On aiming for the Good

I have been thinking that Plato and Aristotle were "birds of a feather" for a little while now and that I could consider myself in the same camp. Lately, I've been questioning that belief though.

I agree that if we do not choose everything for the sake of something else (for this would go on until your racing for the best spot at the local retiring home) we must aim at the Good. Further, I claim that we must be content in speaking of such subjects and with such premises as to indicate the truth roughly and in outline, and in speaking about things which are only for the most part true. As Aristotle writes in Nichomachean Ethics,

"A young man is not suited to only listen to lectures...for he is inexperienced in the actions that occur in life."

Rationality can teach us how to get (most effectively) from A to Z but it can't tell us where Z is located. For such persons at the incontinent knowledge brings no profit. This is where Aristotle and I split with Plato: philosophical examination is not a reliable source of happiness or political nous. It isn't the end of the world though, there are many philosophers who regarded the quest for understanding as an end in itself, not as a path to success. After all, as most of those who have been bitten by the philosophy bug will tell you, philosophers mainly philosophize because they cannot help it.