Aristotle's Doctrine of the Mean: Applications to Human Decision-Making and Ethical Dilemmas
Overview
This essay explores Aristotle's doctrine of the mean as a philosophical principle applicable to all aspects of life, arguing that moderation and balance between opposite extremes lead to optimal outcomes. The paper illustrates this concept through various examples including animal behavior, highway crossing decisions, and an ethical dilemma involving academic cheating for scholarship opportunities.
What this essay covers
- Introduction to Aristotle's doctrine of the mean and its universal application across human and animal behavior
- Examples of practical decision-making: highway crossing and animal hunting as demonstrations of natural balancing
- Ethical case study: examination of a student's dilemma between cheating for scholarship benefits versus maintaining integrity
Preview
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Philosophy
Aristotle's mean is a philosophical doctrine that applies to every aspect of life. Each endeavor has two opposite outcomes, and moderation is the key to betting the best result. In each element, there is a positive and negative effect. Either can happen when you underperform or overperform an activity. This doctrine is not confined to human activity alone; even animals must strike a balance in thought before making a decision (Nahum 121). It is imperative to say that the doctrine is an animal trait. Sometimes the balance between negative and positive outcomes occur in the subconscious, and we do not spend a lot of time in the decision-making process. A particular example among humans is when and where a road should be crossed on a busy highway. This decision is key to survival and rarely does a person cross without checking the road because it may lead to death. Even when someone is in a hurry, they must stop to assess the situation before they leap into a decision. When a vehicle is oncoming, a person may choose to rush through, but they assess the likelihood of making through the other side of the road. If the merits outweigh the demerits, they cross at a calculated pace, but when the risks of injury and death are high, they stop and waits for safety. When hunting, animals also make these kinds of decisions; the predator asses a pack of animals and chooses the weakest and the heaviest.