Question

Aristotle writes that "no would call a person just if he did not enjoy acting justly, or generous if he did not enjoy generous actions, and the same goes for other virtues" (14). What does he mean here? Is he right? Is acting virtuously pleasurable? Can someone be called virtuous who doesn't take pleasure in acting virtuously? Can you think of any examples where this wouldn't be the case?

Answer 1

In my view, morality and pleasure are two completely different constructs. Although an individual should ideally enjoy acting in an ethical manner, one cannot dismiss his/her actions as immoral simply because it is not accompanied by pleasure. The right thing to do in many cases can cause significant distress to an individual. For example, a mother maybe compelled to turn in her son to the police after finding out that he murdered his wife. Although she is acting justly, testifying against her own son would assumingly cause mental anguish to her and can by no means be pleasurable.