<aside> <img src="/icons/feather_gray.svg" alt="/icons/feather_gray.svg" width="40px" />

Summary: All human activities aim at some good, with the Chief Good being that which everything ultimately seeks. Goals are either the activity itself (dancing) or a tangible result (a ship); master-arts have more valuable ends than subordinate arts, which exist only to serve them. This ultimate goal belongs to political science (πολιτικὴ), which governs society and encompasses all practical fields, representing humanity's highest good. The discussion can only offer a rough outline since it concerns justice and conduct, and young people lack the experience needed for this moral philosophy, being too governed by passion.

</aside>

Table of Contents

Main Text by Aristotle

[You can listen and read along]

On the Ultimate Good and Politics.wav

Every art, and every science reduced to a teachable form, and in like manner every action and moral choice, aims, it is thought, at some good: for which reason a common and by no means a bad description of the Chief Good is, “that which all things aim at.”

Every skill, every area of study, and every action or choice we make is aimed at achieving something good. This is why people often describe the ultimate good as "that which everything aims toward."

Now there plainly is a difference in the Ends proposed: for in some cases they are acts of working, and in others certain works or tangible results beyond and beside the acts of working: and where there are certain Ends beyond and beside the actions, the works are in their nature better than the acts of working.

There is a clear difference in what we aim for: sometimes our goal is simply the activity itself, and other times our goal is to produce something as a result of that activity. When we aim to produce something beyond the activity, that product is more valuable than the activity itself.

graph TD
    A["Any Art/Science"] --> B{"What is the End/Goal?"}
    
    B --> C["Activity Itself"]
    B --> D["Result"]
 
    
    %% This diagram illustrates Aristotle's distinction between ends that are activities themselves versus ends that produce results beyond the activity

Again, since actions and arts and sciences are many, the Ends likewise come to be many: of the healing art, for instance, health; of the ship-building art, a vessel; of the military art, victory; and of domestic management, wealth; are respectively the Ends.

Since there are many different activities, crafts, and fields of study, there are also many different goals. For example, the goal of medicine is health, the goal of shipbuilding is to create a ship, the goal of military strategy is victory, and the goal of household management is wealth.

And whatever of such actions, arts, or sciences range under some one faculty (as under that of horsemanship the art of making bridles, and all that are connected with the manufacture of horse-furniture in general; this itself again, and every action connected with war, under the military art; and in the same way others under others), in all such, the Ends of the master-arts are more choice-worthy than those ranging under them, because it is with a view to the former that the latter are pursued.

When different activities or skills fall under one main skill (for example, making bridles and other horse equipment falls under horsemanship, and horsemanship itself falls under the military art), the goal of the main skill is always more important than the goals of the smaller skills beneath it. This is because we pursue the smaller skills in order to achieve the goal of the main skill.

Horse bridles

• Modern Examples

(And in this comparison it makes no difference whether the acts of working are themselves the Ends of the actions, or something further beside them, as is the case in the arts and sciences we have been just speaking of.)