structure for 'Metaethics'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

22. Metaethics / C. The Good / 1. Goodness / a. Form of the Good

[goodness as a perfect and eternal idea]

24 ideas
Plato says the Good produces the Intellectual-Principle, which in turn produces the Soul [Homer, by Plotinus]
     Full Idea: In Plato the order of generation is from the Good, the Intellectual-Principle; from the Intellectual-Principle, the Soul.
     From: report of Homer (The Iliad [c.850 BCE], 509b) by Plotinus - The Enneads 5.1.08
     A reaction: The doctrine of Plotinus merely echoes Plato, in that case, except that the One replaces the Form of the Good. Does this mean that what is first in Plotinus is less morally significant, and more concerned with reason and being?
The good is beautiful [Plato]
     Full Idea: The good is beautiful.
     From: Plato (Lysis [c.400 BCE], 216d)
     A reaction: also Timaeus 87c
The good involves beauty, proportion and truth [Plato]
     Full Idea: If we are unable to net the good in a single concept, three must capture it: namely, beauty, proportion and truth.
     From: Plato (Philebus [c.353 BCE], 65a)
     A reaction: Very interesting. More illuminating than the discussion of the Good in 'Republic'. Is a handsome and honest murderer good? Is beauty part of the nature of the good, or a hallmark of it?
Neither intellect nor pleasure are the good, because they are not perfect and self-sufficient [Plato]
     Full Idea: Both intellect and pleasure are completely absolved of being the good itself, since they both lack independence, that is, sufficiency and perfection.
     From: Plato (Philebus [c.353 BCE], 67a)
     A reaction: This seems to be Plato disagreeing with Socrates, who sees reason and intellect as central to morality. Presumable he means that the good should be a primitive. Why is pleasure not sufficient?
The main aim is to understand goodness, which gives everything its value and advantage [Plato]
     Full Idea: The most important thing to try to understand is the character of goodness, because this is where anything which is moral (or whatever) gets its value and advantages from.
     From: Plato (The Republic [c.374 BCE], 505a)
     A reaction: I think I'm with Aristotle on this. I understand a good lunch or a good person, but pure goodness just seems to be an empty placeholder. A vote in favour.
For Plato we abandon honour and pleasure once we see the Good [Plato, by Taylor,C]
     Full Idea: For Plato, once we see the Good, we cease to be fascinated by and absorbed in the search for honour and pleasure as we were before.
     From: report of Plato (The Republic [c.374 BCE], 505d) by Charles Taylor - Sources of the Self §3.2
     A reaction: This is the quasi-religious aspect of the Good - that it is more like a vision than a reason
Every person, and every activity, aims at the good [Plato]
     Full Idea: The Good is something which everyone is after, and is the goal of all their activities.
     From: Plato (The Republic [c.374 BCE], 505d)
     A reaction: An obvious danger of tautology. If a blood crazed army is 'after' a massacre of some sort, that seems to qualify. What proportion is needed for 'everyone'?
Good has the same role in the world of knowledge as the sun has in the physical world [Plato]
     Full Idea: As goodness stands in the intelligible realm to intelligence and the things we know, so in the visible realm the sun stands to sight and the things we see.
     From: Plato (The Republic [c.374 BCE], 508c)
     A reaction: The claim seems to be that only goodness makes the world intelligible, but that strikes as closer to mysticism than to objective observation.
Goodness makes truth and knowledge possible [Plato]
     Full Idea: It is goodness which gives the things we know their truth and makes it possible for people to have knowledge.
     From: Plato (The Republic [c.374 BCE], 508e)
     A reaction: If we take truth to be the hallmark of successful thinking, then I have no idea what this means. I can't see how truth would disappear in an amoral cosmos.
The sight of goodness leads to all that is fine and true and right [Plato]
     Full Idea: The sight of goodness shows that it is responsible for everything that is right and fine,…and it is the source and provider of truth and knowledge. It is necessary for intelligent conduct of private and public affairs.
     From: Plato (The Republic [c.374 BCE], 517c)
     A reaction: As so often with Plato, I am baffled by such a claim. I sometimes see things in the world which strike me as right or fine, but I cannot conceive of a separate 'sight of goodness'.
Bad is always destructive, where good preserves and benefits [Plato]
     Full Idea: Badness always manifests in destruction and corruption, while goodness always manifests in preservation and benefit.
     From: Plato (The Republic [c.374 BCE], 608e)
     A reaction: Suspicions of tautology in this one. Can we have any concepts of good or bad which are not linked to desirable or undesirable outcomes?
I can form no notion of what the good is [Amphis]
     Full Idea: What the good is I no more can form a notion of, than of the good of Plato.
     From: Amphis (comedies (frags) [c.350 BCE]), quoted by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 03.1.22
     A reaction: It was evidently a running joke in the ancient world that no one could define Plato's Form of the Good. He was said to have written a book on it, now lost.
The good is 'that at which all things aim' [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: The Good has rightly been defined as 'that at which all things aim'.
     From: Aristotle (Nicomachean Ethics [c.334 BCE], 1094a02)
     A reaction: So it is logically impossible to aim at evil? Maybe in practice people always aim for what they take to be good, but it must be possible to deliberately do evil, just to prove a point.
Each category of existence has its own good, so one Good cannot unite them [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: Things are called good in as many senses as they are said to exist (e.g. substance, quality, quantity, relation, place, time); clearly, then, there cannot be a single universal common to all cases.
     From: Aristotle (Nicomachean Ethics [c.334 BCE], 1096a23)
     A reaction: It doesn't follow that because you can divide the substratum, that therefore the superstructure lacks unity. One tree has many roots. We must ask whether a good substance and a good quantity have anything in common.
There should be one science of the one Good, but there are many overlapping sciences [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: Of things that come under one Idea there is one single science, so there should be some one science of all good things; but in fact there are more than one science even of those that fall under one category (e.g. opportunity in medicine and in war).
     From: Aristotle (Nicomachean Ethics [c.334 BCE], 1096a27)
     A reaction: The reply might be that there are many sciences because humans are confused. A truly wise person would see that the science of opportunity is the same in medicine and war. If the good was pleasure, or the glory of God, this would be obvious.
Is the good a purpose, a source of movement, or a pure form? [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: The good is a principle for all things, and is so in the very highest degree, but in what way? As a purpose, as a source of movement, or as a form?
     From: Aristotle (Metaphysics [c.324 BCE], 1075a32)
     A reaction: I tend to think of it as an 'ideal', whatever that is, and hence an inspiration, but a rather vague one. Beauty, goodness and truth. Surely not a source of movement?
The good is what is perfect by nature [Diogenes of Babylon, by Blank]
     Full Idea: Diogenes of Babylon defined the good as what is perfect by nature.
     From: report of Diogenes (Bab) (fragments/reports [c.180 BCE]) by D.L. Blank - Diogenes of Babylon
     A reaction: This might come close to G.E. Moore's Ideal Utilitarianism, but its dependence on the rather uneasy of concept of 'perfection' makes it questionable. Personally I find it appealing. I wish we had Diogenes' explanation.
Saying the good is useful or choiceworth or happiness-creating is not the good, but a feature of it [Sext.Empiricus]
     Full Idea: Asserting that the good is 'the useful', or 'what is choiceworthy for its own sake', or 'that which contributes to happiness', does not teach us what good is but states its accidental property.
     From: Sextus Empiricus (Against the Ethicists (one book) [c.180], II.35)
     A reaction: This seems to be a pretty accurate statement of Moore's famous Open Question argument. I read it in an Aristotelian way - that that quest is always for the essential nature of the thing itself, not for its role or function or use.
It is always an open question whether anything that is natural is good [Moore,GE]
     Full Idea: Good does not, by definition, mean anything that is natural; and it is therefore always an open question whether anything that is natural is good.
     From: G.E. Moore (Principia Ethica [1903], §027)
     A reaction: This is the best known modern argument for Platonist idealised ethics. But maybe there is no end to questioning anywhere, so each theory invites a further question, and nothing is ever fully explained? Next stop - pragmatism.
We can ask of pleasure or beauty whether they are valuable, but not of goodness [Ross]
     Full Idea: While it can be intelligently asked whether the pleasant or beautiful has value, it cannot be intelligently asked whether the good has value, since the good is just to be valuable.
     From: W. David Ross (The Right and the Good [1930], §IV)
     A reaction: It is simply tautological that goodness has value, and that valuable things are good. But an assassin might 'value' a 'good' way of killing someone, or an instrument of torture. We might say "He values x, but x is bad". Still, he must think x is good.
There are two goods - the absolute good we want, and the reachable opposite of evil [Weil]
     Full Idea: There are two goods - one which is the opposite of evil, and one which is the absolute. …That which we want is the absolute good. That which is within our reach is the good which is correlated with evil.
     From: Simone Weil (Gravity and Grace (9 extracts) [1943], p.142)
     A reaction: Elsewhere she seems in tune with the thought of Nietzsche (whom she despised) that good and evil are false social constructs which are quite different from healthy values. Weil, of course, sees the absolute as transcendent.
The good is a nothingness, and yet real [Weil]
     Full Idea: The good seems to us a nothingness, since there is no thing that is good. But this nothingness is not unreal.
     From: Simone Weil (Gravity and Grace (9 extracts) [1943], p.278)
     A reaction: A neat move in the notoriously difficult platonic problem of specifying the actual nature of the good.
'Good' is an attributive adjective like 'large', not predicative like 'red' [Geach, by Foot]
     Full Idea: Geach puts 'good' in the class of attributive adjectives, such as 'large' and 'small', contrasting such adjectives with 'predicative' adjectives such as 'red'.
     From: report of Peter Geach (Good and Evil [1956]) by Philippa Foot - Natural Goodness Intro
     A reaction: [In Analysis 17, and 'Theories of Ethics' ed Foot] Thus any object can simply be red, but something can only be large or small 'for a rat' or 'for a car'. Hence nothing is just good, but always a good so-and-so. This is Aristotelian, and Foot loves it.
The good is implicitly violent (against evil), so there is no pure good [Derrida]
     Full Idea: Even the good is implicitly violent (against evil), so there can be no 'pure' good.
     From: Jacques Derrida (works [1990]), quoted by Barry Stocker - Derrida on Deconstruction