Moral Virtue as the Mean

Aristotle argues that moral virtue lies at the median between excess and deficiency relative to the individual. With each virtue comes two vices with one being a lack of the virtue and the other too much of the virtue (1108b.15). The two vices are opposites of each other and also opposed to the virtue itself. All three form a spectrum on which each individual falls at their own place. The position where one falls on the spectrum determines which direction the person should aim to attain virtue. If one falls closer to recklessness then they should aim toward cowardice. If one lies closer to cowardice then they should aim at recklessness. It is interesting that Aristotle believes one should aim at the excess or deficiency opposite of where we lie in order to attain virtue. 

One would think that in order to achieve courage as a virtue, one should aim at courage. But Aristotle says we need to aim past the virtue we want to acquire. By doing this, we will move along the spectrum and hit the median. If you aim at the virtue itself, then you will only move closer to the median, but never reach the end goal until a much longer time. By aiming past the median you can reach it faster then aim at the other opposite end so that you do not go too far past the median. This is because we often think of things relative to our own disposition. A cowardly man will view a courageous man as reckless and vice versa. Thus, we ought to aim at what appears to us to be the extreme, when in fact it might be the virtue itself. At some point, however, I feel that you must aim at the virtue when you think you are close. This leaves the question of how do you know when you are close to the median?

-BaylorBear16