much more does it in power and worth surpass everything" (1177b).
It seems, from these passages, that individuality--what distinguishes one man from another--is
connected with the body and the irrational soul, while the rational soul or mind is divine and
impersonal. One man likes oysters, and another likes pineapples; this distinguishes between them.
But when they think about the multiplication table, provided they think correctly, there is no
difference between them. The irrational separates us, the rational unites us. Thus the immortality
of mind or reason is not a personal immortality of separate men, but a share in personal
immortality, in the sense in which it was taught by Plato and afterwards by Christianity. He
believed only that, in so far as men are rational, they partake of the divine, which is immortal. It is
open to man to increase the element of the divine in his nature, and to do so is the highest virtue.
But if he succeeded completely, he would have ceased to exist as a separate person. This is
perhaps not the only possible interpretation of Aristotle's words, but I think it is the most natural.
CHAPTER XX Aristotle's EthicsIN the corpus of Aristotle's works, three treatises on ethics have a place, but tow of these are now
generally held to be by disciples. the third, the Nicomachean Ethics, remains for the most part
unquestioned as to authenticity, but even in this book there is a portion (Books V, VI, and VII)
which is held by many to have been incorporated from one of the works of disciples. I shall,
however, ignore this controversial question, and treat the book as a whole and as Aristotle's.
The views of Aristotle on ethics represent, in the main, the prevailing opinions of educated and
experienced men of his day. They are not, like Plato's, impregnated with mystical religion; nor do
they