Theoretical Arguments in Ethics: Analyzing and Examining the C. D. C. Reeve’s Presentation of Aristotle’s Ethics

Some moral philosophers consider ethical arguments to be theoretical and the result of these arguments to be a type of proposition or belief that is true or false, but some consider these arguments to be practical arguments. The same difference is substantial regarding the interpretation of Aristotle's view on ethics. Reeve asserts that moral arguments are theoretical based on his interpretation and of Aristotle's works. Aristotle has researched the axioms of ethics by examining the principles of different sciences and the method of acquiring them and has shown that it is possible to consider the propositions of ethics and the logic governing them similar to other theoretical sciences. Despite this, two basic points undermine this analysis. The arguments in theoretical sciences require a certain degree of necessity, while ethics does not. Second, the propositions of ethics have exceptions and according to Aristotle, they are of the hôs epi to polu type; It means that they are true in most of the times and conditions. What we have presented in response to these two issues in order to defend the theoretical nature of moral arguments is that the necessity of moral arguments is De Dicto necessity and not De Re necessity. Moral arguments are made up of two levels. At the first level, we are faced with theoretical arguments that determine the happiness of human beings; and at the second level, we are faced with arguments of the type of deliberation, in which hôs epi to polu propositions are included in the argument.