(intro music)
Hi, my name is Monte Johnson.
I'm a professor at the University of California, San Diego,
and today I want to talk about the purpose of human life,
Aristotle's Ergon Argument.
The word "ergon" in Greek means
"work," or "job," or "product," or "function."
The term is most clearly used in the context of artifacts
or skills.
So the ergon of a saw is to cut.
The ergon of a house is to protect against weather
and intruders.
And the argon of an architect is to build houses.
A connected term is "arete,"
which means "excellence" or "virtue."
The excellence of a saw is sharpness,
since its function is to cut.
The excellence of a house is stability and security,
since its function is protection.
And the excellence
of an architect is the building of good houses.
Do human beings have an ergon, or a function?
And if so,
do they also have a corresponding arete, or excellence?
Aristotle argues that they do,
And his argument can help us think more clearly
about the purpose of human life.
But before we can discuss the ergon argument itself
we need to discuss some background assumptions
about the nature of life.
Aristotle recognizes four distinct classes of living things:
plants, animals, humans, and Gods.
And we'll set Gods aside for a moment here.
Aristotle defines living things by their
capabilities.
Plants have the ability to grow,
use energy, and reproduce.
When we talk about a plant doing well or poorly,
we refer to these capabilities.
Thus, when a plant is growing properly,
deepening its roots, throwing out leaves
and flowers and shoots,
and fructifying,
we say that it is flourishing.
The opposite happens when a plant's capabilities are stymied,
when a tree, for instance, is stunted,
or leaves are withering and dying on the vine.
Botanists and gardeners know
what is good or bad for plants,
that is,
what kinds of things help
and what kinds of things hurt the activities
related to their capabilities.
Notice that it is not a matter of opinion,
but of scientific fact,
what is good and bad for plants in this respect.
Different plants might require different kinds of nutrients
or different amounts of shade and water.
But every plant is said to do well or poorly
on the objective basis
of the activities related to its specific capabilities.
Animals, in a way, are like superpowered plants.
They too have the ability to grow,
use nutrition, and reproduce.
These things are just as objectively important
for animals as they are for plants,
as veterinarians and zoologists can tell you.
But animals also have other and higher capabilities.
For example animals, unlike plants,
can move themselves around in space.
Animals that cannot do so,
whether because of a birth defect or because they're encaged,
cannot be said to be doing well.
This is why animal rights activists
campaign for larger cages or free ranges for animals,
because it's obvious that it is better for the animals
if they are capable
of exercising their capacity for self-movement fully.
Most importantly,
animals have the capability of perception.
They can feel
hot and cold, smell, taste, hear, and see.
And some of them can do all of these things.
Animals that are incapable of seeing,
even though members of their species are normally
able to do so,
are thought not to be doing as well
as their relatives that can.
With the ability to sense
comes the ability to feel pain and pleasure,
and thus appetite and aversion.
These capabilities are connected with
an animal's capability for self-movement,
since they pursue that which
they have an appetite for
and avoid things
that might interfere with their natural activities.
Now an animal cannot do well if it is deficient
with respect to its plant-like or vegetative capabilities.
But even if it is fine with respect to those capabilities,
it cannot be said to flourish if it is stymied
with respect to self-movement and sensation.
For example,
if an animal is in a lot of pain
or is unable to satisfy its desire for food
because of injury to its organs of movement,
that animal will not be said to do well.
For an animal to flourish,
it needs to be able to move around
and to sense the world in such a way
that produces, for it, pleasure
or at least more pleasure than pain.
Now let's move on to humans.
It's often pointed out that humans are animals,
animals with superpowers.
But it is less often pointed out that
we are plants too.
That is, we, like other animals,
have the capabilities of plants:
growth, nutrition, and reproduction.
And we need to exercise these capabilities
if we are to live.
And like the other animals,
we have the capabilities for self-movement and sensation.
And with these, pleasure and pain,
appetite and aversion.
All life is deeply connected in this way.
But humans also have unique capabilities
that no other animals have,
most importantly the ability to reason and to use language.
These capabilities allow us to cultivate friendships
and social relations,
build and contribute to political structures,
plan for the future,
modify our appetites and desires,
educate our young,
develop music and mathematics,
and even to contemplate the nature of the universe
and the purpose of human life.
If a human does not have these capabilities,
they are missing out on part of what it is to be human.
And if they also lack even the animal capabilities
we might consider them less than animal,
at least while they're in what we,
for these very reasons,
call a "persistent vegetative state."
Thus, we can determine what is good for us
in a parallel fashion to how we determine
what is good with respect to the
other kinds of living things.
Those things that allow us to engage in the activities
that exercise our capacities are good,
and those that impede or prevent this are bad.
Now that we have that background in place,
we should be in a good position to answer
"What, for Aristotle,
"is the ergon of a human being?"
It would be odd if the purpose of human life
was related to our lowest vegetative capabilities,
unless we aspire to being a good plant.
Thus, the exercise of our capabilities for reproduction,
growth and stature, and even nutrition,
however important for us,
cannot be the ultimate purpose of our life
any more than it could be for a brute animal.
Similarly, mere sensation, pleasure,
and satisfaction of our bodily appetites
cannot, as they are for brute animals,
be the purpose of our life.
What makes cows and pigs flourish
can no more make a human flourish
than what makes oaks and vine flourish
can do so for cows and pigs.
Even if those lower vegetative capabilities
must be in a satisfactory condition
in order for the higher ones to do their work.
Thus, by a process of elimination,
we arrive at the capabilities to use reason and language.
These are the capabilities that define us,
which is why Aristotle defined the human being
as a rational animal,
which is reflected in the modern name for our species,
"Homo sapiens."
Thus, the forming of friendships and social relations,
the controlling of our appetites and emotions,
the cultivation of moral and intellectual virtues,
and the observing of the cosmos
and our place in it
are the activities that,
because they correspond with our highest
and most unique capabilities,
give meaning to human life
and represent the flourishing of our kind of living thing.
The things that are good for us
follow from this,
and thus can be determined
with the same degree of objectivity that gardeners
and botanists can for plants,
and veterinarians and zoologists can for animals.
These arts and sciences can objectively determine
what is good and bad for those kind of living things,
and so anthropology and philosophy can determine
what is good and bad for our kind of living thing.
In fact,
the very highest activity,
the one that Aristotle calls godlike,
is philosophy,
because this involves
the pure exercise of reason and thought,
just as the Gods constantly engage in,
according to Aristotle.
And philosophy engages in reason and thought
not only in order to serve our vegetative and animal needs,
but just for its own sake as well,
for the sake of living a human life.
For this reason, Aristotle thought that doing philosophy
was the ultimate end of human existence.
In conclusion,
you should be happy that you're watching this video,
because I have just shown how you are now engaging
in the exercise of your highest
and most godlike capabilities.
Good work.