Aristotle says that virtue is a "mean" between two extremes. For instance, the virtue of courage consists of the disposition to
feel neither too much nor too little fear, but rather some appropriate amount in between. Is this consistent with his claim that some actions (such as stealing or adultery) are always wrong in all circumstances?
Explanation: Aristotle's statement applies only to virtues, not to traits or things that are wrong as such. So things like stealing or adultery are listed, but also all other wrong things like lying, cheating, etc, are these where there is no scale for the mean between the two extremes. This means it does not apply the "too much or too little" principle does not apply to wrong things. This principle, therefore, is based on real application, it is not about some irrational, imagined virtue, and it certainly depends on the actual situation and purpose. The real purpose of virtues is in fact the appropriate quantity of that virtue, which is rationally determined for the given situation, according to the already stated "neither too much nor too little".
If Presidents were elected for life, we would not be the same. Everything would not change and we wouldn't get a chance to see something new. If its a bad president, bad things will keep happening. But, f it's a good president, good things will happen.
The item that may not
be a good consideration in selecting a bank is the word “FREE” is prominently
displayed in the marketing pamphlet. The answer is letter A. it may be free
while you purchase it but later on, when you save money, you will be charged.
Explanation: A duty of obedience is referring to board directors that are caring about nonprofit and the law. They are also searching activities that are against the law, illegal or they are unauthorized. When it comes to this duty. board directors are having to take care of that the nonprofit organization is working with legal law situations.
