- A thesis on Aristotelian virtue ethics as the intermediate. **To be revised
Is there a possibility of happiness beyond what we immerse ourselves in, that is, is there happiness to be found in Being virtuous and good? Is virtue compatible with meaning and purpose? Is the purpose of life to be a good human being? These are questions this inquiry attempts to answer. This is the beginning of the blog series, The Meaning of Life.
the Parthenon, the Acropolis of Athens -a symbol of something uniquely human: 'art', but moreover the symbol of what we can achieve, what humans can make, the 'art of making'
Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics begins with: "Every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action as well as choice, is held to aim at some good."[1] He then continues by declaring: "Hence people have nobly declared that the good is that at which all things aim."[2] The quick and ignorant fool could here pinpoint falsity in Aristotle's introductory premise, mainly a call of "ad populum". Yet, however you desire to understand the legitimacy of the opening argument, surely one desires to inquire what value it offers, regardless of its legality. After all, is it not the nature of all human action, whether it be the art of making or inquiry of human curiosity, whether is action or choice that adheres or follows, that all have been judged after this first paragraph in Nichomachean Ethics. Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Hume, and Kant are just a few notable names among the great philosophers who have attempted to understand if our father-philosopher Aristotle was right about the nature of Man.[3] Worth mentioning is the emphasis that must be put on the "some good", thus so that one does not mistake that all actions aim at the good in its purity.
Aristotle does not leave action to contend with herself, because all actions aim at something, thus, all actions have an end. Therefore in a deeper sense of purpose, if that is the goal of Man, it is not merely enough to aim at 'some' good, the end result must properly represent just that. Clearly, there are similarities to be found in virtue ethics and our inquiry about the Meaning of Life. Mainly, both have the aim to provide a deeper sense of purpose.
Greeks, masters of Art, virtue and good ethical life, and tragedy of the purest
Something distinguishable about Aristotelian virtue ethics is that it focuses on the character, the human itself, and not a set of rules. Unfortunately, however good one hopes to be, even Aristotle, falls prey to his own good nature, mainly, mistaking by taking goodwill and the possibility of virtuousness as an axiom, that a good and virtuous being would always act by means and ends, good as well as virtuous. Would it not have been supreme if humanity would not have required rules; if everyone could adhere to the principles of fairness, equality, and justice — that that was human nature. But the reality is rarely ever so as our supreme imagination senses. Simply, every human is not good and virtuous, as Aristotle well knew (rarely is anyone virtuous), but neither is it true that every human can be virtuous — just as every human being is not happy, as in every millionaire is not happy, regardless if they spent the money on themself, in generosity on others, or kept living a simple life. The truth is that every human cannot be good, virtuous, or happy. Therefore must it not be that we must inquire whether or not virtue is something we should search purpose in?
Let us first understand what Aristotle meant with the emphasis on character. For Aristotle character is not merely who we are, rather, it is a representation of who we are and more (a moral disposition, hence êthos). Character is not just Batman or Robin Hood, a character is shaped by the choices they make, and hence it forms habits, viz., behavior, a set or way of acting (habitus), and together with virtue and practical wisdom the habit can shape a way to lead a good, virtuous and prosperous life — all according to Aristotle. By this statement, Aristotle means that virtue, mainly virtuousness, exhibiting virtuous character as well as a moral disposition, and excellence, is something to be practiced. No Man is virtuous naturally, (apart from God, a matter for further discussion in Part IV), but every Man has a sublime chance of becoming that; but only with a disciplined lifetime of practice. For example, one does not become courageous simply by "being courageous", nor by cowardice — one becomes courageous by practicing, that is by acting courageous, by doing courageous acts. Going beyond and above the natural fear one comes to possess, overcoming challenges in the most prudent and excellent of courageous manner. Courageous as in facing evil on the front foot, and most importantly by challenging oneself. The path to a higher good. - Moral virtues are not inherent. That is factual, an ultimate of Truth. According to Aristotle.
We are in a most delicate and paradoxical matter. At once we are uncertain if virtue is worth the effort, but just as well we are confused about the what if it is not, because if the meaning is not found in being good, does it mean that it can be found in vice and evil, thus dies meaning — but after all, is it not said that "everything is worth a try". Something else may as well challenge our beliefs: ought we not challenge ourselves; why live easy or simple when we can have more — extraordinary things? Aristotle presents the challenge of finding the middle ground, the mean:
"Enough has now been said to show that moral virtue is a mean, and in what sense this is so, namely that it is a mean between two vices, one of excess and the other of defect; and that it is such a mean because it aims at hitting the middle point in feelings and in actions. This is why it is a hard task to be good, for it is hard to find the middle point in anything: for instance, not everybody can find the center of a circle, but only someone who knows geometry. So also anybody can become angry—that is easy, and so it is to give and spend money; but to be angry with or give money to the right person, and to the right amount, and at the right time, and for the right purpose, and in the right way—this is not within everybody's power and is not easy; so that to do these things properly is rare, praiseworthy, and noble". [4]
Thus it seems to be worth taking the road to become virtuous, and thereafter a good human being, and living the higher life, the "good life". Ought not everyone challenge on the path to greatness, even if Aristotle clearly stated that it is not easy? Is the rewards of rarity, praiseworthiness, and nobleness, worth it, and moreover that of being virtuous?
...anybody can become angry—that is easy, and so it is to give and spend money; but to be angry with or give money to the right person, and to the right amount, and at the right time, and for the right purpose, and in the right way—this is not within everybody's power and is not easy...[4]
...to do these things properly is rare, praiseworthy, and noble.
Shall we return to the beginning of it all? A beautiful hill, but that is not really where philosophy began, it is somewhere far more sincere, shall I reveal?
Perhaps it is worth looking at the matter from another point of view. After all, we cannot return back to the 'hill' of Ancient times, of the Greek's golden age. We are at our present, and our present is soon to be the past. Just as then, when the time was to the Greeks — and philosophy not to the weak.
We can see the Ancient Chinese theory of balance of the opposites, Yin and Yang also in virtue ethics. We can see the balance in virtue ethics if we dare to reach beyond the principal emphasis on eudaimonia, which of we are at this stage certain; happiness alone cannot be the source of deeper purpose, the Meaning of Life. Aristotle thought that virtue shall be the aim of Man, but just as well was virtue neither the excess of excellence and goodness nor the deficiency. Virtue is and must be intermediate, a golden mean.
As we have understood it, the intermediate is a solid foundation for being good and virtuous. For everyone involved, particularly oneself, it gives an advantage in life. It is no surprise that the most common advice for life is to everyday work on becoming a better version of oneself. And neither is it a surprise that this ultimate guide for life has been derived from the Greek philosophy on living a good and virtuous life. And the Truth is, becoming and being virtuous is a road of a lifetime. An utmost dedicated act of patience and duly brilliance is required, and perhaps that is enough to be shaped to excellence, of virtue, of Life.
The question then remains, whether or not one shall remain as one has been, or is more to be found in working to become as virtuous as one can be? How can we ever know?
Aristotle was wrong in proclaiming famously: “happiness (eudaimonia[5]) is the meaning and the purpose of life, the whole aim and end of human existence.” After all happiness, in its purest, is a miserable and unattainable goal. The meaning must be found much closer to the opposite, mainly suffering. Because you have not lived if you have not suffered, and it is not a fleeting sensation, it is an eternal condition in life. Perhaps there is no universal meaning at all; we live in a meaningless state. The question remains if it is a permanent condition or if one creates the meaning itself. What is existence and meaning is a question for the next two parts of The Meaning of Life. Firstly, The Meaning of Life - Vol. 2 - The path to nihilism; Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Nietzsche. And secondly, The Meaning of Life - Vol. 3 - The way out of anxiety and despair; Kierkegaard.
But Aristotle was right that there is something to be found in being good and virtuous, or rather in aiming at 'some' good. It is the individual journey to becoming a better Being, a better Man, a better Woman, a better husband, wife, a better father, mother, a better Friend, a better Leader, companion, and advisor[6] — a way to a better life. And if one can find purpose in Being, being just what One is, what One ought to be, well then there is nothing to stop One, even in the face of endless suffering and Death.
"Then it's true: all things aim at something, 'good', and if the aim is intrinsically at something good and virtuous and in becoming just that, then perhaps everyone around Oneself may reap the rewards of that tasty fruit, the Green Apple of the good life." O.K
[1] All quotes from the Nichomachean Ethics will be from the new translation by Robert C. Bartlett and Susan D. Collins, by the University of Chicago Press. In the first sentence, Aristotle introduces key terms such as techne (=art), not art like a painting, rather the art of making something, eg. shoemaking, and praxis (=our actions), and lastly, proairesis (=choice), tied to how we choose regarding the longing and desiring that causes action. Nichomachean Ethics, Book I, Chapter I, p.1
[2] Nichomachean Ethics, Book I, Chapter I, p.1, second sentence
[3] Further reading: my blog series on the Nature of Man, mainly are we born good or evil, or are we made what we are by the goodness or corruptness nature and people we are surrounded with. Conflict and Bloodshed, Part I , Conflict and Bloodshed - Part II
[4] Aristot. Nic. Eth. 1109a: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0054%3Abekker+page%3D1109a
[5] eudaimonia does not simply translate to happiness. Eudaimonia is not a fleeting feeling, it is the product of joy, when one succeeds and lives life to the fullest, to excellency.
[6] and so much more
Comments