Aristotle and Human Nature - Essay Example

Aristotle and Human Nature Aristotle was born in Stagira in Thrace, Greece in the year 384 BCE. His father was the court physician to the king of Macedonia. Aristotle is one of the icons of classical Greek philosophy. He went to Athens at the age of seventeen to train under the tutelage of another great Greek philosopher, Plato, who had founded a school of philosophy known as the Academy in Athens. He was later to be the only person to rival Plato in terms of influence on Western philosophy. Human nature was a subject that made both of them interested a lot and this essay will explore what they felt about this subject. Though there seems to be a lot of similar ground in both their thoughts yet Aristotle later markedly differed from the views of his mentor. Plato (427-347 BCE) and Aristotle (384-322 BCE) both, defined society in holistic terms and regarded it as an organism in which the constituent parts were necessarily related to the whole. Plato, in particular, laid special emphasis on the unity of the social organism, each individual part clearly defined in terms of its subordination to the whole. Society to Aristotle on the other hand, was a differentiated structure formed of separate elements which, while contributing to the whole, retained their separate entities. To Plato, society was a unified system structured around the division of labour and social inequality. "Social health or social order was the product of 'wise legislation' in which the interests of the whole exerted priority over those of the individual parts." (Smith, Page: 15) On the other hand Aristotle's idea of society was anti-atomistic. The complex and differentiated structure of the social whole was made up of groups and not individuals. The foundations of it lay in human nature; that man was by nature social and political and therefore desired to live with others in communities. Therefore, according to Aristotle, the lives of individuals were invariably linked with each other in a social context. He agrees with Plato that a life of virtue is not only rewarding for the person who is virtuous but also good for the community in which he belongs. He also agrees that the highest form of human existence is that in which man is able to exercise his rational faculties to its fullest. He expounded his theories on moral conduct and human nature in several efforts like Eudemian Ethics and Magna Moralia, but the most complete work which survives to our days is the Nicomachean Ethics. In Nicomachean Ethics, he discusses in length about man's natural desire to achieve happiness. He then discusses what this happiness means and described human volition and moral deliberation. He described the three different kinds of friendship and the value of each. He then defended his conception of an ideal life which consisted of intellectual pursuit. In his views he agrees with Plato that a life of virtue is not only rewarding for the virtuous but is also beneficial for the society in which the individual belongs. He is also in agreement with Plato when he says that the highest form of human existence is one in which man exercises his rational and mental faculties to their fullest. Both Plato's and Aristotle's philosophies are anti-Sophist. They both attempt to draw a theory of what is the essence of a good life and their theories are based on the foundations of their knowledge about the stable nature of reality. But there the similarities end. "Whereas Plato is a rationalist viewing our knowledge of reality as derived from intuitive reason, and an idealist locating ultimate reality in an eternal, immutable world of Ideas, Aristotle is an empiricist, anchoring all knowledge of reality in perpetual experience, and a realist, identifying reality with the concrete spatio-temporal objects of this world." (Pomerleau, 1997) The central discussion of Nicomachean Ethics, revolves around moral responsibilities of individuals, virtues and vices, and how to achieve happiness in life. The central issue is what it takes for a person to be a good individual. It is to Aristotle that we owe the notion of the final end, or, as it was later called by medieval scholars, the summum bonum--the overall good for human beings. Since every activity has a final cause or good, Aristotle argues that there must be a highest good which every human activity aims at. Therefore human beings must aim towards the achievement of virtue since desires and material acquisitions are of lesser importance compared to this. A happy person is one whose personality is appropriately balanced between his desires and his reasoning capacity. True happiness can be achieved through the cultivation of virtues which alone make human life complete. To Aristotle, virtues are dispositions in humans to act in certain ways in response to similar situations. These may be considered to be habits of behaving in a certain way and are developed through repeated actions and corrections which help in refining our habits. "VIRTUE, then, being of two kinds, intellectual and moral, intellectual virtue in the main owes both its birth and its growth to teaching (for which reason it requires experience and time), while moral virtue comes about as a result of habit, whence also its name (ethike) is one that is formed by a slight variation from the word ethos (habit)." (Nicomachean Ethics, Book II) Ethics to Aristotle was an intensely practical discipline aimed at action rather than speculation. Nicomachean Ethics is a teleological or goal oriented approach what he conceives as a good life and his study of human nature. Thus he declares at the beginning of his work: "Everything that is done by reason of ignorance is not voluntary; it is only what produces pain and repentance that is involuntary." (Morris, Page: 20) Aristotle stressed on moderation in actions. Too much or too little are always wrong and virtues lie at the mean of these two extreme states of excess and deficiency. Therefore, when acting in the face of danger, courage is the mean state between rashness and cowardice. Therefore, courage is a virtue. Similarly, generosity, which is a mean between wastefulness and miserliness is a virtue with respect to spending of money. Temperance is also a virtue and so are magnanimity and friendliness. Aristotle applied the power of voluntary choice to individuals in relation to moral responsibility. He carefully considered the aspects of human nature in acting virtuously and accepting moral responsibility. Human action is involuntary only under two distinct conditions, otherwise responsible action is to be undertaken voluntarily. An action may be caused involuntarily because it is induced by force or by ignorance. He also distinguishes between actions caused by ignorance and done in ignorance. Actions of the first kind are non-voluntary since you did not know what you were doing. This action becomes involuntary once you realize what you have done and regret your action. In this transition you also overcome your ignorance. "Everything that is done by reason of ignorance is not voluntary; it is only what produces pain and repentance that is involuntary." (Nichomachean Ethics, Book III) Again, an action done in ignorance is not always involuntary. So if you shoot your enemy while you are drunk or you are angry then your action cannot be considered fully involuntary or having been committed in ignorance since you are responsible for your drunkenness or for your inability to control your fury. Aristotle listed six particulars of an action of which someone can be considered ignorant. They are: 1. Who is doing it 2. What is he doing 3. About what or to what he is doing it 4. Sometimes also what he is doing it with 5. For what result 6. In what way (Wayne P. Pomerleau, 1997) Nobody can be ignorant of all of these though all of us may be ignorant of some of these. What is important is whether we feel pain and regret after committing an action in ignorance and then we are no longer ignorant. Our voluntary actions depend upon the choice we make among alternative courses of actions. At the time of this deliberative process, actions are evaluated in the light of what is good and the individual selects the best option for implementation. Therefore, moral actions according to Aristotle, are within our power to perform or to avoid. Virtue is a habit that we can acquire at least partially, as the result of our own volition. Whatever desire motivates us we are free to deliberate what promotes it as a means to an end. It lies within our power to choose between what is fine and what is shameful and act thus and be good or bad. It derives therefore, that vice is voluntary. As has been discussed earlier, we are sometimes responsible for our ignorance. Aristotle believes that it is difficult to reform a person who has developed immoral habits. In opposition to Plato's theory that vice is caused due to ignorance since everyone does what he thinks is good, Aristotle holds the view that since we are responsible for our virtues we should also take the responsibility of our vices and character is a matter of free choice. Though virtue is not the same as intelligence, however, our acquisition of the former is conditioned heavily by our exercise of our intelligence. The greatest impediment to our moral conduct is the failure to behave well and act virtuously even when we have acquired a clear knowledge of what is right and what is expected of us. Though incontinence, or the weakness of the will, is not heroically moral, neither is it vicious. It is curable since the individual has a moral preconditioning and is able to discern between what is right and what is wrong. Aristotle also differentiated between the kinds of friendships we form based on the purpose for which we form a relation. So there can be a friendship for pleasure and friendship for utility. However, these friendships last only as long as we derive pleasure from common activities that we pursue with our friends, or so long as we derive some benefit by engaging in coordinated activities with our friends. However the best kind of friendship is formed when we engage in common activities with our friends, not for a common pleasure or for a benefit, but for the sake of developing the overall goodness of the other. "The truest friendship, then, is that of the good, as we have frequently said; for that which is without qualification good or pleasant seems to be lovable and desirable, and for each person that which is good or pleasant to him; and the good man is lovable and desirable to the good man for both these reasons." (Nicomachean Ethics, Book VIII) Like Plato, Aristotle too conceives of ethics to be a search into the ultimate intrinsic good. He considers ethics to be a branch of political science since every morally significant human action has a social context. Though he agrees with Plato that the good of an individual is the same as the good of a society he differs from his mentor in arguing that at times when individual good appears to be in conflict with political good, it is better and noble to subordinate individual good to the good of the society and the city. Having said all this, Aristotle goes on to analyze the true nature of intrinsic good. According to him, happiness stems from the ability to fulfill human potentialities. These potentialities are identified by our rational choice, our practical judgment and our recognition of the important of selecting the mean choice instead of one of the extremes. Our tendency is to acquire more and act unjustly. Here education helps to guide us and temper our attitudes. It dissuades people from acting according to these inclinations which are more often guided by our desires for acquiring money or fame. Since possession of moral virtues implies possessions of intellectual virtues as well, it derives that practical wisdom is in essence an intellectual virtue. He was vehemently critical of the Sophists who advocated that freedom means living life exactly as a man wishes to. True freedom according to him, consisted in ruling and being ruled by the laws of the community. Furthermore, he derives and justifies ethical and political notions on the basis of the 'political nature' of human beings to live in a polis. He believed that good life cannot be pursued outside the polis. He made his famous claim that anyone who is incapable of forming a community with others can be taken as a beast or a god. According to Aristotle, the ultimate good that constitutes general happiness must be a final end or intrinsic good, something for the sake of which other things are done, the good must be comprehensive and it must be self sufficient not requiring anything beyond itself. Finally, it must be the most desirable of all goods. Aristotle's views have come under criticism from several critics. Central to his views was his teleological account of nature and of human nature. He committed a fallacy in assuming that whatever capacity distinguishes humans from other beings is the highest and the best. Also, he thought that an investigation of human nature would show us what we ought to do. He proposed an analogue with a knife to conclude that we all exist for a purpose. However, it may be argued that since human beings exist on this earth as a result of random forces of natural selection, we cannot actually determine how they should live. "With respect to ethical judgments, Aristotle expounds that a person should not expect more certainty in methods or results than the nature of the subject matter permits. It is obvious then that Aristotle did not regard ethics as an exact science. His modern critics' explanation of Aristotle's position on ethical exactness is that it was a consequence of the intrinsic elements of his epistemology. Because Aristotle considers universals, concepts, or essences as metaphysical rather than as epistemological, it is difficult, if not impossible, for him to explain how one sees or intuits "good," "value," "ethical," and so on when he is confronted with various optional actions or objects. (Younkins, 2008) Aristotle's arguments are principally elitist in nature. According to him, full excellence can only be acquired by a mature male of the higher class and not by children or women or manual workers or non-Greeks whom he considered barbarians. He even advocated taking away their voting rights. Though it Aristotle's fails in propounding a clear moral code, yet he his work is an important footprint in the study of ethics. (Edelstein, Page: 57) He insists on standards of right and wrong based on character and done with a purpose of general good. He was the first to propose that mental development and progress was a great deal dependent on the actual circumstances that one is placed in, in this world. They are inseparable components in our search to understand the purpose of our existence as human beings. Aristotle's influence on Western philosophy has been profound. For many centuries, philosophers couched their arguments in the form of commentaries on his works and his logic remained virtually unchanged through two millennia. Even though many of his ideas have been superseded or discredited, a lot of what he said still remains valid. Aristotle remains unequalled in the history of philosophy by the sheer breadth of his intellectual curiosity, the depth of his analysis and the vastness of his influence on earlier and contemporary thoughts. Works Cited Swingewood, Alan. "Origins of Sociology". A Short History of Sociological Thought. 2000. Palgrave Macmillan. Pomerleau, Wayne P. Twelve Great Philosophers. 1997. Rowman & Littlefield. Alexander, John M. "Aristotle and Nussbaum's Hybrid Theory of Capabilities". Capabilities and Social Justice. 2008. Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Kemerling, Garth. Aristotle (384-322 BCE), 1996-2006. Philosophy Pages. Retrieved from: http://www.philosophypages.com/ph/aris.htm on December 21, 2008 Kemerling, Garth. Aristotle: Ethics and the Virtues: The Goal of Ethics, 1997-2002. Philosophy Pages. Retrieved from: http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/2s.htm#eth on December 21, 2008 Cohen, S. Marc. "Introduction to Aristotle". Philosophy 433: Philosophy of Aristotle. University of Washington. Retrieved from: http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/433/arintro.htm on December 21, 2008 Younkins, Edward W. "Aristotle, Human Flourishing, and the Limited State". Capitalism & Commerce. 2008. Retrieved from: http://www.quebecoislibre.org/031122-11.htm on December 21, 2008 Martin, Thomas R. "Aristotle on Human Happiness". An Overview of Classical Greek History from Mycenae to Alexander. Retrieved from: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text.jspdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0009%3Achapter%3D15%3Asection%3D16 on December 21, 2008 Edelstein, Wolfgang; Gertrud Nunner-Winkler. Morality in Context. 2005. Elsevier. Smith, Murray E. G. Early Modern Social Theory. 1998. Canadian Scholars' Press. Morris, Herbert. Freedom and Responsibility. 1961. Stanford University Press. Read More