It's been a bit since I last talked about the philosophy of things, and what I've learned - and, to be honest, I've been a bit scared of writing this entry.
Recorded, my adventure thus far has been fundamentally simple in nature. The temperature of the air, the clarity of stars, observations of the world alone without interpretation. An excellent pursuit of pleasurable things.
Following this would be some sort of life that consists in perceiving, but this seems to be shared in by a horse and a cow and by every animal. So what remains is some sort of life that puts into action that in us that has articulate speech; of this capacity, one aspect is what is able to be persuaded by reason, while the other is what has reason and thinks things through. (p. 79)
But, the intent and goal underlying this journey is not, unfortunately, pleasure alone. I'm looking for happiness, which I believe now to be much different, along with direction and, perhaps, some guiding principles from which to move forward upon.
So this entry is going to feature a bit more gravitas than my other notes, as this deals in matters of life and heart, which I believe is worth being serious about.
Please don't feel pressured to read it. It's likely to be more personal than my other notes.
If you're interested in such philosophy, however, I'd welcome your thoughts on these subjects. Mature understanding is best achieved when we can engage with one another, as some of you are very aware of my thoughts on :)
Note: This is my understanding of Book 1 of Nicomachean Ethics as I see it through the lens of my lived experiences - it should not be taken as a verbatim representation of Aristotle's thoughts. I try to note where I notice my own thoughts diverging from my review of Aristotle's, but as with all things it's impossible to be totally objective about such things.
It is also consonant with our statement that the one who is happy is said to live well and do well, since the end was just about said to be some way of living well and acting well.
- Nicomachean Ethics Book I p.85, Aristotle
Let's talk about happiness.
Aristotle takes an inductive approach to happiness in Book 1 of Nicomachean Ethics - starting off with base observations about "what is good", then gradually approaching the concept of happiness through observations about the goodness of things, and how it applies to people.
So, let's follow his reasoning. We'll start off by understanding good.
Aristotle believes that there is a tangible difference between capital-G absolute Good, and good. This is an important distinction - Plato, who mentored Aristotle, approaches the idea of absolute Good in Republic, where absolute Good is a concept and idea that exists independent from human society and perception.
Aristotle's focus is not on the absolute idea of Good - rather, it's good, as in the context of "to do something well" or "of good quality". This is said to be the end goal of all activities - when you are building a ship, for instance, you intend to build a good ship, seaworthy and durable. When making a dinner meal for guests, you make a "good" meal - delicious and excellent in design. If you are a medical doctor and have a focus on healing people, the goal of your art is to make people healthy and whole in physique.
In these contexts, we do all of these things for the sake of good - a ship or meal of poor quality is far less useful, and far less beautiful. A bad bandage can lead to an infected wound. The master chef/shipwright/doctor do these things to ensure the result is good.
Now - from the previous examples, you can see that what is good is synonymous with something being complete.
Further, we can extend our definition. A complete dinner alone would include enough calories to feed the present guests; a good dinner, however, would both have sufficient calories (completeness), and be delicious and aesthetically prepared (beautiful), just as a good ship is durable and strong-looking, and a healthy human is healthy both on the inside and out. So, we say the term "good" can be represented as something that is both beautiful and whole.
[...] in an unqualified sense, the complete is what is chosen always for itself, and never on account of anything else. And happiness seems to be this sort most of all, since we choose this always on account of itself and never on account of anything else (p. 76)
And thus, we arrive at our Aristotelian definition of happiness, the human life that is both whole and beautiful.
Self-sufficiency is the way Aristotle describes this aspect.
And by the self-sufficient we mean not what suffices for oneself alone, living one’s life as a hermit, but also with parents and children and a wife, and friends and fellow citizens generally, since a human being is by nature meant for a city. [...] But we set down as self-sufficient that which, by itself, makes life choiceworthy and lacking in nothing, and such a thing we suppose happiness to be (p. 79)
I say "wholeness" because that is the term that most closely represents this aspect in my mind. I further believe this has three primary aspects, though I digress from Aristotelian view in this manner:
Of the professional part, that is closely addressed below. I think it's important to do what you love - and by that I'm quite serious. If you do not feel you love and are passionate for the thing you've dedicated your life to, then I would argue you should desist and switch to that thing instead, as soon as possible.
You are a thinking person with agency over your own life. You are free; lead the life you want right now. Start. Do not dally!
Of the social part ... this is a topic I remain unsteady and unsure about.
I firmly believe it is important to maintain a small circle of close friends, who you feel improve your Self and you may improve their Selves in turn. I am incredibly fortunate to have individuals of this type in my life.
I don't know if it's important to have a significant other or not. This has been a topic I've oscillated on; relationships of this nature can either be tremendously constructive to one's life, or tremendously destructive. I am, however, starting to become convinced of the value of having an equal in your life that you love, and who loves you in turn. This person must be, without reservation, good for you in your mind, and visa versa.
I want to talk about this idea of an S.O. further, but not now.
In regards to family - yes. Find the people who will love and support you without reservation or love withheld - they are your family.
Finally, of the spiritual component - this is what I seek to understand now. In an ideal life, these are the principles that direct your every single action, your ideals and things you aspire to, and the overarching concepts which guide your life. In a sense, this is the most important category, for the other two are subject to it - but development in all three is, I believe, necessary for this idea of wholeness.
That was a beautiful thing you did.
Even with the verbosity of the above - I believe the idea of the beautiful is more crucial than wholeness when describing a happy life.
But first - it's important to differentiate beautiful from that which is handsome, or physically nice. In Aristotle's definition, beautiful is something that is graceful and noble in nature - such as "beautiful" in the context shown above.
One element of a happy life is one in which everything of significance that one does is done beautifully.
[...] as in the case of a harpist and of a serious harpist, and this is simply because in all cases the superiority in excellence is attached to the work, since the work of a harpist is to play the harp and the work of a serious harpist is to play the harp well — if this is so and we set down that the work of a human being is a certain sort of life, while this life consists of a being-at-work of the soul and actions that go along with reason, and it belongs to a person of serious stature to do these things well and beautifully (p.81)
Sachs makes a note about this use of the word serious - and is something I want to bring up.
The word serious (spoudaios) is usually translated as “good” or “excellent,” as though it were simply an idiom of ancient Greek that had lost its root meaning [...] A serious harpist is not just one who is highly skilled technically, but one who chooses well the uses worthy of that skill. (p. 116)
So, in this situation, we say that a serious person is one who focuses on directing their energy and ability toward tasks that are worthy of it.
How does this apply?
In all things living, one should make a conscious effort to act beautifully - or, with grace and nobility, in all things professional, social and spiritual.
Further, either as a product of these constituent elements or as a source, the beautiful seeks that which is just. If you ever are in a situation in which the beautiful is hard to distinguish, then seek that which is most just according to what your heart indicates to you is just, and it is likely to be the path of the beautiful.
Hexis, or the active condition, is a Greek term Aristotle uses to describe the qualities and "active disposition" desirous for interactions with the world.
Loosely, it can be translated as "disposition", "habit" and "character" - however, Sachs is emphatic that hexis forms a cornerstone to many of Aristotle's writings. I think some understanding of this concept can best be conveyed by his own words.
Socrates suggests that whatever knowledge is, it must have the character of a hexis, an active having-and-holding that depends on the effort of concentrating or paying attention. (p. 17)
The verb 'echein' means to have something in that effortful way, or to be something in an enduring and active way, and its corresponding noun is 'hexis'. By choosing that word, Aristotle says that a moral virtue is an active state or condition. (pp. 17-18)
Perceiving may seem to us, as it seemed to many of Aristotle’s predecessors, to be a passive state, but he is emphatic that we are only open to the world by the effort of holding ourselves ready. (p. 18)
It says that a hexis comes into being out of an 'energeia'. The latter word does not mean mere behavior, however repetitive and constant it may be. It may be translated as being-at-work, and this is the central idea in all of Aristotle’s thinking. (p.27)
And, perhaps one of the more important statements,
Responsible human action depends upon the combining of all the powers of the soul: perception, imagination, reasoning, and desiring. These are all things that are at work in us all the time. Good parental training does not produce them, or mold them, or alter them, but sets them free to be effective in action. This is the way in which, according to Aristotle, despite the contributions of parents, society, and nature, we are the co-authors of the active states of our own souls. (p. 33)
The way I understand it at this point, is that hexis is an active condition - an active disposition, where we seek to use reason to reconcile a chaotic reality and chaotic set of emotions into deliberate action, at any given point in time.
It's not a principle that one switches on and off, such as "thinking cap on" or such - rather, hexis should be the constant state through which we percieve and act at any given point, constantly adjusting and responding to new situations and realities as they become emergent.
Note: From my understanding, hexis, when applied to happiness, is the 'being-at-work' of the soul in accordance with reason - or, you strive to reconcile the principles that guide your life with your emotions, thoughts, desires with the present reality. Happiness is achieved when desire, thought, reason and goal are all acting in harmony with reality.
Following the verbosity of the above paragraphs, let's try to summarize it.
Happiness is the highest form of good to which any person can aspire. Happiness has two primary attributes: the wholeness of life, by which we mean a person has all of their needs beautifully fulfilled: friends and family, work one is passionate for, and purpose and intent with their life; and beauty in all things, by which we mean one is actively maintaining a beautiful (both graceful and noble) approach to all things.
Do everything with gusto, style and panache.
Imagine your life as a sailing ship, and you are the shipbuilder.
This ship will sail on both calm days, and through torrential rains and terrible storms; the seas will be kind to it at times and viciously cruel at others, without regard for fairness or precedent.
Your job is to build a ship capable of surviving anything; if you build it completely and beautifully enough, it will not only survive the seas of the world but it will do so with nobility and grace.
One final thing.
Happiness as Aristotle details it is a good and high aspiration; but, fundamentally, knowledge is useless unless it can be applied, and philosophy doubly so unless it is applied.
I'm worried that, even having read this and agreed fundamentally with its contents, leading such a life will be a challenge I'm not prepared to focus on - that I've grown too used to ignoring the path of wisdom in favor of that of comfort.
Perhaps, in matters such as this, strength is a virtue.
Regardless - let us try, to lead a beautiful life.