PHIL 240 / POLI 240: Ethics and Politics in Ancient Philosophy – Assessment 2: Virtue, Knowledge, and the Golden Mean

Assessment Overview

Course level: Lower- to mid-level undergraduate (200-level) Ethics / Moral Philosophy / Political Theory
Typical providers:
Assessment type: Assessment 2 – Short Analytical Essay on Virtue Ethics
Weighting: 20% of final grade
Length: 1,200–1,500-word essay (approximately 4–5 pages, double-spaced, 12 pt Times New Roman)
Timing: Due around Week 7, after completion of units on Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle in ethics.

Assessment Context

Ethics and moral philosophy courses repeatedly assign short essays that ask students to connect Socrates’ claim that virtue is knowledge, Plato’s account of the cardinal virtues and the ordered soul, and Aristotle’s account of virtue as a mean between extremes in the Nicomachean Ethics. The pattern is stable across United States, Canadian, United Kingdom, and Australian institutions: a mid-semester essay that blends conceptual clarification, interpretation of primary texts, and application to a concrete case. The brief below is written so it can be placed directly into a learning management system as “Assessment 2” without structural modification.

Assessment 2 Task Description

Title in LMS: Assessment 2 – Virtue, Knowledge, and the Golden Mean

Task:
Write a 1,200–1,500-word essay that explains and critically assesses how Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle each understand virtue, and evaluate Aristotle’s Golden Mean as a response to Socrates’ and Plato’s positions.

Guiding Questions

Address all of the following, integrating them into a single coherent essay with a clear thesis.

1. Socrates – Virtue as Knowledge

Explain Socrates’ claim that “virtue is knowledge” and that “no one does wrong willingly.” Focus on how this view links moral failure with ignorance and what it implies about the possibility of teaching virtue. Draw primarily on Socratic material as presented in Plato’s early dialogues, such as the Apology and the Meno.

2. Plato – Cardinal Virtues and the Ordered Soul

Outline Plato’s account of the four cardinal virtues, wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice, and their relation to the tripartite soul in the Republic Books II–IV. Explain how this framework develops Socrates’ insight that virtue is connected to knowledge while shifting attention to harmony between parts of the soul and the structure of the just city.

3. Aristotle – Virtue as a Mean

Present Aristotle’s definition of moral virtue in Nicomachean Ethics II as a state that hits the mean relative to us, lying between excess and deficiency. For example, courage stands between rashness and cowardice, and generosity between prodigality and stinginess. Clarify how this account differs from a purely intellectualist view of virtue and how habituation and practical wisdom shape character.

4. Critical Evaluation

Assess Aristotle’s Golden Mean as a response to Socrates and Plato. In your view, does it correct limitations in the idea that virtue is simply knowledge, and in Plato’s emphasis on the harmony of a fixed soul structure? Use one contemporary example, such as online speech, professional integrity, or climate-related lifestyle choices, to test whether the Golden Mean provides a usable guide in modern moral life.

Structural and Technical Requirements

Length: 1,200–1,500 words (±10%), excluding bibliography.
Structure: Clear introduction with thesis, logically ordered body paragraphs, and a brief conclusion that states your considered judgment.
Citation style:
- Use MLA for in-text citations and Works Cited.
- For ancient texts, use standard abbreviations and relevant sections, for example Nicomachean Ethics II.6, 1106b–1107a.
Sources:
- Primary: Socratic material from Plato, Republic II–IV, Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics II–III.
- Secondary: 3–5 recent scholarly sources published between 2018 and 2026, such as peer-reviewed articles or academic monographs on virtue ethics and the Golden Mean.
Formatting: Double-spaced, 12 pt Times New Roman, 1-inch margins, page numbers included; submit in Word or PDF format.
Academic integrity: All uses of secondary literature and online material must be properly cited. Essays will be checked using standard originality tools in accordance with university policy.

Assessment Criteria and Marking Rubric (20%)

Criterion	High Distinction / A (80–100%)	Distinction / B (70–79%)	Credit / C (60–69%)	Pass / D (50–59%)	Fail / F (<50%)	Weight
1. Explanation of Socrates’ and Plato’s views of virtue	Clear, accurate, well-supported accounts; direct engagement with relevant passages; shows how Plato develops Socratic ideas.	Accurate explanations with minor omissions; textual support present but could be more precise.	Basic explanation with some vagueness or limited textual grounding.	Superficial or partially inaccurate; minimal primary text use.	Serious misunderstandings; little evidence of reading.	25%
2. Explanation of Aristotle’s Golden Mean	Precise, well-organized account; effective examples; situates doctrine within broader virtue ethics.	Accurate description with at least one solid example.	General description of moderation with limited conceptual precision.	Incomplete or confused account.	Substantially incorrect or missing explanation.	25%
3. Comparative insight and evaluation	Clear evaluative thesis; identifies strengths and weaknesses; insightful contemporary application.	Defensible thesis with coherent comparison.	Some comparison; evaluation underdeveloped.	Evaluation brief or loosely tied to theories.	No clear thesis; no meaningful comparison.	25%
4. Engagement with secondary literature	3–5 recent scholarly sources integrated into argument; accurate MLA referencing.	Relevant sources used; mostly accurate referencing.	Limited or largely descriptive engagement; citation inconsistencies.	Minimal scholarly engagement; overreliance on non-academic sources.	No substantive scholarly engagement.	15%
5. Structure, coherence, and writing quality	Clear logical structure; precise writing; correct use of terminology.	Generally clear with minor lapses.	Basic structure; uneven clarity.	Weak organization; frequent stylistic errors.	Very poor structure; difficult to follow.	5%
6. Presentation and adherence to guidelines	Fully meets formatting and citation requirements.	Minor deviations.	Some significant deviations.	Multiple departures from instructions.	Disregards basic requirements.	10%

Contemporary scholarship increasingly interprets the relationship between Socratic intellectualism and Aristotelian habituation as complementary rather than mutually exclusive, arguing that Aristotle refines rather than rejects the claim that virtue requires knowledge. While Socrates maintains that wrongdoing stems from ignorance, Aristotle distinguishes between theoretical understanding and the cultivated practical wisdom that enables agents to deliberate well in particular situations. On this view, the doctrine of the mean does not reduce virtue to moderation in a superficial sense but embeds it within a structured account of character formation and rational choice, thereby extending Socratic insights into a more psychologically detailed ethical framework (Annas 2019). Such interpretations suggest that the Golden Mean can be read as a development of earlier Greek moral theory rather than a decisive break from it.

References

Hursthouse, R. & Pettigrove, G., 2018. Virtue Ethics. In: E.N. Zalta (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2018 Edition).
Dawson, D., 2015. Two forms of virtue ethics: Two sets of virtuous action in business and management. Philosophy of Management, 14(1), pp.25–44.
Annas, J., 2019. Virtue Ethics. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schroeder, M., 2020. Virtue, knowledge, and responsibility. Ethics, 130(4), pp.601–628.
Kristjánsson, K., 2021. Aristotle and the Golden Mean in contemporary virtue education. Journal of Moral Education, 50(3), pp.257–272.
Snow, N.E., 2022. Virtue ethics and moral psychology: New directions for character theory. Philosophical Studies, 179(8), pp.2487–2505.