Aristotle’s Function Argument: The Human Function and its Peculiarity Lawrence Edward John Evans Supervised by Dr Fiona Leigh and Dr Elena Cagnoli Fiecconi UCL Thesis Submitted for the Degree of Master in Philosophical Studies MPhil Stud 2nd September 2019 1 I, Lawrence Edward John Evans, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 2 Abstract My thesis is on Aristotle’s ‘function argument’. In my first chapter I explore the opening lines of the function argument, and I investigate whether Aristotle has an argument to support his claim that human beings have a function. I argue that Aristotle has such an argument, and that the questions he asks are therefore rhetorical questions. In my second chapter I consider the problem that the human function cannot be peculiar to humans in the sense of something unique, since reason and contemplation are shared above all with the gods. I also consider the problem that there are many activities peculiar to humans besides reasoning, and why it is reasoning well that marks someone out as a good human being. I argue that Aristotle understands the peculiar function of humans to be the characteristic life that only humans live, namely an ‘active life’. In claiming that humans have a ‘function’, then, the claim is that human beings have a particular kind of life appropriate to them, which, I argue, Aristotle understands to include both practical and theoretical activity. In my third chapter I consider the connection between being a good human and the human good. If the human function is a certain kind of life that humans live, the challenge is why living well is the good for human beings. I argue that, for Aristotle, to be a ‘good’ human just is what it means to live well as a human, in accordance with the specifically human life, so that the good for humans is good for them in so far as they are good specimens of their kind. Hence, in drawing a connection between the ‘life’ appropriate to a human and ‘the good’, Aristotle means to directly show us how human beings can live the good life. 3 Impact Statement I anticipate that my research into Aristotle’s function argument, a famous argument in ancient and moral philosophy, will be primarily aimed at having an impact inside academia. The function argument is of central importance to Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, outlining the human good and human happiness, so it is particularly important that a thorough understanding of Aristotle’s reasoning and desired conclusion is appreciated. The argument is also particularly controversial, and a variety of problems and challenges have been raised against it, especially since the renewed interest in virtue ethics. One of my aims in this thesis has therefore been to clear up what I perceive as a variety of misunderstandings with certain Aristotelian concepts like ‘function’ and the connection, in Aristotle’s philosophical usage, between a thing’s function, its excellence and its good. Additionally, Aristotelian ethics is still a major influence on contemporary moral philosophy, such as in the aforementioned renewed interest in virtue ethics, as well as in studies of ancient ethics and ancient philosophy. This research will therefore be of interest for contemporary moral philosophers, as well as for scholars and others interested in ethics, Aristotle, or ancient philosophy. On the other hand, I do not anticipate that my research into the function argument, an argument little-known outside philosophy, will have any kind of significant non-academic impact. Nevertheless, the function argument focuses on what it is that makes human beings human and how to live a good life. Aristotle’s Ethics also remains persistently influential on the way in which we think about ourselves, and how we ask questions about the good life and the sort of life we should lead. Such questions are surely of interest to many people, whatever their academic background. For individuals, these questions can make people think about the sort of life that they want to live, their capacity for good, and what sort of actions and decisions they should make if they want to do good and live a good life. For the populace generally, questions about the good life can be relevant to influencing issues on the formulation of public policy, especially for those interested with collaborating with academics, as, for example, in relation to issues of the quality of life. For these reasons, while I anticipate that my thesis will be primarily aimed for academics and specialists, certain aspects will have interest for almost everyone, which means that it has the potential to have some impact outside academia. 4 Contents Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Impact Statement ....................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 6 Chapter 1: Aristotle’s Argument That Humans Have a Function .............................................. 8 An Argument by Analogy or Induction? ............................................................................... 9 The Concept of Ergon .......................................................................................................... 17 The Argument from the Crafts ............................................................................................. 25 The Argument from the Bodily Parts................................................................................... 32 Chapter 2: The Peculiarity of the Human Function ................................................................. 39 Absolute and Relative Peculiarity ........................................................................................ 48 Essence ................................................................................................................................. 51 A Kind of Life ...................................................................................................................... 54 Chapter 3: Why Performing the Human Function Well is Good for Human Beings .............. 62 A Fallacy about the Good .................................................................................................... 63 The Good and the ‘Well’ ..................................................................................................... 65 Benefit .................................................................................................................................. 69 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 74 References ................................................................................................................................ 75 5 Introduction The ‘function argument’, as it is commonly referred to, in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics (hereafter the Ethics or EN) is one of the most widely discussed arguments in the Aristotelian corpus, if not in ancient philosophy.1 It is, however, extremely controversial.2 There is dispute over the importance of the argument, what does the work in the argument, the validity of the argument and the conclusion of the argument.3 My aim in this thesis is to critically examine the argument’s three main parts, considering some of these disputes and trying to answer certain questions, examining both the primary and secondary literature. In the first chapter I explore the opening lines of the function argument where Aristotle compares the functions of carpenters and tanners and bodily parts to human beings. He poses his comparisons in the form of questions, and it is debated whether Aristotle has any kind of argument that humans have a function, and if he does, what this argument is. I consider the two possible readings of the questions Aristotle asks – one as an argument and the other not as an argument – and I argue that Aristotle does in fact have an argument, so that we should prefer to read the questions he asks as rhetorical. In the second chapter I explore Aristotle’s important but, I argue, problematic claim that we are looking for the function ‘peculiar’ to human beings; it is important because it allows Aristotle to deduce our function, but it is problematic because it raises several questions. If the human function is peculiar to humans in the sense of an activity that only humans can do, how can the activity of contemplation (which Aristotle later argues is our best activity) be peculiar to humans if it is also shared with Aristotle’s god? Also, are there not many activities peculiar to humans besides reasoning? Lastly, why should performing the function peculiar to humans distinguish someone as a good human, as Aristotle thinks it does? My aim in chapter 2, then, is to explore proposed solutions to these three problems. In seeking our function, I argue that Aristotle means to deduce the characteristic life of humans, which is an ‘active 1 Recent studies include Charles (2017), Baker (2015), Barney (2008), Korsgaard (2008) and Lawrence (2006). 2 For a criticism and defence of the function argument see e.g. Whiting (1988). 3 Gottlieb (2001) 6 life’ involving the combination of practical and theoretical reasoning, or moral