[Ἔστιν ἄρα ἡ ἀρετὴ…] μεσότης δὲ δύο κακιῶν, τῆς μὲν καθ᾽ ὑπερβολὴν τῆς δὲ κατ᾽ ἔλλειψιν· καὶ ἔτι τῷ τὰς μὲν ἐλλείπειν τὰς δ᾽ ὑπερβάλλειν τοῦ δέοντος ἔν τε τοῖς πάθεσι καὶ ἐν ταῖς πράξεσι, τὴν δ᾽ ἀρετὴν τὸ μέσον καὶ εὑρίσκειν καὶ αἱρεῖσθαι.
Do I understand it correctly that τῷ here makes the four infinitives that follow articular?
It looks that way to me, though I don’t understand what is governing the dative (τῷ).
Thanks! I take it to be the implied ἀρετὴ ἔστιν μεσότης.
Adding a bit more context:
Ἔστιν ἄρα ἡ ἀρετὴ ἕξις προαιρετική, ἐν μεσότητι οὖσα τῇ πρὸς ἡμᾶς, ὡρισμένῃ λόγῳ καὶ ᾧ ἂν ὁ φρόνιμος ὁρίσειεν. μεσότης δὲ δύο κακιῶν, τῆς μὲν καθ’ ὑπερβολὴν τῆς δὲ κατ’ ἔλλειψιν· καὶ ἔτι τῷ τὰς μὲν ἐλλείπειν τὰς δ’ ὑπερβάλλειν τοῦ δέοντος ἔν τε τοῖς πάθεσι καὶ ἐν ταῖς πράξεσι, τὴν δ’ ἀρετὴν τὸ μέσον καὶ εὑρίσκειν καὶ αἱρεῖσθαι.
In the earlier sentence, isn’t the μεσότητι ὡρισμένῃ by λόγῳ καὶ ᾧ ἂν ὁ φρόνιμος ὁρίσειεν?
So when we get to καὶ ἔτι τῷ, I guess that he means that the μεσότης is also “ὡρισμένη” by “τὰς μὲν ἐλλείπειν…καὶ αἱρεῖσθαι”. So, to me, the infinitives don’t look like they are governed individually the τῷ, it’s just setting off everything as a definition in the acc. + inf. construction.
Or that’s what it looks like to me. I still haven’t read any Aristotle, so I don’t have any feel for how he writes. (But maybe he should have played more D&D in high school. Well-balanced characters stink compared to highly specialized builds.)
Joel - I was wondering too if the ᾧ in τὰς μὲν … mirrors that in καὶ ᾧ ἂν ὁ φρόνιμος … To me the editor’s punctuation argues against that, but for sure I don’t know.
Also, anyone, what are the referents for the τὰς’s? And are they the objects or the subjects of ἐλλείπειν and ὑπερβάλλειν?
Joel:
What kind of construction (τῷ + acc. + inf.) are you referring to?
Randy:
τὰς, in my view, refers to κακίας; I take them to be the subjects.
Well, in the interests explaining what I’m grasping at, I’ll try to translate as I understand it:
Ἔστιν ἄρα ἡ ἀρετὴ ἕξις προαιρετική,
Then virtue is a ἕξις προαιρετική,
ἐν μεσότητι οὖσα τῇ πρὸς ἡμᾶς, ὡρισμένῃ λόγῳ
being a median for us, defined by λόγῳ
[I don’t like this comma, so here is the above translated without it too]
ἐν μεσότητι οὖσα τῇ πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὡρισμένῃ λόγῳ
being a median defined to us by λόγῳ
καὶ ᾧ ἂν ὁ φρόνιμος ὁρίσειεν.
and by what ὁ φρόνιμος might define.
μεσότης δὲ δύο κακιῶν,
It [is] a median of two evils,
τῆς μὲν καθ’ ὑπερβολὴν τῆς δὲ κατ’ ἔλλειψιν·
one towards excess, one towards insufficiency.
καὶ ἔτι τῷ
And also [defined by]:
τὰς μὲν ἐλλείπειν τὰς δ’ ὑπερβάλλειν τοῦ δέοντος ἔν τε τοῖς πάθεσι καὶ ἐν ταῖς πράξεσι, τὴν δ’ ἀρετὴν τὸ μέσον καὶ εὑρίσκειν καὶ αἱρεῖσθαι.
“some [κακίας] fall short, others exceed the needful among both experiences and actions, but virtue seeks and chooses τὸ μέσον.”
However, I’ve read it like indirect speech, only motivated by that τῷ, and indirect speech seems a bit incongruous with what came immediately before. And the editor doesn’t include quotes around this last bit.
λόγῳ καὶ ᾧ ἂν ὁ φρόνιμος ὁρίσειεν
Re-reading, I got this wrong. It’s not “a word and whatever…”. It’s “defined by a λόγῳ just as…”