Virtue and the human function

Aristotle's view of virtue and the human function, as presented in Nicomanchean Ethics, puts forth the argument that the true function of man is to pursue a life guide by reason, thus creating eudemonia (or fulfillment). Overall, Aristotle's arguments are perhaps most valuable as a practical guide on how to live one's life. However, his argument that humans as a whole have a distinct function is questionable, as is the concept that all individual humans would share the same function that was limited to reason. Taken together, this analysis reveals Aristotle's understanding of virtue and the human function as a potentially flawed work that nonetheless can have a real practical impact on the individual life.

Overview of Virtue and the Human Function

Aristotle notes in Nicomanchean Ethics, "to call happiness the highest good is perhaps a little trite, and a clearer account of what is, is still required. Perhaps this is best done by first ascertaining the proper function of man." For Aristotle, human flourishing is something that we want for its own sake, and that explains our desire to seek health, money, and recognition, among numerous other things. This human flourishing (which he terms as eudaimonia) is something more than simple happiness (although it often results in happiness), and comes about by living well or doing well in specific activities (praxeis). Eudaimonia is composed of a number of constituents, including the desiderata of wealth, a respected station in life, and good health (Cooper).

The challenge, then, notes Aristotle is to understand the true function of man. This function, notes Cooper, "is not some end state which people consciously or otherwise aim at: rather, it is man's form or essence, the what-it-is-to-be-a-man'" (Cooper, p. 127).

In the original text of his work, Aristotle uses the word ergon, which has commonly been translated as function. However, the word may have a meaning closer to that of activity. Thus, Aristotle goes on to note that all natural kinds of beings have a function that expresses their fundamental nature. Further, he concludes that the good of a kind of being is to express its nature through activities that best express its nature (Harris; Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

Thus, for humans eudaimonia comes through the use of reason "the most divine part of the human being" (Engstrom, p. 115), a distinctive human function, and exercising the virtues.

Aristotle believes that "the good life is one of deliberative activities done with the aim of performing them well or excellently" (Cooper, p. 127).

Humans, notes Aristotle, best express their fundamental nature through virtue. Writes Aristotle, what is good for humans is create eudaimonia, or to engage in "activity of the soul in accordance with perfect virtue." The virtues are thus divided into two main classes, the ethical and the intellectual. Ethical virtues, which can perhaps be better translated as 'excellences of character' include righteous indignation, courage, and friendship (Cooper).

Analysis of Virtue and the Human Function

Aristotle's Nicomanchean Ethics is perhaps most valuable as a practical guide on how to live one's life. Writes Copper, "the Nicomachean Ethics, many hold, is the greatest work ever written on practical philosophy" (p. 126). The greatest portion of this appeal comes from Aristotle's ability to reconcile the cultivation of a pure, inner self with the promotion of the universal good of mankind as a whole (Cooper).

While Aristotle's conception of virtue can be a valuable practical guide on how to live one's life, his philosophy is not without major flaws. In particular, the idea that humans as a whole have a distinct function is questionable. Notes Sumner, "it is not at all strange to ask what the function is of a bricklayer or a kidney. But no answer comes readily to mind when we ask what the function is of a human being-or, for that matter a giraffe or a lichen" (p. 71). Writes Pritchett, "Aristotle's assertion that humans even have a function is optimistic or possibly reached by faulty assumptions." Further, he fails to effectively establish why humans must necessarily possess a function, and why the human function must necessarily be unique (Pritchett).

Given the complexity of human culture, individuals, and interactions, it seems intuitively wrong to assume that the functions of one human individual that create eudaimonia to would be the same as in another. Certainly, even ethical virtues, or 'excellences of character', may vary according to culture. For example, many Asian countries place a much larger emphasis on familial relationships than Western countries, which tend to value individuality above that of the family. Notes Harris, "We should be cautious about Aristotle's assumptions about the species-wide good, especially in regard to humans..." (p. 99).