The Complete Aristotle (eng.)

innate in men than prodigality; for most men are fonder of
getting money than of giving. It also extends widely, and is
multiform, since there seem to be many kinds of meanness.
    For it consists in two things, deficiency in giving and excess
in taking, and is not found complete in all men but is sometimes
divided; some men go to excess in taking, others fall short in
giving. Those who are called by such names as ‘miserly’, ‘close’,
‘stingy’, all fall short in giving, but do not covet the
possessions of others nor wish to get them. In some this is due to
a sort of honesty and avoidance of what is disgraceful (for some
seem, or at least profess, to hoard their money for this reason,
that they may not some day be forced to do something disgraceful;
to this class belong the cheeseparer and every one of the sort; he
is so called from his excess of unwillingness to give anything);
while others again keep their hands off the property of others from
fear, on the ground that it is not easy, if one takes the property
of others oneself, to avoid having one’s own taken by them; they
are therefore content neither to take nor to give.
    Others again exceed in respect of taking by taking anything and
from any source, e.g. those who ply sordid trades, pimps and all
such people, and those who lend small sums and at high rates. For
all of these take more than they ought and from wrong sources. What
is common to them is evidently sordid love of gain; they all put up
with a bad name for the sake of gain, and little gain at that. For
those who make great gains but from wrong sources, and not the
right gains, e.g. despots when they sack cities and spoil temples,
we do not call mean but rather wicked, impious, and unjust. But the
gamester and the footpad (and the highwayman) belong to the class
of the mean, since they have a sordid love of gain. For it is for
gain that both of them ply their craft and endure the disgrace of
it, and the one faces the greatest dangers for the sake of the
booty, while the other makes gain from his friends, to whom he
ought to be giving. Both, then, since they are willing to make gain
from wrong sources, are sordid lovers of gain; therefore all such
forms of taking are mean.
    And it is natural that meanness is described as the contrary of
liberality; for not only is it a greater evil than prodigality, but
men err more often in this direction than in the way of prodigality
as we have described it.
    So much, then, for liberality and the opposed vices.
<
    div class="section" title="2">
2
    It would seem proper to discuss magnificence next. For this also
seems to be a virtue concerned with wealth; but it does not like
liberality extend to all the actions that are concerned with
wealth, but only to those that involve expenditure; and in these it
surpasses liberality in scale. For, as the name itself suggests, it
is a fitting expenditure involving largeness of scale. But the
scale is relative; for the expense of equipping a trireme is not
the same as that of heading a sacred embassy. It is what is
fitting, then, in relation to the agent, and to the circumstances
and the object. The man who in small or middling things spends
according to the merits of the case is not called magnificent (e.g.
the man who can say ‘many a gift I gave the wanderer’), but only
the man who does so in great things. For the magnificent man is
liberal, but the liberal man is not necessarily magnificent. The
deficiency of this state of character is called niggardliness, the
excess vulgarity, lack of taste, and the like, which do not go to
excess in the amount spent on right objects, but by showy
expenditure in the wrong circumstances and the wrong manner; we
shall speak of these vices later.
    The magnificent man is like an artist; for he can see what is
fitting and spend large sums tastefully. For, as we said at the
begining, a state of character is determined by its activities and
by its objects. Now the expenses of the magnificent man are large
and fitting. Such, therefore, are also his results; for thus there
will be a great expenditure and one that is fitting to its result.
Therefore the result should be worthy of the expense, and the
expense should be worthy of the result, or should even exceed it.
And the magnificent man will spend such sums for honour’s sake; for
this is common to the virtues. And further he will do so gladly and
lavishly; for nice calculation is a niggardly thing. And he will
consider how the result