of a civilized way of life. The concept of Good in Plato is too much abstract and pure for the people but the concept of Good in Aristotle has more appeal: Aristotle and the magnanimous [65] Good is the act that gets the best products when performed by the magnanimous as he is himself the product of the best acts (as health and good body issue from exercise and good food) and the magnanimous is the active creator of the best acts on this World: the glorious acts or those that help the most the other people and the city, serving the Reason of the magnanimous which is at the same time the best thing he has in his life. In our epoch, people consider the Good to get a comfortable material life, a good salary, a technical career and an ordered country with all kind of public services. It is obviously [66] Enrique Morata the concept of Good of the positivists, for whom the Good is to have a plentiful material life with all the tools needed for it furnished by Science and Technology and a well administered State. Aristotle defends the employer that imitates the Gods: a poor, senseless and weak man has not the money neither the ability and strength to do great public works for the city. But an excess of reckoning on how much he spends as an employer is despicable (1122 b), as he always thinks he is spending too much. Random sends men to hate each other by their differences meanwhile Distributive Justice sends men to relate each other by the money which symbolizes the value of each one. Aristotle and the magnanimous [67] This is the civilized way of relationship among men, meanwhile war and violence are the barbarian ways of relationship among men. The moral counsels of Benjamin Franklin are a sample of primitive Ethics that are followed by fear of bad fame among our neighbors and no by a rational science of the Good: «Don't eat until being fed up, don't drink until getting drunk, don't talk but on affairs that can benefit you or the others, be ordered, each business must have its time, do what you have decided to and do it without mistakes, don't waste things, don't expend in vain but to do the good to you and to the others, by industrious, don't loose your time, avoid useless acts, be true, don't use lies, [68] Enrique Morata think and talk with innocence and justice, don't do harm to anybody, don't forget your duties, avoid the extremes, don't be resentful even if the offence is serious, be clean with your body and home, don't turn nervous by foolish things or common and unavoidable events, don't use sexual pleasure but for procreation or health, be humble as Jesus and Socrates». (Benjamin Franklin) Baltasar Gracián, the ideologist of the Spanish «hidalgos», can be deemed too as a «primitive», his Ethics are a collection of «tricks» (issued many times from proverbs) and a training for sly people: «Don't say all the truth, without saying neither lies. Truth asks for a lot of care, as it is a bleeding of the heart. It is important to know the truth and to know how to say not the truth. If you say a single lie, you loose all the credit of your integrity. Aristotle and the magnanimous [69] To deceive is a lack of judgement and the deceiver is a false man, and this is even worse. You cannot say all the truths, some because they are important for you and others because they are important for others». Baltasar Gracián «Oráculo manual», 181. Aristotle says that most people are treated with Justice without being aware of it, by mere accident, as it is possible to participate in the Justice by accident, without knowing the science behind the concept of Human Justice as reasoned by Aristotle. But when a magnanimous gives to someone more money for a product from its right value, this is not unjust. To be unjust is to give less of the right value of it, or to have more of what corresponds to you. [70] Enrique Morata The modest gives to himself less of what he deserves but he gives to himself more on moral beauty, reputation or gratefulness. (1136 b) Nobody wants what is not good, nobody wants to be hurt or to suffer pain but the incontinent or out of control hurts himself and against his will. The problem of the willingness or unwillingness of our acts: if there is an intention to do evil, by malice (as it happens in agreements which are not fulfilled) this is a sort of conspiracy of one of the parts and this conspiracy is an intention. The primitive Justice is a Justice by accident, it follows Natural laws, not Human laws, Aristotle and the magnanimous [71] and men follow those Natural laws without science. Cicero calls «natural laws» those laws that all the tribes apply since thousands of years ago, such the killing of the foreigners and the defence of their territory. Man loves the most what he has got with effort and toil, by acting in this World. Heirs have not acted to gain the money of their parents and because it, they spend it recklessly. The person that receives a Good from a magnanimous has not acted himself, and doesn't appreciate it as he should. This happens with the sons of rich men when they inherit. [72] Enrique Morata This is a proof that money must be earned by acting in this World, otherwise men degenerate as the heirs do. The mother is an active benefactor but her son is passive and regards his mother as something useful and not endurable. It is more important and beautiful to be active, to act, than to be a passive parasite. (1168 b) A person likes himself because he likes the Good that it is his life . A bad man doesn't likes himself because there are inside him two beings, one is himself and the other is his life and he hates his life. Aristotle and the magnanimous [73] There is no equality on what is a bad man and what is his life. The selfish doesn't love himself but the pleasures and the money that his nature (his body) and his life could enjoy. A magnanimous is not a selfish person because he keep to himself what is most valuable, noble and good in himself: his life. By acting this way, the magnanimous obeys Reason, his best part. Reason wants to live and the magnanimous obeys Reason and forgets what other men want or say on his life. [74] Enrique Morata The magnanimous is a continent person because he obeys his Reason and acts willingly thenafter. The magnanimous loves his Reason and by it, he loves himself and he will be useful to the others being this way. The bad loves himself only as a body where to experience his passions and appetites. The tyrant loves himself as a body that looks for goods for himself and he sees not as a person with Reason that could be useful to the others. Human relationships happen by acts, thoughts and words, otherwise we would be cattle Aristotle and the magnanimous [75] grazing on the same forage and sharing nothing else than the herbs. To live is to feel, to think and to act, inside the limits. The good friendship only happens among virtuous friends that know Aristotle's Ethics. The loner has no relationships with Mankind and degenerates as he doesn't act nor even with himself. Virtue needs a technique (offered by the Ethics of Aristotle) and by the relationship with the good friends, we can practice this technique. [76] Enrique Morata The faint-hearted avoids relationship with the World by vice (the shyness). The greedy is an «ignorant of himself», of his real power and shortcomings. Virtues and vices happen in a graduation and men negotiate among themselves after a deliberation on so many differences and grades among them and their virtues and vices. To be worse, those virtues and vices are hidden most of the time. We judge men by their appearances and by the movements of their bodies, as they show the inner movements of their minds (1128 a) and, at the same time, the kind of body they got shows too their character. Aristotle and the magnanimous [77] The physician, the soothsayer, the wise man and the liar can deceive easily. To get fun and to laugh are a form of relationship with the World but the jester is an extreme, he does whatever thing that comes along to make laugh, even hurting himself. The mockery is a form of insult or aggression. The «prudent» man, the man that always looks for the middle way on everything, laughs when it is the time to do it and only mocks on the persons that can bear it, with moderation and without debasing himself to get a laugh. [78] Enrique Morata Modesty is to fear social scorn by an indecent act and the magnanimous never acts this way willingly as modesty works as a natural mechanism to avoid indecent acting. Democracy searches equality among the mob, Aristocracy searches individuals that be more intelligent, more well built physically and more able to do much work . Justice is a proportion or balance among the diverse kinds of men. The Corrective Justice is a natural mechanism that balances the relationships among very different men. The ruler becomes a magnanimous when he is just with the others' affairs and not only with his own affairs, when he acts this way, he turns virtuous. Aristotle and the magnanimous [79] Pleasure is not an end by itself but a process and meanwhile this process happens, we cannot think well. Pleasure needs no technique, there is not such a thing as an art of pleasure. But by the pleasure we reach an improvement of our nature, because a man acts on his character following a pleasure to improve his nature, and pleasure takes a part on the development of the individual. For the sage, the pleasures of thinking and proposing theories are the spur to learn more. (1153 b). The prudent man looks to be free of those pleasures [80] Enrique Morata that come with appetites and pains (the body pleasures). But is is a flaw too to enjoy less of what he should on the sexual affairs. Evil is all kind of hurdles that block your ability to act. To act perfectly (as a God) is to act without hurdles of any kind. The incontinent is unable to act, his passions decide for him and act for him: the incontinent is like a city full of laws that nobody obey. A «prudent» man is not what we understand nowadays but such a man. In our days, we consider a prudent man the person that avoids problems, Aristotle and the magnanimous [81] by trick and ability, being smarter than the others or a person that always chooses the middle way in all kind of matters, just by trickery and not by Aristotelian science. For Aristotle, the «prudent» man is the person that chooses the middle way between the extremes, not by trick but by knowledge of Aristotle's Ethics and after a deliberation and not by a not rational mechanism. Aristotle conceives his system as a World where the magnanimous earn honour and virtue and the common people earn economic help from the magnanimous, by a proportion, which turns to be then an equalization among different men (1163 b). The relationships among living beings are ruled by a measure which springs from the deliberation of each being on his acts. [82] Enrique Morata In timocracy, there is equality as all men rule, by lottery and in time. In tyranny there is no friendship as there is nothing shared between the tyrant and the people, (as it is a relationship of the kind as he were a Creator and his instrument, or the soul and the body, or the master and the slaves as the slave is a living instrument and an instrument is a dead slave, (1161 b). Brothers and sons are even as they are the same but in separate bodies. In politics, equalization looks for all men being brothers or different bodies but a same soul or essence, as all are the same. Timocracy is the rule of the brothers (1161 a) but when the differences of age appear, timocracy falls into the collapse. Aristotle and the magnanimous [83] In timocracy all people are even if they all own a material property or the same quality of character (1159 b). The king has got everything he needs and thenafter he devotes his life to the profit of his people. The king has power, authority and riches, he doesn't need anything and considers his people as his friends. As a magnanimous, he wants to do good to his friends, as he needs to do good to them to become a magnanimous. The friendship among the living beings appears by what they can bring to each other (pleasure or use, and both change along the time). This relationship of friendship can only happen if the living beings perceive each other (1156 a). The sleepers and the far away by distance cannot relate. [84] Enrique Morata The friendship by interest happens between opposites (rich-poor, wise-ignorant, beautiful-ugly) as one of the parts needs something that the other part has and there is a trade of it. What is dry needs what is wet and what is hot needs what is cold to find a middle point or balance. The marriages between even persons are placid and easy but the marriages between extreme persons are violent and wild. The friendship among foreigners lasts a short time as they are not pleasant among themselves because the different race, national origin language and creeds. The friendship among young people lasts short time too as it changes with the pleasures Aristotle and the magnanimous [85] and pleasures in young men change a lot, even along the same day. The friendship among magnanimous is the best and most excellent as it doesn't change from one day to other. The magnanimous are a sort of «private club» of superior people, an artificial brotherhood created by Aristotle's Ethics, a timocracy of magnanimous where they are all even in magnanimity. There is no friendship between Gods and men as Gods are so superior to men, by their lack of limits (1159 a). The magnanimous doesn't desire the best good for his friend, as he would turn then a God an would loose him as a friend. The magnanimous wants the Good for himself, and that his friend remains human [86] Enrique Morata and doesn't change. He needs that his friend be a man and not a God. The magnanimous will desire the Good to his friend but within the limits of staying a man. The magnanimous deems it is noble to do the Good to the others and that evils must be shared not at all or the less possible with the friends. The magnanimous needs friends to do the Good on them and he won't be the cause of pain or evil to them when he suffers pain or bad luck. Love is an excess of friendship and happens only between two beings, therefore it is not useful for the city which needs friendship among many beings (1171 a). But the magnanimous cannot have too many friends, he cannot share himself with too many people Aristotle and the magnanimous [87] (relationship with the others is a sharing of your talent, your time, your energy, your works and your remembrances and leaves you exhausted, the magnanimous cannot have too many friends). In bad times, friends are useful and in good times, their friendship is noble. Friends of the magnanimous should be friends among them but this is difficult because the differences on men. The magnanimous doesn't need powerful friends as he is big enough in Good, he doesn't need friends for pleasure as his virtuous life gives him enough pleasure, he only needs friends to do the Good on them and to watch good acts done by them as he rejoices when he sees them. [88] Enrique Morata And to act towards the Good is to be virtuous as virtue is the middle way between the extremes on the behaviour of the living beings when relating with each other. Excesses happen when people act with the wrong people, before the time, by undue motives, more than needed and for more time than due. Excesses are evil but they don't happen all at the same time, otherwise they would destroy the individual («Evil destroys itself by all excesses happening at the same time»). The people with bad liver or spleen («acrobilis») get angry by everything and at each instant (they are really sick people suffering from liver diseases or other organs' ). The angry and sick cannot relate with other people and fall into the category of «the brutish». Aristotle and the magnanimous [89] The resentful and bitter restrain their anger for many years until they get revenge with pleasure and it is by then when their bitterness ends. Their anger is hidden and impossible to punish or correct but many times their anger turns to themselves and causes pain and suffering to themselves. The bitter are difficult people as they behave always in a bad mood, their motives can or cannot be justified, their bitterness lasts many years and they are healed only by vengeance or punishment. Friendship breaks when one of the friends progresses more than the other, or stays stagnant in its childhood meanwhile the other lives his mellow age, from now it treats the other as a superior or a giant treating an inferior or a dwarf but still with some affection due to the old friendship which is not more. [90] Enrique Morata (1172 a) Relationship is so natural among men as it is to enjoy the sight of the lover. Both acts belong to the Human nature. Sight was developed for love and men were developed to relate. Man relates first with himself and thenafter with the others. A man becomes friend with himself and thenafter he looks another man as an «other me» or friend. When you love other person you feel the same sensation as when you love yourself. You have your own ideas on yourself and on life and you suppose that the others have the same, that they act and participate on the same things you do. The philosophers become friends (?), the riders become friends, the hunters become friends, Aristotle and the magnanimous [91] the drinkers become friends, the athletes become friends. Friendship among magnanimous gets better with time, by the contact. The magnanimous is the measure of all things (1166 a). Proportion rules the friendship among uneven, it is a proportion among the love and the merit (the most useful has the merit and he is loved, by a trade) turning both persons even by this proportion. When the friendship happens between even persons, they exchange pleasure for use, one of them offers pleasure and the other is useful to the other. Commercial relationships are of this kind but they last short time [92] Enrique Morata as the two parts change easily and day by day, the agreements are for a short time and there are gossiping, slandering, lack of confidence and personal attacks. When a false friend has feigned he was a good friend or turns bad, he is worse than a person that counterfeits money (they were sent to death at Greek cities). Friendship breaks when men change, or change the use or the pleasure involved or by the differences between the friends, as one goes for the interest or the use and the other looks for pleasure. Friendship between not even is sought after by an inferior to live close to the superior to him, because his beauty or wisdom. Shame is a restrain to not to do some acts but it is not a virtue, Aristotle and the magnanimous [93] just a «dexterity» or trick of the common people to avoid greater evils, and without science. To be a virtue, shame should have a science behind it. The lack of shame is worse, it is evil, it is to be unbridled to act bad. If you get ashamed after acting badly, this is not a Good. Relationship among men is an exchange of acts, with pleasure or pain involved, and always with consequences on the World. The kind man is an excess as he loves everyone, allows all kind of acts, looks to give pleasure without knowing the people with which he deals and gives gifts to everyone. [94] Enrique Morata The troublemaker is a flawed person as he opposes to all the acts of the other men, causing pain to everyone and turning life impossible. The middle way between the kind man and the troublemaker is the friendly man, correct with everyone but reckoning what he does thinking on what will happen in the future and on what is useful, when it is bad to give pleasure he stops and when it is painful to do it, he stops too. He observes differences when treating the magnanimous or the common people, the known and the unknown. In all the human relationships there is the same trade or market-dealing, according of what we owe to each particular individual (1127 a). Aristotle and the magnanimous [95] People with excesses cannot relate with all the people of the city (relationship is the essence of the city) but they can relate only with another living being, the one that will counterbalance their excesses by his flaws. Because it, the city needs people without excesses as all the people of the city must relate among themselves to keep alive economically the city (1158 a). The bad look for friends to get pleasure or use of them: they find pleasure as they enjoy the malice of the others who are as bad as they are. But the bad get tired soon of that friendship and change soon as their friendship is just an imitation of the friendship among magnanimous. [96] Enrique Morata The bad have the soul divided, they repent of their pleasures, look to commit suicide, flee from themselves by looking for the company of other bad, their bad side suffers, their other side enjoys (it seems as if Aristotle were describing the Epicureans and the lower class here). Epicurus wrote in his Capital Sayings that Justice is what is useful for a community to avoid causing harm or receiving harm (XXXI), Justice rules relationships among men on different places, for they don't do injuries to others nor receive injuries from others (XXIII) and it doesn't matter if the laws are equal for all of not, what matters is if they protect coexistence among men, those laws change as men change (XXVII) as Justice is a concept on finding the best laws to live together. This is the call of Utilitarism since ever and still is in our days: Aristotle and the magnanimous [97] Justice is whatever laws that could satisfy our current need of a comfortable society without personal problems and a good salary and job to enjoy everything material this epoch can offer. As the incontinent and shallow, the bad are at war with themselves: sometimes they want this thing, then they want that thing, even if that thing is harmful to them. Their soul is ripped, going to and fro from one side to other. Our nature is double: soul and body. And if one part acts, it hurts the other part. Man looks for a balance where there is no pleasure nor pain. Man looks for such balance in his every day life, to find bearable his life, [98] Enrique Morata and all the living beings looked for this balance since millions of years ago when they grew or developed from basic living beings. It is a part of the development of the living beings since millions of years ago this search for a short-lived balance once and once again. When finding this balance, the living beings «are », they reach a staple form. For God, all his acts are pleasant as he is simple, One, not changing, and his pleasure comes from his ever resting life, as when he acts it is to not change or move. Gods don't relate among themselves. Pleasure is a Good and it can come by accident, as when a healthy part of our body cures a sick part, and we feel pleasure by it. Pleasure by Nature comes when an act causes pleasure Aristotle and the magnanimous [99] because it suits to the «nature» of a given living being. All Men need to change day after day, it is a vice as we find a pleasure on it, because our double nature, which is imperfect by our soul and body (God has no double nature and because it he is perfect). The most vicious man is the one that changes the most. The same Nature is imperfect as there is change every second: Nature is not simple because Goddess Need orders Nature to change endlessly and, at the same time, Goddess Need exists to rule Nature because Nature is not simple nor perfect. Avarice is natural to men as all men look to give little and to receive much. [100] Enrique Morata Some are stingy when giving, others when taking too much and most don't give neither take, being useless for the city. Prostitutes, usurers, thieves and gamblers take petty money but tyrants take enourmous amounts from the city. The generous by splendour likes to show off by spending too much. The despicable reckons each dime and each ethical act he deliberates to do. The magnanimous looks to finance the most useful, big, admired, everlasting, not easily matched and fine public works for the city. He has the money to finance it, coming from his ancestors or from his contacts with rich people (1123 a). Aristotle and the magnanimous [101] The magnanimous only thinks on great amounts of money and great works. The generous is an instrument that gives and takes money. He doesn't love money by itself but as an instrument of the instrument that he is himself when taking and giving money in the city. The too generous or lavish is an incontinent as he spends too much money and efforts, turning broke soon and he finds himself without a dime when he really needs it, as he has not understood what life is all about. There is vile people with several vices at the same time. To be rich is to be an instrument of the city and it is a virtue [102] Enrique Morata if the rich man gives more than what he receives (or gives more good than what he receives). This is beautiful because he acts and because to donate money is more difficult than to keep the money to himself. To act following virtue is the less painful way of acting (this is a form of Utilitarianism from Aristotle, as in the current people of our time, all of them utilitarian, looking to act and to live by the less painful way, and from this principle of avoiding pain springs our current Utilitarian Ethics with our current Human Rights (1135 a). Utilitarian Justice is the justice based on the convention and the use, by laws that change according to the men and to the country: the sales man has an excess of something Aristotle and the magnanimous [103] and the buyer has a flaw of something too (aslo called the offer and the demand), this is Utilitarianism since ever. The magnanimous cannot accept gifts and easy money, as this is contrary to the economical life of the city and the role the magnanimous plays in it. The heirs are too generous with the money of their parents but soon the age (the experience of the real World) and the poverty (the Need) will teach them. Changes on their «exis» (character or habits) will send them towards virtue. They spend too much because they don't think, they are senseless but still useful to the city. [104] Enrique Morata If they become thieves because they cannot live without a lot of money as when their parents were alive and gave money to them, the heirs turn not noble and slaves of the pleasures and the flatterers. The niggards are not useful not even to themselves. Old age and the lack of ability to act send people to the avarice. Vengeance is an excess akin to Humans and it is bad for the city's business. To get angry is part of the human relationships if there are motives for it (as the World is full of motives to get angry). Anger is considered a slight flaw (and even those with some excess of anger are considered as manly) and those who are not angry enough are called quiet. Aristotle and the magnanimous [105] The relationships among humans by their excesses and their flaws (or by the demand and the offer, which are a kind of excesses and flaws too) depend on each particular case and on the sensitivity of each living being (1126 b). The ambitious is an impulsive that don't think, he always pretends higher honours than he deserve, but it is considered a manly and noble man if his ambition is moderate and at a small scale and he is praised for being more ambitious than the other people, specially on wartime. «The extremes fight to settle at the middle place as if it were void» (1125 b). In other pages Aristotle says that the ambitious is praised for being so in the «primitive» Ethics or Natural Ethics that follow Natural Laws, one Natural Law is that ambition is good to be successful (and this is praised too in our days [106] Enrique Morata for the ambitious employer, other proof that in our time rules a primitive Ethics). Men exceed or get short and thanks to it other men such the wise, can see the other men act to learn from them and find the middle way. The ambitious surpasses and the person without drive has no ambition but the prudent finds the middle way. The fainthearted has no desires, not even the good and fair, he is a vicious, he is an ignorant that doesn't know himself and his possibilities, he retires from the wordly goods, as the cynics do. The meek is a sober person, he has no passions and he relates with others by anger only when his reason orders him to do it (the Stoics are such kind of people) (1126 a). Aristotle and the magnanimous [107] He is lenient, not able to fight for his life, senseless, without «pathos», stands aggressions and he is a slave (Aristole considers that self defence is a form of relationship with the World, too). Modesty is fear to be degraded in your value as a citizen. Modesty is a body affection but not a passion, young men live by passion but are restrained by modesty or shame. The old men feel no longer passions and don't need modesty or shame to restrain them. The magnanimous cannot do shameful acts willingly but if he acts this way against his will, he doesn't feel shame of himself. [108] Enrique Morata The magnanimous looks to be satisfied with himself by finding a balance in his soul, by being a friend of himself, which is the state opposite of that of the bad as he is an enemy of himself. Friendship is with «another me» (the friend) which we love as we love ourselves (1169 b), we are now two «me» who are like «me» but twice more «me». The sour, dull men don't know how to get fun, the jokes cause them pain and they tend to avoid relationships, being useless to the city. The jesters exceed in laughs, they debase themselves to give pleasure, causing pain to the others by the show of their debasement. The witty have a nimble mind, their minds move nimbly as a dancer does with its body. Aristotle and the magnanimous [109] The character of the witty («exis») is fast and we can see it by their movements (their jokes). (1128 b) The man with touch acts in each case in a different way if the man is a magnanimous, an ignorant, an educated or a slave. With some of them, he acts coarsely, with others with double sense, with others with jokes and looks for a middle way on the jokes he gives and the ones he takes, according to his own law and sensitivity. To rest is a way of relationship too, there are jokes, fun and pleasure, we tease and we are teased. The mocking is a kind of relationship by aggression or insult. [110] Enrique Morata The brutish have a beats-like nature but they are not incontinents as it is their Nature which is incontinent. They are out of the limits, even out of the limits of the vice. The brutish can be cured by education the same way a body can be cured by purges and severe treatments although sometimes these methods fail because the illness is too serious and the body dies (Aristotle hints that the brutish and the bad should die as a sick body dies when it doesn't follow the right treatment). The suicide doesn't contribute to the city and he is an unjust man (1138 a). Senseless, cowardice, wild life and bad character (when in excess) are signs of a brutish man. Barbarians are brutish men as they live without appeal to Reason and obey only their senses. Aristotle and the magnanimous [111] The sick are a kind of brutish by morbidity. Some brutish men have learnt how to not allow to their tendencies and passions, such Phalaris who was an homosexual and cannibal. The brutish loves cannibalism, homosexuality, eats the soil, he suffered offences when he was a child and this has caused in his character a brutish custom, or he has suffered diseases that have sent him to foster a brutish way of life. The brutish only knows how to negotiate by blows and violence and his Marketplace is the battlefield (the barbarians love War). The handicapped and the sick are brutish by their flaws caused by ill luck. The continent knows by his Reason that passions are evil and he refuse to obey them. [112] Enrique Morata Socrates said that nobody acts against the Good but by ignorance (Plato said latter that ignorance is a kind of madness). «There is nothing so strong as the science or knowledge» (1146 a). But passions must be strong too, as if passions were weak, there would not be magnanimous. The doubtful persons are weak to resist passions. The incontinent has knowledge but he cannot use it as he is in a state close to that of the sleeping, drunk or mad people, as sex passions perturb the body and cause madness. Those that loose the control on themselves are better considered than those that allow to their appetites without losing control on themselves. The incontinent is a puny, weak person in body and gets drunk after drinking little wine. Aristotle and the magnanimous [113] He is an imitation of a vicious man with the appearance of a vicious man but he is not a vicious man. The wanton has a body constitution that looks for excesses and the end of his acts is to follow passions and not Reason. The wanton loves excesses of fun, of sex, of resting, of a smooth life and welfare. There is an excess on the continent too when he resists to passions such sex which are a part of the body life. The incontinent is a smooth man, an imitation of a sick man but without the ill fate of the sick. The incontinent acts as a sick person would do, but not by an illness fell upon him by misfortune [114] Enrique Morata but by an imitation of the behaviour of the sick men as at the same time he avoids their sickness. Some kings such those of the Scites where known for their softness. Incontinence springs from impulse (and it is wont by the ambitious, the fast and the angry) or from weakness of the body, sex is like tingles and we must know how to prevent them. Incontinence is of short duration as an epilepsy but malice is lasting as the tuberculosis is. There is a good incontinent: the one that doesn't obey unjust laws, as when men are moved by the compassion (as Neoptolemous did with Philoctetes). The bad philosophers suffer a kind of incontinence when they weave false syllogisms Aristotle and the magnanimous [115] one after other, turning Philosophy as difficult as water that drowns. The philosopher is a sort of detective and mathematician: «To find the answer to a difficult philosophical problem is to find the Truth» (1146 b). The brutish (a barbarian) is the opposite extreme of the divine, a heroe-like or an above human (which suffers from an excess of virtues or excellences!). The angry still listen to their Reason but not too much. They are slaves of their impulses and obey poorly the commands from their master (Reason). The angry always think if they have been scorned and on how to get vengeance [116] Enrique Morata (two more forms of relationships with the other men). He dashes on his desire. The animals are continent because they don't do syllogisms, they don't ask to their Reason on universal matters. Animals feel desires on particular things and they act on particular goals, they cannot think on universals (the same happens to the plants and to the men that are like plants). Socrates said that the passion is caused by an opinion and not by a knowledge. The man under a passion is like the drunk that sings verses without knowing what he says. The hedonist avoids cold, heat, hunger and lack of sex because he is soft and has no power no obey his Reason but he has power enough to go against it. Aristotle and the magnanimous [117] Very important (1148b): a civilization where is an excess of body pleasures (considering too as body pleasures to crave for honours, gains and success) is an extreme and is like fighting against the Gods, as Niobe did when boasting of her twelve sons. Our current civilization is clearly an excess as all the people of our time searches beauty of body, high level of technical education, to get a well paid job, to have money to enjoy everything that this epoch with its planes and cars can offer. (1137 b) Aristotle looks quite for a more lifted civilization, where the equality is the same as the just but where it corrects the unjust laws, when they are too much severe or too harsh. Nature Laws are universals and don't care for the fate of the individuals, [118] Enrique Morata for the rare cases or for the mistakes (1137 b). The universal law is not complete as it leaves out the particular cases. But there is the judge who must apply the equality to adapt this universal law to the rare cases. Aristotle says that the writer of the Laws would have provided too for rare cases if he had been aware of them. Decrees adapt the universal laws to the particular cases, as the limits do with the unlimited: «The multiplicity becomes an unity if it is limited» (1171a). The Good is limited, the evil is unlimited, a bad life full of pain and corruption is unlimited too (1170 b). Aristotle and the magnanimous [119] (1135 b) To grow old and to die are acts nor voluntary neither not voluntary as they are acts of the Nature ruled by Need. If you return a loan by fear of punishment and against your will, you act as a just man but by accident. If you deliberate on it, you act with intention. If you don't deliberate, you act by ignorance or by mistake (and if this ignorance is not human nor natural, it is unforgettable). When there is a natural disaster if the cause could not be foreseen, it is out of human responsibility. If it was possible to foresee, the cause is a human mistake, and it is not an injustice [120] Enrique Morata if there was no malice in it. It is an injustice when there was an evil purpose without deliberation and caused by the natural unavoidable passions of men. Each man acts by his «exis» or character except when he acts by interest, by cause of something, by use of something, by agreements or following Justice (1127 b). The man that acts by duplicity uses irony when talking on his declared belongings as small but boasting on those belongings when they are hidden. This kind of man denies with excess the qualities of his belongings. Aristotle and the magnanimous [121] It is because this that the irony gives pleasure as it reveals the things hidden by the hypocrite. The ironic has the flaw of talking always by lies, denying his achievements and properties or presenting them as smaller than real life. The ironic doesn't look for the Good, he looks to avoid relationship with people (as boasting of your feats is a way of relating with the others and the ironic hates relationship and he denies the money or houses he really has). Those that boast are false people, they claim to have more than what they really have and they claim to be more useful to the city than what they really are, such the physicians, the soothsayers and the wise. The true man is a middle way, it is the well-natured man, [122] Enrique Morata as he has by «nature» (in the Aristotlean sense) a goodness by which he avoids falseness. He loves the truth by itself, both when nobody cares on the truth and when it is important to say the truth as he always says the truth. He is good by his «nature» and he is true by his «exis». He is hated for being true and he knows it and hides his good nature. Democracy looks for equality among the people meanwhile aristocracy looks for differences among the people, caused by money, cradle, talent and ability to do much work. Aristotle tries to overcome this conflict between the upper class and the working class Aristotle and the magnanimous [123] by his concept of the «equality by a proportion» where the people is treated on a equal basis but by a proportion according to the merits (to the glorious acts) of every man. The animals cannot participate in the divine part of their nature, they can only participate in the good things that Nature (its environment) allows them to enjoy, such the material goods (1217 a). Nobody could stand to become a child again as children are plants that slumber meanwhile they grow (1215 b). A life without pleasure not pain in not a life, this is why boredom is unbearable for Men as it is an evil. A life with a man acting against his own will for all the eternity would be unbearable too. [124] Enrique Morata A life with only sex and food is the life of an ox such Apis of Egipt or a life of a slave. Anaxagoras said: «We live to understand the order of the Universe». A politician is someone who acts for the Good, therefore he is a magnanimous but most politicians only work in politics to act for their own profit and to earn money (1216 a). The magnanimous are even in nobleness as they are constant with themselves as they don't change easily, and as they don't change, they are constant too with their friends. They stop each other to do evil acts as they don't fail into mistakes and don't allow that their friends could fall neither (1159 b). In friendship by interest and use, there is always a conflict among people Aristotle and the magnanimous [125] as one of the parts wants always more as he believes he deserves more and that he needs more than the others, meanwhile the other part has no more to give (1162 b). But there can be a friendship in trades by interest or use, when one of the parts allows a delay on the payment or delivery of the agreed products or loans. In all living beings there is the faculty for deliberation if one wants to mess with some other being, thinking before it if the other being can return the act or not (1163 a). The best living beings think they deserve more because they think they contribute more to the community, then they think they must receive more from the community. [126] Enrique Morata The worst being thinks that the only reason why there should be a relationship with the best being is to be helped by him and that this could be the only Good possible among superior and inferior beings. The best being gains honour, which is something not material: the knowledge that this being acts as the Universe does, towards the best Good available in this World within its Natural laws and its Need (a mad magnanimous could act towards what he considers the best acts, out of the Natural laws of this Universe, but he would remain an insane man). «In all things that change, there is a continuous movement, divisible and with extremes and a middle part» («Eudemian Ethics», 1220 b). Men change and share this principle because they are a divisible continuous too: Aristotle and the magnanimous [127] they have extremes and a middle part. The envious get angry and cranky when they see the Good achieved by the magnanimous, who are those that deserve it by their glorious acts. The obliging don't get angry not even with those that get a Good that they don't deserve, the excessive («Eudemian Ethics», 1221 b). Life is a play of excesses and flaws happening along Time and with diverse graduation (1221 b). Virtue appears when the soul acts the best way. Virtue acts by the same causes that generates and corrupt it. [128] Enrique Morata At the same time, soul acts on those natural causes by the best way too, and with pleasure and pain (1220 a). Virtue is the best way to act, and when we act the best way, we call it a virtue. The best acts in sport and at feeding produce the best bodies and from the best bodies come the best acts as efforts. All living beings generate and corrupt by the acts caused by the same natural elements of our environment. If they act towards the Good (good food, good exercise, good land) they get good health and if they don't (bad food, no exercise, bad Aristotle and the magnanimous [129] land) they get sick and a feeble body. A good body comes from many particular virtues, by many acts towards the Good (1220 a). Men can act by Good only by acting with things that change in this World. Gods act by Good on things that don't change as they don't change neither, Gods are the best beings by its own «nature» (1217 b). The sight is a perfect act as it doesn't admit parts in its act of seeing along a time. Sight is directed towards the most excellent objects, [130] Enrique Morata by a process where the sight is active and the objects are passive but with a relationship with the sight. The sight appears on the living beings with this process of perfect activity with an object. And it is the principle to develop the eyes. Sight must be perfect or is not sight, it must be perfect to develop the eyes by this process of searching excellent objects in the reality (1174 b). Health is previous too to the development of Men as health is the end that develops Men: the proof of it is that health gives a perfect pleasure, without parts (1174 b). There must be a relationship between someone that acts and Aristotle and the magnanimous [131] someone that receives the act as passive, with pleasure. If both are the best, or are magnanimous, the pleasure drives to the end of the act, as a blossom of the age in its best year (an argumentation with sexual hues, an orgasm!). The end of the active and the end of the passive are the same end. Honour is the Good of the city when there are many magnanimous living there. Aristotle searches the «equality by a proportion» and not the absolute equality of the Anarchists. Friendship among magnanimous is permanent and free of slandering [132] Enrique Morata (as slandering happens in friendship by interest and use). The magnanimous loves his act as the artist loves his work. The magnanimous is active and his act is pleasant and fine. The product of his act is pleasant: love and friendship, activities that ask for an active man, not for a passive one (1168 a). The magnanimous gets a pleasure when he sees the product of his acts on his friends or on his helped fellows. It is easier to perceive the acts of our friends that our own acts and it is more pleasant to see the good acts of our friends. Aristotle and the magnanimous [133] To have money is to be an instrument, it is beautiful when the magnanimous gives more than what he receives and it is a virtue as he acts and does more Good than what he takes. On private property: what is ours is more pleasant (our character, our land, our virtue). Some people get angry against their parents because: «they battered me too when I was a child». The angry acts face to face, and he is not happy with himself. The envious men act by deluding and by seduction, with pleasure of their acts. [134] Enrique Morata The brutish are Nature stranded beings, they have not Reason, they are animals but if the brutish is bad too, he is a thousand times worse than a animal as he can do much more harm. The lack of luck, of body health and of all kind of goods are a hurdle that turn you a handicapped man. But too much luck is «unlimited» (out of the limits Men can put on the World) and turns to be a hurdle too to act. The pleasure is a good, otherwise we would live amidst pain all day long (1154 a). Pleasure is a balm, a violent and contrary one, to cure an excess of pain. The incontinent suffer much pain for living, because their Aristotle and the magnanimous [135] have an excessive «nature», being slaves of their desires and needing pleasures to find bearable this life. The living being acts all time, and those acts are painful (even the sight and hearing are painful although we have grown accustomed to it). It belongs to the Men's lot a life with pleasure and some pain meanwhile pain with some pleasure only exists for the incontinent or for the masochist (Christians will adore pain, believing that much pain controls their desires). But there are too pleasures without the slightest pain: those are the pleasures of the wise men that work writing theories, the pleasures that come from the Good (not by the good by accident). [136] Enrique Morata Those pleasures don't cause excesses nor blame (1154 b). The young people are angry because they grow and this is painful, so they live as drunkards do, to stand this pain. Two magnanimous think and act better. The greatest goods are the most easy to loose. But the friends watch them and in ill luck, friends are the best shelter, in mistakes the friends help, in weak shape the friends help and the mellow men help the old and the children. We rule our acts by the pleasure and the pain (1105 a). Aristotle and the magnanimous [137] Politics is the art of promoting the acts of the citizens. We deliberate to limit this Universe and to control what can depend on us in this unlimited Universe. The mad and foolish think on random, solstices, lottery, droughts, on what happens in other countries, all are matters that are out of our deliberation (1112 a). The poor are sent towards the magnanimous by the Goddess Need and the magnanimous need the poor to help them (1169 b). Those that look for friendship by interest and pleasure, look too for funny friends. [138] Enrique Morata Gods are happy because contemplation is the only activity they can perform, as they don' t act nor produce (1178 b). Animals don't know what contemplation is. The wise man reaches happiness when he acts on jobs dealing with contemplation and theory. In the city, there must be no absolute equality but an equality by a proportion. If there were equality in the city, bad would return an evil by another evil (as they feel that if they don't revenge, they are just slaves) and the magnanimous would return a good for another good Aristotle and the magnanimous [139] and this would be useless for the city as there wouldn't happen the relationship among all men and their trades (1133 a). The city wouldn't be united, it would be just a gathering of atoms, all the same, with random relationships by sympathy and antipathy, by accident, as in the movie: «Being John Malkovitch». The only alternative to Aristotle's system is the «Lepers Island» concept, a far away and hidden place where the freaks, the handicapped and the sick can live, arranging among themselves their political structure, protected from prosecution by the cruel people and the barbarians of each time. Harold Foster shown us in his «Prince Valiant» this concept: [140] Enrique Morata The «Lepers Island» is a place where those that are sent to live a marginal life by our current society because their diseases or their faulty body could find a haven where to rule by themselves their lives and their community. Aristotle and the magnanimous [141] [142] Enrique Morata The people with rare diseases and strange bodies suffer the cruelty of the posh people and look for a place where to live in peace. Aristotle and the magnanimous [143] Sometimes they got to settle in a lost and forgotten place where [144] Enrique Morata they can live without fearing the cruelty of the posh: this is the «Lepers Island » concept. Aristotle and the magnanimous [145] The freaks and sick only want to live in peace and they have a [146] Enrique Morata burden enough with their diseases so they don't want to suffer too the despise of the normal people, which by inside are often worse than them, as the posh are often monsters of the enjoyment of their own handsome body and of the luxuries of their time. The «Lepers Island» concept is not impossible from an economical point of view as the «lepers» know how to arrange things to produce food and goods Aristotle and the magnanimous [147] for themselves. The reason why the «Lepers Islands» are forbidden in our time is because they don't contribute to the economy of the country and they envy the happiness found there by the freaks. [148] Enrique Morata 3.– Conclusion Nobody knows if Aristotle plan was to wrote a hand -book for the upper class of his time or if he really believed that his science of Good would raise a better city, as a sort of an Aristotelian Utopia. Either way, Aristotle's book is the most important book on Ethics ever written and, for our disgrace, there has not been another philosopher on Ethics so influential as him. We still live in the civilization based in his Ethical principles and whatever philosopher that dreams on writing a better Ethics must base his theory on Aristotle's to advance further. But nobody has got yet a better system of Ethics than Aristotle's nor has explained what are the mistakes of his system and why it doesn't work as the every day experience shows us that the rich are not at all magnanimous and the working class people are not helped by them. We live in a Universe filled with opposites: 1People conservative and people lefty. 2Darwinists strong and big and the mob sick and weak. 3Incompatible countries: (Israel -Palestine, CataloniaSpain, EnglandIreland, USA-Iran). Aristotle and the magnanimous [149] 4Soul and body, spirit and matter, appearances and deep reality, reason and instinct. 5People living inside the material beauty and enjoying the beauty of the outside objects and people working on intellectual subjects, looking for the truth behind the material, deluding things. 6The Human beings that live as if they were Gods on this land, only worried in their money and success and, at the same time, when they gaze the starry night, they feel like ants. Men as divine and animal. 7As said Parmenides, our being doesn't change (our body frame and our mind) but at the same time it can be modified somewhat. In Aristotle, «nature» doesn't change but «exis» does change although it can become another « nature» with time (1152 a). 8Men are by outside of one way wearing a disguise or a mask and by inside they are another way, secret, hidden, with occult projects and feelings. Two personalities in each man. 9Human History has two faces too, one as told by the historians of a given party and another as told by historians of other party, one as told by the friends and other as told by the enemies, one as told by the relatives and other as told by the biographers. 10Alexander was the student of Aristotle and his most excellent sample of «magnanimous». But Alexander the Great degenerated as an imperialist and an invader, convinced that Greek civilization (with [150] Enrique Morata Aristotle as its «intelligent designer») was the highest ever. This shows that it must be something wrong in Aristotle's system of the World, but nobody knows yet what is it. Aristotle believed that the living beings: • Look for a balance inside their soul, a friendship with oneself. • The bad don't get this balance and disappear. • There is a middle way between excesses and flaws (but the primitive tribes never worried on flaws, they only cared on controlling the excessive men of their tribes, such the thieves and the killers). • There is a natural mechanism that rules those excesses and flaws, thanks to the living beings' differences and by an intercourse among all them or relationship. • There are proportions that rule the relationships among living beings (a geometric proportion could mean that the bigger living beings were more developed by Nature in a geometric proportion and that the smaller living beings must deal with them assuming this geometrical difference). • There are a minority of magnanimous trained in Aristotle's system and a majority of beasts or plant-like men that ignore what is all about. • Or all is a pre-capitalist system devised by Aristotle which we still suffer in our days, ruled by exchange of goods and by a never ending activity (or high productivity as this concept was already known by the Greeks , such Pericles when putting at work all the citizens in all kind of Aristotle and the magnanimous [151] jobs with special tasks, as Plutarch tells us on his «Pericles») to raise a city full of great and beautiful public works (Giovanni Botero understood Aristotle this way in his book: «Reason of State»: «The prince must populate his city by introducing all kind of industries and crafts, attracting craftsmen from other countries by a suitable accommodation , appreciating the fine machines and inventions and other rare and excellent works , giving money for the most perfect of them») and with Adam Smith repeating most of the concepts of Aristotle, many centuries later. • But the conflicts among neighbors (those that are most in contact, would say Aristotle) and the conflicts among relatives don't appear by a market-like relationship and by differences but by pure malice. • How can explain Aristotle pure malice? • Andwhat happens if a whole country is filled with brutish people or with sick people? • Aristotle accepts that the magnanimous have grown better and bigger by a better food, better exercise and better land and by great efforts, such fighting at war or building great works. But Bakunin would say that the magnanimous are just «gorilla-men», bigger than the others and looking for a political system such Aristotle's where they could be Kings and Rich «because they are bigger». The current concept of the mighty, rich and powerful seems to support this thought as most of our current millionaires understand for being «magnanimous» to earn a lot of money and to live amidst luxuries, just because «they are bigger». [152] Enrique Morata José Luis López Aranguren writes in his book: «Propuestas morales» (Ed. Tecnos, 1983,pag 53 ), terrified by the way the Utilitarianism is turning a dictatorship where the Good is what contributes to the welfare of all the citizens and it is imposed by force to all of us: «The men of our time, to be ensured with a good life, accept willingly to suppress their existence and to obey a dictatorship more or less disguised as a technocracy». • Aristotle hates those that leave this system, such the cynics, the hippies or the ecologists that settle in the mountains. They don't contribute to the city's welfare and they are «bad». Or they are clever than the others and see clearly the trap which is Aristotle's system... • I said in my writing «El progreso ético» that it has been a progress in Ethics in the last 3.000 years. Now I think quite that there has not been any progress in Ethics since Aristotle, as he wrote the only Ethical advanced system until today and there is no alternative. Utilitarianism is only a primitive Ethics looking for the welfare of the smooth and technocratic people of our days and it is not an alternative, just a new primitivism for a neo-primitive era, which is our epoch. • It is possible that Aristotle's Ethics be just a «machine to make gods», an artificial invention to make magnanimous or «Alexander the Great» by thousands, a social system to impulse the growth of better built and handsomer men from the upper class. In this case, Aristotle's Ethics would have been necessary, from a Darwinist point of view, to develop bigger and more well built men, instead of the ape-like working men deformed by physical labors. Aristotle and the magnanimous [153] • It is evident that there is a pride of the philosopher when he states than the best happiness is the one that enjoys him as he doesn't work in physical jobs, he does theories which don't tire him and that allow him to act long time. It is the pride of the philosopher but every job has his own pride and we shouldn't take seriously Aristotle when claiming that his job is the best. • Man is a machine that relates with the World by a door (the mouth, the sight) and by an exit (the bottom, the words, the thoughts), there are things entering and leaving him all time. Soul searches the Distributive Justice as the body searches health, Justice is the health of the soul when it gets a balance and in society this balance means a right distribution of all men by their differences and works. Life would be a boredom without so much play that so many differences among men allow, interacting at the Market. As in an Arabian «zoco», it is a play with money and the personality of each man, a negotiation to find the middle way or right price. Soul cannot rest until it finds this Distributive Justice, its health. • Cicero will adapt Aristotle's Ethics to the Roman Administration. Cicero was an admirer of Sparta and its lifestyle as a fight and develops a philosophy of death for the Romans: the legion soldier, his honor and glory are the Good that supports the Roman Empire. Bertrand Russell wrote in his book: «Human society in Ethics and politics»: «What makes that men embrace some principle is that it gives them some exit to their passions not very noble such envy, cruelty and the feeling of being superior» . [154] Enrique Morata For the comfortable man of our time, the Utilitarian Ethics on fashion cater on his need of not suffering pain by conscience's problems and this is a passion too, not so noble as it seems as it comes from deep selfishness which finds an exit in the Utilitarian Ethics of our time. If we compare Moses system with Aristotle's, we will realize that Moses wanted what today we would call a «Welfare State» for the Jews, by hygienic laws , a job and a chance to live for everybody. But Aristotle's system was devised to get high productivity ( already known in Greece), intense commerce and it was a way to build great public works , and Adam Smith will repeat all his concepts. Matter is unlimited but form putts limits to the Matter and each living being adopts a form . From here comes the differences among all living beings. Each living being exploits some newmatter that appears at the environment, metals, rocks, plants, chemicals or our day technology and scientific tools. All the living beings want to try whatever outside matter that comes along to see if they can enjoy a better life with it and each living being uses that matter in his own way and style, from hence comes a differentiation of millions of different living beings. Aristotle never considered the possibility of helping the brutish and the sick or the slaves, they were just «deformed apes» with no real existence as the other men enjoyed. Aristotle never thought on turning them magnanimous too by better conditions of living. Alexander got angry when he knew that Aristotle had published some books, as Alexander wanted to be the only one that had read them. Aristotle and the magnanimous [155] Augustine and Lactantius blamed Aristotle for being too much «lover of the intellectual life», it is not good to think too much as it is an excess too that Aristotle committed a lot , they blamed Aristotle too for his love for material public works . Alexander the Great believed that the Greeks were superior to the other countries populated by just brutish and should be invaded and turned slaves. This is a form of Nazism on Ancient World and the use by the conservative people of the next centuries of Aristotle's theories show us that it must be something wrong in his Ethics. Aristotle describes the cruelty but he is cruel too with the sick and brutish. Aristotle says that the gods don't act nor produce, just ponder but at the same time he says they are the first motors that «order» the Universe. He is greedy when he says the philosopher enjoys the best happiness but the reality is that philosophers are just workers as the others are, they work with papers, books, words and thoughts and this is all, there is no reason to be greedy. If their job is not physical not tiring is just an accident. Philosophers turn excessive to, they want to read more and more books, as Menéndez Pelayo when dying at his bed he said «Oh, I must die now that I have so many books still to read!». The life of the philosopher is an extreme by too much intellectualism. The philosopher turns greedy when he sees himself as a «second motor» by the influence of his writings on the politicians of his time. Philosophers love their own opinions above everything else and tend to impose them to the people, he suffers a lot when their opinions are refuted and doesn't find again a balance until he finds new opinions of their own. [156] Enrique Morata Philosophers are machines that cannot stop until finding a solution to a philosophical problems, turning slaves of this process and obsession and neglecting daily needs. The selfishness of the magnanimous is of the same kind of the selfishness of the common people but Aristotle justifies it by its use for the city. Aristotle and the magnanimous [157] Esta primera edición de Aristotle and the magnanimous, de Enrique Morata, terminó de imprimirse el xxxxx de xxxxxxxxx de dos mil dieciséis en los talleres de xxxxxxxxx en xxxxxxxx.