Aristotle Argues That If Human Beings Are Human Beings Have

Aristotle Argues Thatif Human Beings As Human Beings Have A Prop

Aristotle posits that if human beings, as human beings, possess a proper function—an activity they are specifically designed to perform that distinguishes them from plants and animals—then genuine human happiness, understood as a flourishing and blessed life, would lie in fulfilling that function. This proper function serves as the basis for what constitutes a well-lived life. According to Aristotle, this function is the rational activity of the soul, particularly the exercise of rational virtues, which helps realize human nature's unique capacity for rational thought and moral virtue.

Aristotle’s conception of proper function emphasizes that humans are rational animals, and thus their ultimate purpose or "telos" is the exercise of reason in accordance with virtue. Living well, therefore, involves cultivating virtues—both moral and intellectual—and exercising rational capacities fully. This view aligns with the idea that happiness is not merely a fleeting feeling but a stable state of flourishing, achieved through virtuous activity and the cultivation of character over time.

Assessing whether this is our proper function depends on philosophical perspectives and empirical evidence. From an Aristotelian perspective, the emphasis on rationality and virtue as central to human life appears compelling, as it aligns with our capacity for complex reasoning, moral decision-making, and self-reflection. However, some might argue that defining human purpose solely through rational virtue neglects other aspects of human life, such as emotional fulfillment, creativity, or social relationships.

Alternative views suggest that our proper function could encompass broader elements. For instance, some philosophers advocate for a pluralistic understanding that includes emotional well-being, social connectedness, or even spiritual pursuits as integral to human flourishing. Perhaps human proper function involves a balance between rational activity and other facets such as compassion, aesthetic appreciation, and community engagement. This broader perspective acknowledges the multidimensional nature of human identity beyond purely rational capacities.

Furthermore, critics might contend that the notion of a single proper function is overly reductive, given the diversity of human experiences and individual differences. If humans have varied natures or purposes, then a more inclusive approach to understanding our proper function might be necessary, emphasizing personal development and subjective well-being alongside rational virtues.

Is agreeing with Aristotle's view justified? Or could there be alternative proper functions for humans?

While Aristotle’s focus on rational activity and virtue as the path to happiness offers a coherent framework rooted in our distinctive capacities, it is not the only plausible conception. The multidimensionality of human life invites consideration of additional or alternative functions that contribute to well-being. For example, research in positive psychology highlights the importance of emotional resilience, relationships, and meaningful work as key components of flourishing. These elements suggest that a comprehensive understanding of human proper function might integrate rational virtues with emotional, social, and creative pursuits.

In conclusion, Aristotle’s notion of the proper function as exercising rational virtues provides a strong foundation for understanding human happiness. Nonetheless, recognizing the complexity of human nature, it is worthwhile to consider broader interpretations that encompass various aspects of human experience. Whether we fully align with Aristotle’s view or propose alternative functions depends on our philosophical commitments and empirical insights into what constitutes a fulfilling human life.

References

• Aristotle. (1999). Nicomachean Ethics (J. Sachs, Trans.). Anchor Books.
• White, J. (2012). Contemporary Moral Problems (10th ed.). Cengage Learning.
• Annas, J. (1993). The Morality of Happiness. Oxford University Press.
• Happiness and Human Flourishing. (2015). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/happiness/
• Kraut, R. (2018). Aristotle’s Ethics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
• Nussbaum, M. C. (2000). Upheavals of Thought: The Intelligence of Emotions. Cambridge University Press.
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
• Schwartz, B. (2004). The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less. HarperCollins.
• Singer, P. (2011). Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
• Vallance, E. (2007). Virtue and Well-Being: The Socratic Paradox. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 41, 255–266.