Aristotle's Generosity and the Vices of Giving Money to a Beggar
...ly generous, the giver must avoid acting in accordance to any of generosity's vices. For example, to be over-generous is considered as acting wastefully, without concern as to what the taker's intentions are or the quantity that he or she is giving. Aristotle claims that giving wisely in a situation results in the reassuring factor that he or she will give generously to the taker, without giving in excess or to an extent that creates a deficiency in what is or was rightly his or her own. In addition, being wasteful of something that is a necessary possession will not only lead to a lack thereof, but it could also lead to the taker wasting the possession on an inappropriate means. For instance, a person without much food should not give their food away, unless he or she has a sufficient amount to spare, while having enough of the item to sustain themselves as well; this matters especially when giving carelessly to one who might possibly have their own food already. Aristotle continues his argument by stating that this process of careless giving would lead to a cycle of the giver becoming so deficient in his wastefulness that he himself will eventually become the taker. He claims that the people who are prone to being wasteful, simply have the “urge to give” no matter what the circumstances of the situation seem to be (IV, 1: 34). Being intemperate with the act of giving or spending prevents the object of aiming at a fine goal; therefore, a giver of this kind would not be considered a generous person. The second vice that follows the act of generosity, in Aristotle's point of view, is ungenerosity. In this sense, ungenerosity is when a person places their wealth and material goods above all else- in other words, a person who is deficient in giving due to his or her own selfishness. According to Aristotle, a person with enough material possession to spare for any greater good is required to give in order to be generous. Moreover, one who has and will have enough to suffice for his or her own is also required to give more than they have themselves or at least in accordance to achieve his or her final means. For example, being aware that a hundred dollar bill given to someone who will consequently use it appropriately is a correct example of a generous transaction. However, it is more often than never that those who possess material goods in excess become “cheap” or “stingy” habitually, and will, at most times, not spare his or her surplus to help another. Instead, their goods are frugally used solely to benefit themselves. Although Aristotle's generosity theory focuses mainly on the giver, the taker in these occurrences also holds the responsibility of both taking and using generously; for, the giver cannot be named generous, if the taker does not follow through with the aim of the fine. For instance, the taker can easily fall into the trap of being wasteful, if he or she uses what was given for something other than its intended purpose. For example, this occurs if someone is given money for food or a drink, and instead, he or she wastes the money on something inappropriate such as drugs or alcohol. Due to the fact that the ultimate goal of the giver was not reached, both the giver and the taker are considered wasteful. This is evident as Aristotle says, “if someone gives to the wrong people or does not aim at the fine, but gives for some other reason, he will not be called generous, but some other sort of person” (IV, 1: 14). On the other hand, Aristotle explains that the taker can also be ungenerous if he or she is prone to take too much by taking advantage of the givers, no matter what the original intentions had been. Again, in this situation, both the giver and the receiver are considered to be ill-virtued. Aristotle assertio...