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

Now these two also do not seem to be bad — for 35! they do no harm — though they are in error.

For the little-minded man, though he deserves good things, deprives himself of that which he deserves, and so seems to be the worse for not claiming these good things, and for misjudging himself; for if he judged right he would desire what he deserves, as it is good. I do not mean to say that such people seem to be fools, but rather too retiring. But a misjudgment of this kind does seem actually to make them worse; for men strive for • that which they deserve, and shrink from noble deeds and employments of which they think themselves unworthy, as well as from mere external good things.

But vain men are fools as well as ignorant of 36 themselves, and make this plain to all the world ; for, not doubting their worth, they undertake honourable offices, and presently stand convicted of incapacity: they dress in fine clothes and put on fine airs and so on; they wish everybody to know of their good fortune ; they talk about themselves, as if that were the way to honour.

But little-mindedness is more opposed to high- 37 mindedness than vanity is ; for it is both commoner and worse.

High-mindedness, then, as we have said^ has to do 38 with honour on a large scale. Of a similar 4 g^j^ {^ appears (as we said at the outset) that 1 virtue m rsr \ /

Slers there is also a virtue concerned with honour, which bears the same relation to high-mindedness that liberality bears to magnificence ; i.e. both the virtue in question and liberality have nothing to do withp. 121 great things, but cause us to behave properly in

2 matters of moderate or of trifling importance. Just as in the taking and giving of money it is possible to observe the mean, and also to exceed or fall short of it, so it is possible in desire for honour to go too far or not far enough, or, again, to desire honour from the right source and in the right manner.

3 A man is called ambitious or fond of honour {(juXoTifiog) in reproach, as desiring honour more than he ought, and from wrong sources; and a man is called unambitious, or not fond of honour {a<fn- XoTtfiog), in reproach, as not desiring to be honoured even for noble deeds.

But sometimes a man is called ambitious or fond of honour in praise, as being manly and fond of noble things; and sometimes a man is called unambitious or not fond of honour in praise, as being moderate and temperate (as we said at the outset).

nessp. 122 has no recognized name. Compared with ambition, it seems to be lack of ambition ; compared with lack of ambition, it seems to be ambition ; compared with both at once, it seems in a way to be both at once. This, we may observe, also happens in the case of 6 the other virtues. But in this case the extreme characters seem to be opposed to one another [instead of to the moderate character], because the character that observes the mean has no recognized name. Of gentle- 5. Gentlcncss is a kind of moderation with respect l

4 It is plain, then, that a man is called " fond of this or that " in many senses, and that the term " fond of honour" has not always the same sense, but that as a term of praise it means " fonder than most men," and as a term of reproach it means " fonder than is right." But, as there is no recocmized term for the observance of the mean, the extremes fight, so to speak, for what seems an empty place ; but [the place is not empty, for] wherever there is excess and defect there is also a mean.

5 And men do, in fact, desire honour more than they ought, and less, and sometimes also as they ought; at least, this chai-acter is praised as observance of the mean in the matter of honour, though it