• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

—Aristotle (384–322 bce) Nicomachean Ethics1

Everyone knows the Bluth family is full of eccentric characters, each notable for his or her peculiarities and foibles, and all suffering from some form of arrested development. Standing out among this motley crew of misfits is George Oscar Bluth Jr. (or Gob, as the family calls him), who is perhaps the most morally ambiguous character of the series. Whether the context is one of his numerous and quite public career failures, a romantic indiscretion, or a botched attempt to show up his brother Michael, the one line that we have come to expect most from Gob is “I’ve made a huge mistake.”

While nearly everyone in the family utters the words, Gob has made them his catchphrase. Whereas other characters tend to learn from their mistakes, Gob never does. Gob is thus an interesting case study in the role of error in the development of “moral character.” Someone who fails to do what is right in a particular situation might not be held morally blameworthy by others if that action seems out of the ordinary (or, “out of character”) for that individual, or if he or she appears to learn a lesson from the experience (or, “builds character”). But, what about Gob, who never seems to learn his lesson? Aristotle (384–322 bce), the grandfather of character-based ethics, offers us only a little help when he writes, “When the injury takes place contrary to reasonable expectation, it is a misadventure. When it isn’t contrary to reasonable expectation but does not imply vice, it is a mistake.”2 While any reasonable person could likely predict the injuries caused by Gob’s assorted goofs and gaffes, how do we determine whether these actions imply vice or simply exhibit “mistakes?” A closer look at some of the major contributors to this character-based moral philosophy may help us answer this question and reveal both the comedic and philosophical value of Gob’s character.

“And I’m Not Afraid to Make Mistakes. Or Have You Forgotten to Read This . . .”3

Let’s consider one of Gob’s first notable foul-ups (is it correct that this is Gob’s FIRST notable foul-up?) (from “Key Decisions”) in light of Aristotle’s thoughts on character. Trying to further his career as a professional magician, Gob proudly announces during Marta’s interview for Acceso Mexico that he plans to stage an escape from the prison where his father is held.4 This single act isn’t enough for Aristotle to claim that Gob lacks arête, or moral excellence (despite it being so inconsiderate to Marta). Many moral philosophies look to the intentions or to the consequences of a particular act as the litmus test for determining moral worth.

Aristotle, on the other hand, believed that intentions and consequences were only relevant for determining someone’s hexis, or moral “disposition.” According to Aristotle’s formula, one should aim to fine-tune one’s moral disposition through a rational activity of avoiding extremes because cultivating this kind of disposition could lead to human flourishing, what he called eudaimonia (often translated as “happiness”).

Thus, only by examining a series of actions can we make an Aristotelian judgment of Gob’s moral character. His actions and intentions are only important insofar as they apply to his moral disposition. According to Aristotle, any virtuous trait, such as courage, rests between two extremes—in the case of courage, these would be foolhardiness (an excess of courage) and cowardice (a deficiency). The evidence suggests that Gob has strayed very far from the path of flourishing. Once in jail, Gob’s scheme requires passing a key through his digestive system (quite an impressive trick, considering we are never told how Gob got his hands on a key that presumably can break him out of his cell in the first place, though it was fun watching him attempt to swallow the key). Instead, he discovers he didn’t account for some of the realities of prison life:

Gob: Is there a private bathroom nearby?

George: You’re looking at it.

Gob: No, no, no. I