Works › Eudemian Ethics
Work #356

Eudemian Ethics

Aristotle's alternate ethical treatise — the less famous companion to the Nicomachean Ethics

Aristotle · c. 350 BC · Classical Greek · Systematic ethical treatise

Tradition: Classical Greek philosophy

Aristotle's alternate systematic ethical treatise — the less famous companion to the Nicomachean Ethics

The Eudemian Ethics is one of Aristotle's two major systematic ethical treatises (alongside the more famous Nicomachean Ethics). The relationship between the two has been debated since antiquity — they share three books, but the Eudemian has distinctive treatments of virtue, friendship, and the highest good (eudaimonia as theoretical contemplation). The Eudemian has received increasing scholarly attention in recent decades.

Author

Editions cited

  • Eudemian Ethics (Anthony Kenny, Oxford World's Classics, 2011)
  • The Complete Works of Aristotle (Barnes, Princeton, 1984)
Compare this work

School Embodiments

Hylomorphism · 25%
Catholic/Thomistic · 20%
Rationalism · 10%
Realism · 10%
Pragmatic Realism · 10%
Islamic Philosophy / Falsafa · 5%
Platonism (Classical) · 5%
Stoicism · 5%
Analytic Metaphysics / Logical Atomism · 5%
Liberal Theology · 5%
Hylomorphism 25%

Aristotelian-hylomorphic ethical framework.

"Hylomorphic framework." (Eudemian)
Catholic/Thomistic 20%

Thomistic moral philosophy develops from Aristotelian ethics.

"Thomistic engagement." (Eudemian)
Rationalism 10%

Systematic rational ethical analysis.

"Systematic rational analysis." (Eudemian)
Realism 10%

Moral realism about real human ends.

"Real human ends." (Eudemian)
Pragmatic Realism 10%

Practical-political ethical analysis.

"Practical-political analysis." (Eudemian)
Islamic Philosophy / Falsafa 5%

Falsafa engagement with Aristotelian ethics.

"Falsafa engagement." (Eudemian)
Platonism (Classical) 5%

Engagement with Platonic ethical tradition.

"Platonic tradition." (Eudemian)
Stoicism 5%

Subsequent Stoic engagement with Aristotelian framework.

"Stoic engagement." (Eudemian)
Analytic Metaphysics / Logical Atomism 5%

Contemporary analytic engagement.

"Analytic engagement." (Eudemian)
Liberal Theology 5%

Liberal-theological engagement with virtue ethics.

"Liberal-theological engagement." (Eudemian)

Internal Tensions

Relation between Eudemian and Nicomachean Ethics has been debated since antiquity.

⧖

I. Time

Time as the medium of virtuous cultivation.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Grain: Continuous Freedom: Non-Deterministic Traversability: Linear Direction: Uni-directional Dimensionality: One
✦

II. Space

The polis as the space of virtuous life.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Curvature: Flat Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local
◉

III. Matter

Embodied human life.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local
◎

IV. Observer

The virtuous person.

Attributes
Time Instance: Single Space Instance: Single Knowledge Extent: Partial Knowledge Retainment: Total Physicality: Embodied Agency: Active Number: Plural Metaphysical Agency: Cosmic-ordering
⚡

V. Energy

Energies of virtuous activity.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dispersibility: Irreversible
⧉

VI. Information

Ethical tradition preserved.

Attributes
Ontological Status: Substantival Cosmic Conservation: Conserved Personal Conservation: Conserved Granularity: Continuous

Personas that cite this work

Aristotle

Personas with the nearest attribute fingerprint

Historical figures whose own classification on the same six-dimensional grid lands closest to this work's. Computed by attribute-agreement on coordinates both address.

93%
Plutarch
28/30
91%
Gottlob Frege
31/34
91%
René Descartes
31/34
91%
Flavius Josephus
29/32
90%
Marcus Tullius Cicero
27/30
90%
Panaetius
27/30

Computed school proximity

The work's attribute fingerprint scored against all schools using the same quiz scorer. Useful as a sanity check on the hand-curated embodiments above.

75%
Natural Law
24/26
75%
Thomism
24/26
75%
Transcendental Thomism
24/26
71%
Rationalism
21/26
71%
Anti-Trinitarianism
23/26
70%
Mohism
23/26
69%
Catholic/Thomistic
23/26
69%
Christian Personalism
23/26

How Eudemian Ethics resolves each dilemma

51 resolved positions across 4 dimensions · 6 unaligned.

Each dimension is sorted so minority positions come first. Mainstream positions are folded into an expandable list.

Time · 9 dilemmas, all mainstream
Do you really choose? The future is open and you are a genuine origin of it. 69% Are addicts responsible for their addiction? The addict could have chosen otherwise — that's why recovery is real. 69% Should we hold AI systems responsible for what they do? An AI without a free will is not the kind of thing that can be responsible. 69% How much weight do future people deserve? Future people are as real as you are — and their interests count for as much. 47% Is regret rational? The past is as real as the present; regret is a real attitude toward a real thing. 47% Do we owe extinct species something we cannot give them? Extinct species are as real as we are; they have standing. 47% Is the universe running out of usable energy? Time is unbounded but matter is finite; usable energy can fail without time failing. 47% Are natural resources fundamentally finite, or only practically so? Time goes on but matter is bounded; we are eventually constrained even with infinite time. 47% Could we owe future generations more than is materially possible to provide? Time is unbounded but matter is not; we can owe more across long time than the matter can provide. 47%
Matter · 7 dilemmas, all mainstream
Is the world created from nothing? Yes — matter was created and is conserved as a real substance. 55% Is the physical world fully real? Yes — the physical world is fully real, mind-independent, persisting. 55% Does matter have intrinsic moral standing? Matter is morally considerable insofar as it is created or conserved good. 55% What is money? Money is a real institution with intrinsic features. 54% What is a nation? A nation is a real moral community with intrinsic character. 54% What makes someone male or female? Sex is a real biological kind with given content. 54% Should we edit the human germline? Human nature is a real biological kind given by reproductive biology or by creation; editing the germline transgresses what is given. 54%
Observer · 37 dilemmas, all mainstream
Could causation work backwards? Causation runs one way — the arrow of time is real and structural. 68% Is the asymmetry between memory and anticipation a real feature of time, or just of us? The asymmetry is real because time itself has a real direction. 68% Is the arrow of time a real feature of the cosmos, or only of how we describe it? The arrow is real and structural; the asymmetry isn't an artifact of description. 68% Is environmental damage ever truly permanent? Damage is real and permanent on the relevant timescales. There is no recovery; there is only limitation. 66% Can a civilization recover from collapse? Civilizational complexity is hard to build and easy to lose; recovery is at best partial. 66% Does the second law of thermodynamics mean something morally? Entropy is what time is. The moral weight, if any, is the weight of working against the current. 66% When does a person begin? A person exists from conception — when a new being comes into existence. 54% What is marriage? Marriage has a given form — it’s a kind of thing we recognize, not make. 54% Does environmental harm in another country bind me morally? Moral obligation tracks the relations one is in; distance does matter, structurally. 50% What is our place in nature? Active in a real nature — we cultivate, steward, transform. 48% Should we colonize space? Cultivating worlds beyond Earth is the next form of stewardship. 48% Is genetic engineering of food stewardship or domination? Genetic modification is cultivation by other means. 48% Is reality fundamentally digital? No — continuous divine sustaining act, the Tao that knows no joints, the One's self-disclosure. 44% Are there indivisible units of experience? No — continuous divine presence; consciousness is the unbroken witness. 44% Is memory stored or reconstructed? Held in continuous divine or ancestral remembering — neither stored discretely nor purely reconstructed. 44% What happens to "you" when you die? A soul continues into another mode of being. 37% Can prayer for someone far away affect them? Prayer reaches because God or a cosmic ordering acts on the prayed-for. 37% Are coincidences ever more than coincidence? What looks like coincidence is providence — there is no such thing as a real coincidence. 37% Are the dead morally present to the living? The dead are present through divine memory, communion of saints, or ancestor presence. 35% Is divine omniscience compatible with human freedom? The human observer is in time, but God's vantage is not — and foreknowledge is not foreordering. 33% Does meditation reveal something genuinely timeless? Meditation participates in a real eternity — divine or cosmic — that the bounded human observer ordinarily cannot reach. 33% Does prayer change God's mind? God sees from outside time; prayer doesn't change God's mind, but it is part of how providence is enacted. 33% Should we trust expert testimony when we can't verify it? Trust expertise whose conclusions a competent mind can in principle reproduce. 32% Is religious revelation a real source of knowledge? Revelation is evaluable by reason — and not above it. 32% Does an LLM 'know' the things it correctly produces? An LLM can produce correct outputs but not reason to them; useful, not knowing. 32% Could an AI have a mind that matters? No — minds are not the kind of thing we engineer. 30% Do animals have moral standing comparable to humans? Moral standing comparable to humans requires what only humans have. 29% Could a fetal brain organoid in a petri dish be conscious? Without ensoulment, an organoid is tissue, not a person. 29% What makes someone the same person over time? You are a soul — what persists through change is the non-bodily aspect. 29% Is the late-stage dementia patient still the person their spouse married? The soul persists; the cognitive change is the body's, not the person's. 29% If a teleporter copied and destroyed you, would you have survived? The soul accompanies the person; engineering can't transfer it. 29% Does history have a direction or meaning? — — How is knowledge of reality produced? — — Is salvation, liberation, or fulfillment individual or communal? — — Is truth universal, tradition-bound, situated, or constructed? — — What kind of religious-theological authority does the tradition recognize? — — Who is the moral primary — the individual, the community, the cosmos, the class, or the species? — —
Information · 4 dilemmas, all mainstream
Is anything truly lost when someone forgets? Information is conserved — the personal pattern is held even when an individual mind loses it. 39% Does deleting your data online destroy something real? Information at the cosmic level isn't destroyed; deletion only obscures access. 39% Could the dead, in principle, be brought back? The information that constitutes a person is conserved; restoration is in principle possible. 39% Is forgiveness ontologically possible? The offense persists ontologically; forgiveness is real moral work, but it doesn't erase what was. 39%
← #355 De Vita Beata All Works #357 Parmenides →