Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics: Function Argument

2248 Words9 Pages
Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics: Function Argument Aristotle contends that the human function is exercise of the soul that expresses or requires reason. This argument is found in Nicomachean Ethics (Aristotle, Book I). Aristotle has proposed a practical and concise argument, however the passage in which it is contained fails to juxtapose all of the premises to other parts of the text, thus falling short of lending them supporting arguments; Aristotle displayed an elaborate approach beginning from what is commonly believed, and proceeded to overlap these views with the human function dispute, a vital component of the work in its entirety. Consequently, one may be left unresolved about Aristotle’s ambiguous propositions. Aristotle’s aforementioned premises are as follows: First: Humans must have a function, or else they would be idle, which is absurd. Aristotle confronts the reader with a question of whether or not humans perhaps have no overall function aside from a their chosen occupation within society, but implies that this is not indicative of nature; Terence Irwin used the word “idle” in his 1985 translation when wording this separation of Aristotle’s question. Second: Each human body part has a function, so the whole human must likewise have a function. This premise appears to jive with Aristotle’s argument that many goods serve higher goods within a hierarchy (Aristotle, Book I). Aristotle conjured the concept of a hierarchy to better consider the functions of body parts; each body part serves a function that plays a larger part within a different function, and so it seems that the largest unit, the human body itself, must have a function. Third: The human function is unique to only humans themselves. Aristotle does not seem to accept that features unique to humans could simply be useless; he plainly states that as a goal, he is searching for a unique
Open Document