Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Aristotle on the Utility and Choiceworthiness of Friends.Matthew D. Walker - 2014 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 96 (2):151-182.
    Aristotle’s views on the choiceworthiness of friends might seem both internally inconsistent and objectionably instrumentalizing. On the one hand, Aristotle maintains that perfect friends or virtue friends are choiceworthy and lovable for their own sake, and not merely for the sake of further ends. On the other hand, in Nicomachean Ethics IX.9, Aristotle appears somehow to account for the choiceworthiness of such friends by reference to their utility as sources of a virtuous agent’s robust self-awareness. I examine Aristotle’s views on (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • A Peripatetic argument for the intrinsic value of human life: Alexander of Aphrodisias' Ethical Problems I.Javier Echeñique - 2021 - Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science 54 (3):367-384.
    In this article I argue for the thesis that Alexander's main argument, in Ethical Problems I, is an attempt to block the implication drawn by the Stoics and other ancient philosophers from the double potential of use exhibited by human life, a life that can be either well or badly lived. Alexander wants to resist the thought that this double potential of use allows the Stoics to infer that human life, in itself, or by its own nature, is neither good (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Two Categorizations of Goods in Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics.Bradford Jean-Hyuk Kim - 2021 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 38 (4):297-315.
    This article resolves some difficulties with Aristotle's discussion of the choice-worthy (haireton). Nicomachean Ethics I posits goods that are choice-worthy for themselves and for something else, but Nicomachean Ethics X appears to present being choice-worthy for itself as mutually exclusive with being choice-worthy for something else; moreover, Nicomachean Ethics X seems to claim that action is choice-worthy for itself and, therefore, not choice-worthy for something else but also seems to claim that action is choice-worthy for something else and, therefore, not (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation