tribute. Because law has reason on its side, it would be a far superior educator than a father who is an individual and far more easy to ignore. Since states do not take it upon themselves to legislate morality, it ends up being left to the father though. The problem is, is that no matter which party, the state or the individual, there is a necessity for legislative science to be used. It is possible for either system to work, because the individual can have a case created especially for him, but it would far more effective if universal laws governed him. Amelie Rorty comments on the reason for the insertion of the political ideas at the conclusion of a book of ethics in his essay The Place of Contemplation in Aristotles Nicomachean Ethics. His thought is that the discussion of politics which follows the discussion of contemplation in Book X is meant to show that one of the aims of a statesman is the reconciliation of the contemplative and the practical lives(Amelie Rorty, 378). The primary problem with teaching universal morality as well as legislative science is who the teachers should be. There seems to be a need for a middle ground between theory and practical experience. Politicians are of no use because some, like the sophists who advertise that they teach politics [do not] practice it (1181a1). Those that do practice it do not necessarily use thought in their actions. The right approach seems to be somewhere between these two ideas. If it is contemplation that is the highest form of happiness, and action that comes from this contemplation can come to exist, then perhaps there is some validity to this final thought. Instead of trying quickly to answer it though, Aristotle closes off the Nicomachean Ethics, and opens the door for The Politics.Pleasure and happiness and moral thought and action all have conjoining ideas that can tie them into one another. Aristotle was able to see that, and while he was aware that the a...
