Ho Man Leung
Professor Barbara Herman
Philosophy 22W
21 January 2015
First paper Draft
Aristotle raises the function argument in order to find out what the “final good” is for a human being. He describes this “final good” as some goal that every human’s actions should strive for. At first, he chooses happiness as this ultimate goal, and contends that it is a self-sufficient good in which all human do and desire. He also mentions that this final good can only be achieved by being “virtuous”. However, he is not satisfied with happiness; happiness is a mere feeling/sensation and does not provide a clear explanation of what the “final good” is. Furthermore, couldn’t a psychopath achieve his self-sufficient happiness when he murders for the pleasure/happiness
…show more content…
He raises artisans as examples; the functions of the flute-player and sculptor is to play the flute and sculpt, respectively. Body parts also apply, as the human eye’s function is to see, as the leg is to walk. He then assumes that for any of these functions, the “good” is to perform that function “well”. The flute-player’s good is to play the flute well, and the eye’s good is to have good vision. Aristotle then questions, if a sculptor and leg have functions, then why shouldn’t a human? This argument is weak in that it is purely an assumption. It relies on teleological philosophy, where everything is accepted to have a function. This also implies that Aristotle assumes that men were designed to have a single function, meaning some high being/entity crafted the human being. However, his words can also be questioning the human function in respect to the human body parts. If body parts each have their own function, then it would only make sense if the whole, or the human, to have a function to which the body parts function for. Although this argument seems better, it still doesn’t serve as a good explanation to why humans should have a function. This argument does not hold any much validity either, as a statement saying a (two-meter-tall) man has little cells, therefore he too is little would also be true in this context. The inference does not make any sense because nothing …show more content…
Since this function must be unique to the human being, he first rules out other beings that have overlapping functions: the plants, for example, are living things too, so the life of simply living and growing cannot be the function of a human. Similarly, the life of perception cannot be it either, since any other animal can perceive. Therefore, he concludes, the function of a human must be the “activity of soul which follows or implies rational principle.”
While his two premises seem to be sound, Aristotle suddenly pushes his logic to an unfavorable ground as he concludes the discussion of what the human function is. Aristotle seems to be deriving this conclusion from the assumption that human are the only beings that are capable of rational thinking. Something else a human being can do that an animal cannot, however, is have sexual intercourse without reproduction in mind. If Aristotle means to make conclusions based on what distinguishes a human from an animal, then the function of a human might as well be to pollute the world with atomic
In this paper, I offer a reconstruction of Aristotle’s argument from Physics Book 2, chapter 8, 199a9. Aristotle in this chapter tries to make an analogy between nature and action to establish that both, nature and action, have an end.
Aristotle believed that those who ruled must be wise. They must possess certain virtues and knowledge that can allow for him to rule for the common good. For someone to Know, he must understand man and the common good of man. Aristotle believed every man is by nature a political animal. Man must forge partnerships with other humans to live the good life. Man is not self-sufficient. It is these partnerships that provide for the basis of the polis or city-state. There is a natural hierarchy of partnerships that lead to the polis. The most basic is that of the family. Marriage is in essence a political partnership. There are certain tasks and duties that neither a man nor a woman can do without another therefore making marriage a necessity for the good life. Following the famil...
In conclusion, Aristotle’s elucidation of happiness is based on a ground of ethics because happiness to him is coveted for happiness alone. The life of fame and fortune is not the life for Aristotle. Happiness is synonymous for living well. To live well is to live with virtue. Virtue presents humans with identification for morals, and for Aristotle, we choose to have “right” morals. Aristotle defines humans by nature to be dishonored when making a wrong decision. Thus, if one choses to act upon pleasure, like John Stuart Mill states, for happiness, one may choose the wrong means of doing so. Happiness is a choice made rationally among many pickings to reach this state of mind. Happiness should not be a way to “win” in the end but a way to develop a well-behaved, principled reputation.
1. Humans must have a function, or else they would be idle, which is absurd. Aristotle directly asks the reader if humans might have no important overall function other than a chosen occupation in society but suggests that this would not be expected of nature. Terence Irwin used the word idle in his 1985 translation when phrasing this disjunct of Aristotle?s question.
Aristotle begins his ethical account by saying that “every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and every choice, is thought to aim for some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim” (line 1094a1). Though some things might produce higher good than others, Aristotle looks for the highest good, which he says we must “desire for its own sake” and our actions are not decided on some other goal beyond this good itself (line 1094a20-25).[1] This highest good is then realized to be happiness (line 1095a16-20).
...Aristotle’s conclusion relates human good, activity of soul and excellence. It is this expression of virtue through action that allows happiness to be obtained. Such dependence on virtue sets the scene for Aristotle to examine virtue more closely. He will elaborate on the two parts of reasoning well (virtue). The first part of reasoning well is having the right desires to aim oneself at the right good and not just the apparent good. The second part of reasoning well is knowing how to get to this proper desire. This will be further elaborated in book two where Aristotle will explore what it means to reason well and what is means to be virtuous.
Aristotle’s emphasis is on the city-state, or the political world as a natural occurrence. He says “every city-state exists by nature, since the first communities do.” (Aristotle 3). Aristotle continually reiterates the notion that the creation of a community comes from necessity; individuals aim at the highest good of all, happiness, through their own rationality, and the only way to achieve happiness is through the creation of the city-state. Aristotle follows the creation of a household and a village to the creation of the city-state in which citizens are able to come together to aim at the “good which has the most authority of all,” (Aristotle 1) happiness. In turn, this necessity for the formation of a city state comes from the idea of man as a rational being. “It is also clear why a human being is more of a political animal than a bee or any other gregarious animal… no animal has speech except for a human being.” (Aristotle 4). For Aristotle, human beings are political animals because of their ability to speak, their ability to communicate pleasures and desires, and their ability to reason. Aristotle’s state com...
From pursuing pleasure to avoiding pain, life seems to ultimately be about achieving happiness. However, how to define and obtain happiness has and continues to be a widely debated issue. In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle gives his view on happiness. Aristotle focuses particularly on how reason, our rational capacity, should help us recognize and pursue what will lead to happiness and the good life.';(Cooley and Powell, 459) He refers to the soul as a part of the human body and what its role is in pursuing true happiness and reaching a desirable end. Aristotle defines good'; as that which everything aims.(Aristotle, 459) Humans have an insatiable need to achieve goodness and eventual happiness. Sometimes the end that people aim for is the activity they perform, and other times the end is something we attempt to achieve by means of that activity. Aristotle claims that there must be some end since everything cannot be means to something else.(Aristotle, 460) In this case, there would be nothing we would try to ultimately achieve and everything would be pointless. An ultimate end exists so that what we aim to achieve is attainable. Some people believe that the highest end is material and obvious (when a person is sick they seek health, and a poor person searches for wealth).
Aristotle’s thoughts on ethics conclude that all humans must have a purpose in life in order to be happy. I believe that some of the basics of his ideas still hold true today. This essay points out some of those ideas.
Looking though and trying to understand exactly what Aristotle means in his writing is not an easy task by any means. But in trying to see what he meant and also see if in fact to agree or disagree that is in fact very difficult, when truly not fully understanding
1.) Aristotle begins by claiming that the highest good is happiness (198, 1095a20). In order to achieve this happiness, one must live by acting well. The highest good also needs to be complete within itself, Aristotle claims that, “happiness more than anything else seems complete without qualification, since we always…choose it because of itself, never because of something else (204, 1097b1). Therefore, Aristotle is claiming that we choose things and other virtues for the end goal of happiness. Aristotle goes on to define happiness as a self-sufficient life that actively tries to pursue reason (205, 1098a5). For a human, happiness is the soul pursuing reason and trying to apply this reason in every single facet of life (206, 1098a10). So, a virtuous life must contain happiness, which Aristotle defines as the soul using reason. Next, Aristotle explains that there are certain types of goods and that “the goods of the soul are said to be goods to the fullest extent…” (207, 1098b15). A person who is truly virtuous will live a life that nourishes their soul. Aristotle is saying “that the happy person lives well and does well…the end
...rts of the soul in order to find the function of human beings which is activity in accordance with reason. It is first in this function that men ought to be virtuous. It is thanks to the same distinction that Aristotle gives the different types of virtues. However while Aristotle dedicates most of his piece to the practical, active aspects of virtue it is necessary to keep in mind the virtues of the life of study which is reintroduced in the chapters 7 and 8 of book X. Thus what appears as a contradiction in these chapters is in fact a reminder and a justification of the honourable and divine aspect of the life of study which is necessary to reach complete happiness.
Aristotle feels we have a rational capacity and the exercising of this capacity is the perfecting of our natures as human beings. For this reason, pleasure alone cannot establish human happiness, for pleasure is what animals seek and human beings have higher capacities than animals. The goal is to express our desires in ways that are appropriate to our natures as rational animals. Aristotle states that the most important factor in the effort to achieve happiness is to have a good moral character, what he calls complete virtue. In order to achieve the life of complete virtue, we need to make the right choices, and this involves keeping our eye on the future, on the ultimate result we want for our lives as a whole. We will not achieve happiness simply by enjoying the pleasures of the moment. We must live righteous and include behaviors in our life that help us do what is right and avoid what is wrong. It is not enough to think about doing the right thing, or even intend to do the right thing, we have to actually do it. Happiness can occupy the place of the chief good for which humanity should aim. To be an ultimate end, an act must be independent of any outside help in satisfying one’s needs and final, that which is always desirable in itself and never for the sake of something else and it must be
He identifies things that do not change. We can see right and wrong, and what is living well and living poorly. Aristotle on decision making states that the moral virtue is a state of character in which we feel things in accordance with the cause. This means we feel them in the right way, to the right person, at the right time, for the right reason. We also need practical knowledge, which for Aristotle means knowing the right thing to do in a particular circumstance through understanding the context, knowing what matters, and effective reasoning to bring about what matters. One can know the right thing to do in general, and what is required, but this is of little use if one fails to apply knowledge to the
To Aristotle leading a good life, for the most part, means fulfilling one’s purpose in a way that is good by balancing life’s pleasures. In order to determine if an object fulfills its function in a good way, we must first consider the object. If we were to agree that a car should be reliable, then we could also agree that reliable car should be considered a good car. Similarly, animals, for example, possess certain traits like the power of locomotion, and the desire to seek nourishment and reproduce. According to Aristotle, an animal that is a fast runner, or a very successful hunter would be considered a good animal. Following this reasoning, Aristotle believed that in order for a human to be good, he or she must also fulfill their purpose. Yet, as an advanced species, we must go beyond fulfilling these animalistic functions like eating right and reproducing well. In order for a human to live the good life, he or she must first be good at using powers of intellect and reason, which Aristotle believed were unique to only humans and, as a result, constitute our purpose (McManaman). It seems that in addition to being a good human, Aristotle also recognized pleasure must play a role in the good life. Still, he recognized the importance of balance when indulging in acts of pleasure claiming that a life of only pleasure was too animalistic (Richter, 2008). In this way, Aristotle believed the key to a good life was to fulfill one’s function a good way, while balancing life’s pleasures in a way that allowed the...