Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 9.djvu/549

 JOHN BUBNBT, The Ethics of Arittotle. 580 He knows minutely the Physics and other physical treatises of Aristotle. These constitute the base or rather the central portion of Aristotle's philosophy, and Mr. Burnet uses them most effec- tively in the interpretation of the Ethics. Specially noteworthy in this respect is the introductory note to book ii., where ? and /jLto-orrj'i are explained in the technical terms of ^uo-unj. Sometimes Mr. Burnet shows a tendency to push his theories too far, and to discover design in what may be merely accidental. It is possible, for instance, to hold that in general the more popular passages iu the Ethics are addressed specially to a " Platonically schooled public " without finding in eveiy literary phrase a re- miniscence of Plato. Again, Mr. Burnet seems rather fond of novel and paradoxical interpretations. An instance of this occurs at the very beginning of the Ethics. One is rather startled to find that Mr. Burnet has a new interpretation of the first chapter of the first book. "It is generally supposed that the passage deals with ends in general and not simply with the distinction between the ends of theoretical and practical science and the proof that the end of the most architectonic of the practical sciences will be the good for Man " (introduction, p. xxv.). The evidence brought forward by Mr. Burnet is sufficient to prove his point. One inu^t admit that primarily what is divided or classified in the chapter is Trpa.KTiK7j fTTLan~>ifj:f]. But a division of TrpaKTiKoi tirurrri/jMi is neces- sarily at the same time a division of ends, and there is no reason to suppose that this fact was not present in Aristotle's mind and influenced to some extent his words. The antithesis between " ends in general " and " ends of theoretical and practical science " seems illusory, for every end of human activity must imply a cor- responding TrpaKTiKri fTria-Tr'ifi.r) which shall teach the means of realis- ing it. Mr. Burnet's account of Justice is novel and interesting. To discuss it here briefly would be unprofitable, and a mere statement of it must suffice. Mr. Burnet holds that there are two species of " the diorthotic just," one of them depending on a direct " arith- metical proportion " (if the phrase may be used), the other on an inverse " proportion " of the same kind (a - b = d - c). The latter of these is TO wri*^. He thus rejects Prof. Ritchie's view that Catallactic Justice is a third species of Particular Justice, of lower rank than " the dianemetic just " and " the diorthotic just " In conclusion it is necessary to add that the external form of the book is worthy of its contents. The page is most beautiful, and those responsible for the production of the book deserve highest praise.