16 Particular Excellence of Characi, ac 1133 3011340 15. Te is an imy 1 POTEANE pag iets Careful reading and runs as follows: sage ey sestegg. 208 een" “Tes cla that jst action i mean been acing yy corals oe 3 9 ring injustice for the oe i 0 have too muck iy uy favgs (0 Py eal fave co Hite. So justice isa mean, but noc ees Seater, SPE oye her excellences, ut because it aims atthe mt and injure © cess Oe Cerin B the extremes. And justice is chat by which the just man ema iis ora do by choice what is just and to be one who will distri,” ce caret stt beeen himself and anther between ewo other "S so Aes give what is proportionately fai ms cha _ and : tice Acsing jl has ala been denatured by being wane ee merely having an unfair share; similarly just action is aly hat AS denatured by being treated s merely having far shate, Moyes tink chen’ the just man is he who makes a fair distribution and the ‘unjusthe justice cnt ‘who makes an unfair distribution. So if A distributes unfaiciy by ee giving too much to Band too little to C, then A is unjust, B acts iiss unjustly and C is unjustly treated. But if A were unjust one would era think that he acted unjustly; but on this occasion he gor nothing, ae while acting unjustly has been said to be getting an unfair share, oe So Aristotle has got himself into a sophistical muddle, but has disv still noe saved the day, since he admits that justice is not like the oe gihetexcellences; ici said to aim at a mean, bur this is true only = iazing unjustly is implausibly reduced to getting more than iy of hee te: He docs, indeed, somewhat decrease the absurd- x without bees uot OY Tae that it is possible to act unjustly ie Png ett ina way ac pre) eeiving coo much but as IN unjust is eas = BiVes one an unfair advantage, and \ aR osiusly wich the icra Hd non at distribution but to | Prosecution, . and not merely inc, fe nord om different eng °* ™**ely incidentally in ectificato See What has ‘ someone cy i'stice, both Sone Wrong, Distributive and \ simp’, is actin Which can i ply are noe excellenea” Mdicial gp CS Manifested only by Manifestations of a sie OF character va dedicat Capacity, “Pecil emotion thae ‘c Be Xcellence chaps nor are they 3 at: ‘ Be ought to feel anqct’® There is no and exhibit eo, a tight7 = ane charac z iN Me has €0 OPE impartial, without fear oF 18 uy . tes ie fens © ed, ina woe he theo 10 and Of COUT arate, and NOE display ty ei eure iad injagy a? & Co i of cae oa all responsi positions. aaa elt a Nt = ee cig ering, justice re ee cxhibie justice a5 a0 exCelIEACe of re acscoe® chibi Fe gecount. of distributive is ie raged by this failure, mg ese are not damaged bY steed ecco Jo lence of character, ONCE St vet general OUT OT ecesary mistake im CIO Ce Motor, fae Arsale Was Mr yer, when he ceases <0 OY Fh connect mgs be ogtte® ne of the meanrhe abandons his earlier Sipe anne ee 136b 28 he says that is ‘clear that when eo Baces is yes the diseribucot who acts unjustly and not che ee person who has £00 sche ron each occasion, which is plainly right rahe” Per fuely concradicts the passage a 113 Ib 16-20. ae fa ove ehac n specifi emocion was involved in either ue has dsnibotve or recificatory justice. But a¢ 11292 32 Aristotle has be the Gace that paca justice involves aiming at too great @ only deere: ehough it were che relevant emoriOn, But, in the first than place, che distributor, OF ‘rectifier, who alone is capable of urd- displaying these types of justice, may not get any share at all. dy “Aristotle tries to get round this by saying that the unjust judge 0 spay aim at an unfair sare of favour or revenge (11378 1) but this s Taney mere verbal juggling. We might as well treat the coward 1 | dBanjse since he aims ac an unfur share of safety; we might in this reduce all defects of character to greed. way be able to 1 Anatole wishes to make greed an example of a defect of character he will have to dissociate it from his particular justice He ctT have co take some neutral emotion, pethaps called possessiveness or acquisitiveness, of which greed would be the aeee But now the problem will be how to find a plausible go that co which you defect or deficiency, for being willing to fo t have a right is thought by Aristotle to be a sige of liberality oF even magnificence. The best we can do is perhaps 0 SUBBSS* that8 Particular Excellences of Characry the faule is not to be willing to forgo what one ha rather to have t00 low a view of one’s rights i resemble the unduly humble man ae deseipg who has in general t00 low an opinion of Wass tt haps it would be pointless to multiply particylas "fy Fy beving a diferent ove with regard er deren eel, he E — claims to honour, claims co wealth and so on fe Icis clear chat co claim too small a share, even if a faut ie injustice. This follows from an excellent point made ty danas Beosme a recognized principle of law. n met distinction between harming somebody and treating hire Se tight ag his own + ui (1136 5-6) nee legal ag, iis he dancin between in this € and injuria. For there to be injuria che damnum, ot loss, Must ny now be consented to. So taking to oneself the damnum consisting i rexcelle? smal a share cannot be a form of injustice. One cannot be utjeg good to oneself, just as one cannot steal from oneself or break a conties ‘Aristot with oneself, whatever idiomatic elk there may be about dang ‘virtue oneself justice and the like. speak There are other interesting discussions in Book V that will at cand be discussed here in depth. There is the discussion of the of Principle of reciprocity at 1132b 21 ff. Here Aristotle denies FE that, any more than the doctrine of an eye for an eye, it can be ints taken as straightforward principle of justice, But it has its place fics as the principle governing exchange of goods and in partcult at the use of money as a means he use of n facilitating exchange. As such, the discussion is no doubt elementary, but, when considered as a \ pioneering essay on economic theory, it can be seen to have merits. Another influenti jnfluential discussion is of the need for equity as ae i deciding 'Ssues unprovided for, or badly provided for, y ue ea) These passages are left undiscussed here, not ee we eae but because they are easily intelligible justice must, considers ning Useful to add. The treatment of its main contention set dee ee judged a failure, both in sion But, as should a ae tts lack of a coherent organiz- mca ti Particular topics hat i nk there are many ves ar Te both int i the deveren interesting in