No one debates the vast influence that Aristotle has had on Western culture. It seems every discipline, from Science, to art, to literature, bears the mark of his influence. His ideas and his succinct ordering of them have incalculable influences in today’s world. He had rigid ideas regarding human relationships, happiness, virtues, deliberation, justice and friendship. His Nicomachean Ethics is a conclusive work that governs what he considers to be both the “ultimate” good and specific “goods” attainable for man. He believed that things were directed towards specific ends, and that a virtuous entity was one that stayed true to it’s objective. These things, because of their universal nature, have not changed in their essence, but the world of today is certainly much different than the one that Aristotle was interacting with. This essay seeks to explain his belief on the previously mentioned concepts and compares them with our modern world’s concept of them and how they related to our contemporary notions of the best places to work and how our civic relationships should be governed.
Happiness, Aristotle believed, was one of the goals of the human existence. By goals, he means to say that happiness is an “end” or ultimate reason for human existence. Meaning, that a virtuous person is a happy person. He writes in his Nicomachean Ethics that, “As far as its name goes, most people virtually agree, since both the many and the cultivated call it happiness, and suppose that living well and doing well are the same as being happy” (1095a17-20).
Here he connects the concept of happiness with the concept of living well, or leading “the good life.” But he cautions that most people do not necessarily agree with what exactly is the definition of happiness. He makes a distinction that the masses and wise men come to different conclusions about what this is, and as he considers wisdom to be of the highest rank of virtue, that the wise men’s definition is the correction one: “But they disagree about what happiness is, and the many do not give the same answer as the wise” (1094 20-21).
The masses, believe happiness to be some external thing that elevates them to a higher plain. Aristotle lists external things that give comfort or prestige or wealth, which the masses equate with happiness. He writes the masses believe that happiness in this view relies on things like “pleasure, wealth, or honor” (1094 21-22). He notes however that these things are fickle and subject to change, and the desire of each man to them differs.
Aristotle is ever-seeking things that do not vary from person to person but are constants and universally indivisible. Therefore, these fickle notions of happiness that the masses have could not possible be the highest good, or correct notion of it since, they are by the differing of public opinion, varying.
Vulgar men, according to Aristotle, identify happiness with sensual pleasure and therefore seek lives of enjoyments that could include sex, intoxicants, and gluttony.
The importance for Aristotle in understanding what exactly constitutes happiness cannot be understated since he believed it to be not just a goal worth pursuing, but a central purpose for human life (1095, 1-5). This is not so different from our notions of happiness today. The contemporary belief behind our purpose is that people should be productive and engaged in accurate employment, but also that they should have some stake in the work of their hands.
Aristotle noted that everywhere he looked, people were seeking pleasure. He did not see these things as bad in and of themselves, but took issue with their excesses. He saw animals seeking this as their end good, but separated man from animals and thought the humans were destined for greater things than beasts. Our natures, he saw as incomplete, and our goal then was to work to perfect that nature, and through the process of perfection, the end result was happiness (1098a 12).
Our urges must be governed by our rationality. Without that, they are in control of us instead of us in control of them. He writes that “the function of the man is to live a certain kind of life, and this activity implies a rational principle.” The man who is pursuing the “right path” he considers “the good man” (1098a 13). He writes that, the function of a good man is the good and noble performance of these {living a certain kind of life based on rational principle} and if any action is well performed it is performed in accord with the appropriate excellence” (1098a 13).
Virtue is an essential part of attaining happiness, since happiness is following the soul within the bounds of virtue. So what constitutes virtue for Aristotle? He has linked it as a prerequisite of happiness; so an understanding of it is essential in order to both understand what exactly constitutes happiness and also how to attain it. He writes that “He [the good man] is happy who lives in accordance with complete virtue and is sufficiently equipped with external goods, not for some chance period but throughout life” (1101a 10).
Aristotle then, does not see the culmination of virtue, or the end result of happiness as something subjective, but as an objective reality of complete actualization for those who pursue the good path. The goods for Aristotle include are health, wealth, friends and knowledge. Lesser goods may give immediate satisfaction, but only the highest goods can possibly lead to a sustained happiness that will stay with the bearer of it for the duration of their life. Aristotle would likely have some choice words to direct at our current culture, which sees value in a consumer culture of increased consumption. He would see fast food, TV, video games, etc. not only as lesser goods, but perhaps deprivations. A McDonalds hamburger, he might not even categorize as food, but as the contrary of food, or its deprivation.
One of the most important “goods” for Aristotle necessary for the attainment of human happiness is friendship. He places great value on self-sufficiency, but does not count aloneness, or being solitary and away from society as self-sufficiency. He writes that, “Now what we count as self-sufficient is not what suffices for a solitary person by himself, living an isolated life, but what suffices also for parents, children, wife and in general for friends and fellow citizens, since a human being is naturally political” (1097b 9-14).
Basically, humankind exists within the context of a society. So to deprive someone the basic interaction of family life, social life, and political life, is to take mankind out of the context of his own nature, which, since this is not central to the design and “goal” of mankind, is once again a deprivation of an intended virtue.
Aristotle saw three kinds of relationships existing between people and developed ethics for governing each. There are relationships of pleasure, that have to do with sex, relationships in which the concern is on what the other person can do for the individual—political. But the virtuous relationships are ones in which individuals cultivate virtue together. These are the relationships to strive for.
Though Plato is more known for his writing on political writing and duties in his Republic, The Nicomachean Ethics also lists the duties of the individual to the society, and what constitutes justice within a society. Book five of The Nicomachean Ethics concerns itself exclusively with justice. Here Aristotle writes that with regards to both justice and injustice that we must “consider what kind of actions they are concerned with, (2) what sort of mean justice is, and (3) between what extremes the just act is intermediate” (1051b 1).
Since justice is a consideration of “another’s good” it is essentially functioning element of a social society. Justice is part of virtue, or the proper execution of virtue.
As stated in the thesis of this essay, Aristotle’s ideas permeate through the thread of Western society. But today how relevant are his notions of “the good” and civic duties when applied to with our modern day notions of the best places to work. Great Place To Work (GPTW) is a company that has partnered with over 5,500 employment organizations that cumulatively contain 10 million workers in the world. Like Aristotle, who concerned himself with exacting and precise definitions that are universal and unchanging, GPTW has using the same method defined what constitutes a “great place to work” (GreatPlaceToWork.com).
Just as relationships for Aristotle was central and key to happiness, relationships are key for what GPTW defines as an acceptable environment. In these relationships they believe that employees must “trust” who they work for, must “have pride” in the tasks they job requires them to complete and must “enjoy the people they work with.”
In comparing this to Aristotle’s three types of relationships (relationships of pleasure, utility or shared virtue), we could consider GPTW’s definition as fitting best into one of shared virtue, based on mutual trust and pride, which can only be achieved if both parties in the relationship are seeking the same mutual good.
GPTW says that from the manager’s perspective employees must, “work together as a team/family in an environment of trust” (GreatPlaceToWork.com). Just as Aristotle does not believe that a person can be happy and completely alone, GPTW believes in a community of employees working together in a social context rather than alone.
Just as Aristotle saw the virtues put forth in Nicomachean Ethics as universal truths, GPTW sees their metrics as universal, applicable across cultures and time. On their website they write that, “The fundamental model, confirmed by Great Place To Work through over 25 years worth of analysis of employees’ own opinions, is universal and consistent year-over-year, country-to-country. It applies not only to all organizations but to companies with diverse employee demographics.”
GPTW asks some of the same questions of Aristotle. He asked if Virtue and happiness could be defined outside of subjective perspectives and came to the conclusion that through a rational thought process they could as he enumerated in Nicomachean Ethics.
Aristotle believed there were tangible results of a man following the Golden Mean and cultivating the “goods” and “virtues” to achieve happiness. GPTW also believes that there are metrics by which their designation of a great place to work can be measured. Their list of 100 Best Companies “consistently outperform[s] major stock indices by 300%” (GreatPlaceToWork.com).
Just as Aristotle believe that his definition of the highest goods was not merely a subjective measure of his opinion, GPTW believes that they measure for the highest ideal of an employer and its relationship to its employees it not merely their opinion, but based on 25 years of research that yielded consistent results.
Across are world today there are a myriad of employment situations that one can look at. From slave labor conditions, to exploitive labor, to employers who are out for their own benefit at the expense of employees (which according to Aristotle would be a relationship of utility), to the “great” places to work that have been awarded the title by GPTW.
Aristotle saw the highest end of human potential was happiness. This is, essentially, the same metric used by GPTW in determining what companies belong in their list—employee’s happiness. Just as Aristotle listed the virtue he believed were an essential part of true happiness, GPTW has measured based on employee surveys which employees saw themselves as the happiness, and what conditions led to this belief. Happiness is not a concept that changes across time. The emotion of contentment or happiness is the same now as it was 3,500 years ago when Aristotle was writing his Nicomachean ethics. Using real world metrics, GPTW is, without intending to, affirming both the methods and outcomes of Aristotle.
Works Cited
Aristotle. Trans. Ross, W. D.. Nicomachean ethics. Raleigh, N.C.: Alex Catalogue, 2000. Print.
"Great Place to Work® Institute United States." Great Place to Work® Institute United States. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2013. <http://www.greatplacetowork.com/>.
