Building on the strengths of the first edition, the second edition of the Irwin Nicomachean Ethics features a revised translation, expanded notes, an expanded Introduction, and a revised glossary.

Mr Shewring, C.Q. XXV. 14, gives statistics of the clausulae favoured in Aristotle's Ethics. I have applied them to test a few conjectural emendations that I happen to have published, with the following encouraging results: Emendations that substitute a good clausula for a bad one: 96a 18 στερον λγομεν for στερον λγομεν κb, στερον λεγον cet. 09b 5 αυτος φλκειν [δεν]. 48a 14 κλαστον τθεμεν [κα γκρατ κα σφρονα]. 63b 13 τν φιλαν [καθπερ ερηται]. 71a 35 ατν <δον εναι . (...) Emendations that substitute one good clausula for another: 97a 9 τ ατ τοτ for τ ατ τοτο γαθν κb, τ ατ or ατ τ γαθν cet. 25a 22 τν γαθν [κα γνοεν αυτν]. I may be pardoned for omitting my one or two alterations that substitute a bad clausula for a good one. My text adopts a MS. variant, or a conjecture of another scholar, similarly supported by Mr. Shewring's test in the following places: 99b 6, 02a 20, 10b 31, 15a 8, 20a 22, 20b 2, 22a 28, 32a 11, 33a 1, 34b 33, 50b 34, 53a 1, 59a 3, 61a 2, 63a 3, 64a 23, 66a 34, 75a 6, 79a 22. (shrink)

The following emendations, if sound, illustrate the relation between the two chief MSS. Kb shows a gloss that has ousted the true reading, while Lb has a conflation of the two: 1097b 14: τ δ αὒταρκες τίθεμεν μονούμενον ρκιον κα αρετν ποιε τν βον κα μηδενς νδε Lb: αρετν κα ρκιον Mb : Kb has αρετν alone. I suspect the true reading to be ρκιον alone. On this αρετν was a mistaken gloss: it is out of place here, as it (...) belongs to the concept τέλειον which was discussed in §§ 1–5 and to which we return below, τι δ πάντωναρετωτάτην μ συναριθμονμένην. The poetic ρκιον is used to explain ατ-αρκες, and is itself paraphrased κα μηδενς νδε. αύτ is explained by μονούμενον, just as b 9 ατ was explained by τ ντι βίον μονώτην. (shrink)