Introduction to the Function Argument in Nicomachean Ethics
Aristotelian’s function argument has sparked controversial debates across varied forums, especially regarding its importance from a philosophical standpoint. Philosophers and academics alike have increasingly disputed the work of the argument, its validity, and its conclusion. Aristotelian Nicomachean Ethics seeks to offer insights into the discovery of human good. Aristotle describes this good as eudaimonia, which implies a life of happiness. However, several people have objected to his argument that the function of humans is contemplation and reasoning. A review of the function’s argument offers comprehensive insights into why humans have a function, what entails a good function, and an objection to the argument.
The Overlooked Beginning of Aristotle’s Function Argument
The beginning lines of Aristotelian’s function argument have received minimal attention, if any, compared to the rest of the argument. The opening bits in the philosopher’s argument are especially crucial in understanding the subject matter of the entire argument. The opening bits set the stage for the Aristotelian argument that humans have a function peculiar only to them (Evans, 2019, p. 8). Aristotle suggests that the best way to understand the notion underlying the goodness of people is to develop a proper understanding of what constitutes the function of a person (humans).
Clarifying Happiness Through Function
Before drafting his function argument, the philosopher argues that supposedly claiming that happiness denotes the chief good is rightly so but there is a need to establish clarity about what that statement truly implies in the sense of what constitutes good (Ross, n.d.). By this token of logic, Aristotle argues that mustering a clear account of what happiness and/or eudaimonia entails increasingly relies on appealing to the function of a person (Ross, n.d.).
The Concept of Ergon and Human Function
Appealing to ergon, a concept of function is helpful, as illustrated in one of the passages from his function argument. At the beginning of his function argument, Aristotle argues that man has a function just as everything else has a function(Evans, 2019, p. 8). In particular, he clearly states that goodness lies in the function of an activity wherein he claims that man must also possess a function just as a carpenter, a sculptor, a flute player, and any other artist (Ross, n.d.).
The Analogy of Artisans and Body Parts
Indeed, Aristotle presents several rhetorical questions to set the stage for addressing his primary notion of man’s function. He asks why a man would lack a peculiar function when even a tanner and a carpenter have specific functions of their own (Ross, n.d.). Aristotle seems to think that man must have a peculiar function just as artisans and bodily parts have their specific ergon (Ross, n.d.). For indeed, he argues that feet, hands, eyes, among other body parts, have a specific function. Ideally, the function of eyes is to see, that of feet is to walk, and so too does man possess a specific function.
Understanding the Human Function: Reasoning and Contemplation
Aristotle argues that human function is best understood by reviewing what their function is. He argues that the function of man is to be reasonable. Just as a good shoemaker makes good shoes and a good carpenter also makes good furniture, so too does a good human excel at something (Evans, 2019, p. 8). A comparative assessment of bodily parts would also imply that a good eye makes clear vision because this is its final goal.
Final Causes and the Pursuit of Goodness
Aristotle claims that things attainable by action must have an end and that people should not desire things for some specific thing as this could lead to infinite desire (Ross, n.d.). He claims in such a scenario all desire would seem futile and empty. People take action to achieve some kind of goodness (Ross, n.d.). Aristotle seems to think that the function of humans is to contemplate. In this respect, therefore, a good human makes proper reasoning.
Objections to Aristotle’s Function Argument
While Aristotle’s function argument is widely debated across varied platforms, several people find it controversial. Notably, one of the objections to Aristotelian’s function argument is that it is induction and, therefore, a feeble argument for providing grounds why man must have a peculiar function just by merely making comparative assessments to artisans and bodily parts.
Critique of Inductive Reasoning in the Function Argument
Any inductive reasoning is always weak because it entails using relatively fewer observations to justify broader assumptions that are probable at best (Evans, 2019, p. 10). An example of inductive reasoning is claiming the rising of the sun tomorrow. It is not a guaranteed possibility that the sun will rise tomorrow regardless of its rise every other day since the beginning of life on Earth. Therefore, by this token of logic, a conclusion drawn from inductive reasoning thus lacks certainty provided by deductive reasoning (Evans, 2019, p. 10).
Limitations in Aristotle’s Analogies
Therefore, the function argument of Aristotle is critiqued for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the use of bodily parts and artisans lack the capacity to provide representative conclusions to the argument that man has a peculiar function since these are only a few items that have ergon (Evans, 2019, p. 10). Therefore, the token of this analogy warrants the notion that making a conclusive induction that man has a function by comparing it to two factors – artisans and body parts – is weak because of inadequate data to support this assertion.
Inconsistency in Functionality Comparison
Secondly, the examples used by the philosopher to surmise the functionality of man are dissimilar (Evans, 2019, p. 10). In particular, the functions of shoemakers, carpenters, and tanners denote the commodities produced by their art. Nonetheless, the artisans only possess these functions only because they are crucial to society.
Conclusion: Evaluating the Validity of the Function Argument
A review of the function’s argument offers an in-depth assessment into why humans have a function, what a good function is, and an objection to the argument. Aristotle claims that man must have a function just as bodily parts and artisans possess functions. He also claims that man’s peculiar function is reasoning, and a good man must reason properly. Other scholars, however, argue that there is no evidence to suggest that since artisans and bodily parts have peculiar functions, so humans too must have a function. With that said, it seems only fair for Aristotle to assess why people should justify his argument.
For a deeper exploration of philosophical discussions on human purpose and activism, you might find it insightful to read our article comparing the speeches of Martin Luther King and Alicia Garza, which also touches upon themes of individual function and societal impact here.
References List:
- Evans, L.E.J., 2019. Aristotle’s Function Argument: The Human Function and its Peculiarity (Doctoral dissertation, UCL (University College London)).pp. 1-78.
- Ross, W., n.d. Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle. [online] Classics.mit.edu. http://classics.mit.edu//Aristotle/nicomachaen.1.i.html
🎓 Get Expert Writing Assistance Today 🎓
Need help with your academic writing? Our team of skilled writers at Ace My Course Work provides high-quality, custom essays and research papers tailored to your needs. Contact us now to get started!
