The Nicomachean Ethics — trans. F. H. Peters (1881)

than any other loves this part of himself. He, then, more than any other, will be self-loving, in another sense than the man whom we reproach as self-loving, differing from him by all the difference that exists between living according to reason and living according to passion, between desiring what is noble and desiring what appears to be profitable.

Those who beyond other men set their hearts on noble deeds are welcomed and praised by all ; but if all men were vieing with each other in the pursuit of what is noble, and were straining every nerve to act in the noblest possible manner, the result would be that both the wants of the community would be perfectly satisfied, and at the same time each individually would win the greatest of all good things — for virtue is that.

The good man, therefore, ought to be self-loving ; for by doing what is noble he will at once benefit himself and assist others: but the bad man ought not ; for he will injure both himself and his neighbours by following passions that are not good.

Thus, with the bad man there is a discrepancy between what he ought to do and what he does : but with the good man what he ought to do is what he does ; for reason always chooses that which is best for itself; and the good man obeys the voice of reason.

Again, it is quite true to say of the good man that he does many things for the sake of his friends and of his country, and will, if need be, even die for them. He will throw away money and honour, and in a word, all the good things for which men competi rp. 307 iming for himself that which is noble ; for he will I (refer a brief period of intense pleasure to a long period of mild pleasure, one year of noble life to many are of ordinary life, one great and noble action to many little ones. This, we may perhaps say, is what he gets who gives his life for others : and so he chooses for himself something that is noble on a grand scale.

Such a man will surrender wealth to enrich his fiiend : for while his friend gets the money, he gets what is noble; so he takes the greater good for himself

His conduct will be the same with regard to honours and offices : he will give up all to his friend ; for this he deems noble and praiseworthy.

Such a man, then, is not unreasonably considered good, as he chooses what is noble in preference to everything else.

But, again, it is possible to give up to your friend an opportunity for action, and it may be nobler to cause your friend to do a deed than to do it youreelf

It is plain, then, that in all cases in which he is

; praised the good man takes for himself a larger share

> of what is noble. And in this sense, as we have said, a man ought to be self-loving, but not in the sense in which the generality of men are self-loving.

9. Another disputed question is whether a happy wkya man needs friends or not. needs

It is said that those who are blessed and self-sufficient have no need of friends ; for they are already supplied with good things : as self-sufficient, then, they need nothing more, while a friend is an alter egop. 308 who procures for you what you cannot procure yourself; whence the saying —

" When the god favours you, what need of friends ? "

But it seems strange, while endowing the happy man with all good things, to deny him friends, which are thought to be the greatest of all external goods.

And if it is more characteristic of a friend to confer than to receive benefits, and if it is characteristic of a good man and a virtuous character to do good to others, and if it is nobler to confer benefits on friends than on strangers, the good man will need friends to receive benefits from him.

And so people ask whether friends are more needed in prosperity or adversity, considering that in adversity we want some one to help us, and in prosperity some one that we may help.