The Archer and Aristotle’s Doctrine of the Mean

Abstract

It is sometimes claimed that Aristotle’s doctrine of the Mean is false or unhelpful: moral virtues are not typically flanked by two opposing vices as he claimed. However, an explicit restatement of Aristotle’s view in terms of sufficiency for an objective reveals that the Mean is more widely applicable than has sometimes been alleged. Understood as a special case of sufficiency, it is essential to many judgments of right and wrong. I consider some objections by Rosalind Hursthouse to Aristotle’s theory and argue that they are based on a misunderstanding. However, there is indeed a tension in Aristotle’s view of goodness, hinted at in his claim that the good is "said in many ways".

When organizations are too good: Applying Aristotle's doctrine of the mean to the corporate ethical virtues model

“…For Curzer (), the doctrine offers a plausible picture of the virtues. Oates (), Bosley (), Bostock (), Rapp (), Koehn (), and Hartman () also defend the significance of Aristotle's doctrine of the mean. For example, Oates (, p. 392) appreciates its flexibility and points out that “the fact that it admits of comparatively simple elucidation bespeaks its great usefulness as a practical guide to living.”…”

“…The mean is not fixed , but flexible in the sense that it depends on the individual and circumstances (NE, II.8). It is not necessarily one point , but may cover a range of dispositions and actions (Koehn, ), and it does not involve only one parameter because being virtuous requires that one should feel and act “at the right times, with reference to the right objects, toward the right people, with the right motive, and in the right way” (NE, II.6). The mean is not only quantitative but can also be qualitative (Oates, ) because people can be blamed for doing something that is particularly wrong, for example, “being angry with the wrong person” (Rapp, , p. 120).…”

“…The mean is not only quantitative but can also be qualitative (Oates, ) because people can be blamed for doing something that is particularly wrong, for example, “being angry with the wrong person” (Rapp, , p. 120). The mean is neither an infinite tendency —there is no excess of a virtue (Oates, )— nor is it in the object : it is in the subject because the objective of a given mean must be something beyond that mean (Koehn, ). Furthermore, the doctrine is not intended to provide practical guidelines (Rapp, ); it does not imply moderateness and mediocrity (Koehn, ; Losin, ); and hitting the mean is not easy but even difficult (NE, II.6; II.9; IV.1) and hard work (Sison & Ferrero, ).…”

Aristotle and the Management Consultants: Shooting for Ethical Practice

“…Others, however, argue that Aristotle's doctrine of the mean has value as general guidance for someone who is aiming to act ethically, as for an archer who is seeking to shoot in the right direction (Koehn 2012;Losin 1987). These writers argue against regarding the mean as a precise point, capable of being located quantitatively between opposed vices.…”

“…Rather they see it as a general area that is more or less right, and lies between too much and too little. The archer may err in a multiplicity of ways, but each error may yet reasonably be thought of in terms of deficiency or excess (Koehn 2012). Contemporary writers on business ethics have drawn upon Aristotle's doctrine of the mean as a source of guidance, for example, in understanding why unethical behaviour occurs in organisations (Kaptein 2017).…”