Aristotle's Critics

Creating the Good Life :Applying Aristotle's Wisdom to Find Meaning and Happiness
by James O'Toole

(Page 7 of 7)

There is a formidable list of critics who have supplied thoughtful arguments against Aristotle's way of thinking: Hobbes, Rousseau, the Mills (Harriet Taylor and John Stuart), and Bertrand Russell are some of the stars of philosophy who, over the centuries, offered refutations to the Ancient's ideas. Today, some modern conservatives argue he is "naïve," "impractical," and "anti-wealth creation" and, on the left, postmodernists claim he is "elitist" and "morally prescriptive." One thoughtful recent critic, David Denby, ends up rejecting the near entirety of Aristotle's philosophy because

I could not dismiss politically correct objections; nor would I want to. No matter how you look at it–and no matter what qualifying historical context you place it in–Aristotle made a disastrous mistake.

Indeed, Aristotle's "disastrous mistake" of political incorrectness has led an entire generation of scholars to question his fitness to stand as a moral guide.

So, are Aristotle's ideas outmoded? Are they impractical, naïve, antibusiness, elitist, and politically incorrect, as his critics on the left and right claim in their briefs against him ? In my reading, Aristotle turns out to be quite a modern fellow, particularly for one now 2,400 years old. Properly understood, the world according to Aristotle corresponds remarkably with contemporary thinking about human capabilities and meritocracy and about how organizations should be structured to maximize effectiveness. He was also deeply concerned with what we today call social responsibility. And if Aristotle wasn't exactly a capitalist, he was a protocapitalist to the extent that his ideas are consistent with modern economic concepts, particularly the linkage of rewards to contributions.

In the middle of a lecture at the Lyceum in 312 B.C. or thereabouts, we can imagine the gray-bearded Aristotle being interrupted by Simplicius, one of his students: "Tell us, Professor, why is it that philosophers are not rich if they know so much?" Aristotle takes no offense. In his mid-fifties, he has a secure sense of who he is and what he believes. If he winces, it is in recognition of how obnoxious he must have seemed years earlier when he had challenged his own teacher, Plato, at the Academy. So Aristotle restrains himself from giving the easy answer: an accounting of his landholdings and gold stashed away for his old age. Instead, he replies: "You raise an interesting question, one best answered by telling a true story about the great Milesian philosopher, Thales, whose work you doubtless recall we discussed last semester . . .

Certain cynical people in Milesia reproached Thales for his poverty, saying it proved philosophy was of no use. So, to make a point, Thales decided to engage in a little demonstration. He was a skilled meteorologist and, from his analysis of the weather in the dead of winter, he concluded there was going to be a bumper crop of olives during the next year. So he leased all the olive presses in Miletus, which he got at a low price because no one bid against him. Then, when harvest time came and the presses were suddenly in great demand, he rented them out at exorbitant rates and made a windfall profit. Thus, he showed that philosophers can easily be rich, but their ambition is of another sort.

Aristotle pauses to decide how much he should explain to his students and how much he should leave them to discover for themselves. He then proceeds: "Doubtless you see the impoverished and 'impractical' Thales understood the workings of the most complicated of economic concepts: supply and demand, monopoly rents, and futures markets ? So, then, would someone in the class explain the point of Thales' demonstration?"

"I get it, Prof," an eager pupil exclaims. "Thales is showing us that almost anyone can learn the ins and outs of finance, learn to play markets, and do economic calculations. In contrast, he wants us to see that few people are able to answer the questions occupying the minds of philosophers: What is justice? What is a good life? What is a good society? What is happiness? He wants to show it is better to spend more time trying to answer such tough, important questions than working on easier, practical ones, right?"

And to be able to answer such profound questions, Aristotle tells his class, one must learn to think like a philosopher. "Of course," he admits, remembering his disagreements with Plato, "not all philosophers end up with the same conclusions because they start in different places and their arguments rest on different basic assumptions. That's why we spend so much class time testing the basic concepts underlying our arguments. If our foundation is rotten, our entire intellectual edifice crumbles when challenged."

So, as I read and thought more about Aristotle, I realized that the intellectual excuses I had used to keep him at bay were faulty. But I still wasn't ready to face the behavioral consequences of accepting his counsel. Intellectually, I grasped the undergirding of his thinking and was ready to see how he constructs the edifice of his moral philosophy on that foundation. But still I resisted. Emotionally, I wasn't ready to get out of the familiar rut I was in. It still didn't "feel right" that engaging in Aristotelian politics and philosophy would lead me to happiness.

And You?

It's time for you to take your own temperature before moving on to practical applications of Aristotle's admittedly difficult and unusual way of thinking. Here are a few questions you might want to consider asking yourself: Where am I searching to find happiness ? What are the main lines of resistance I habitually use when confronted with new ways of thinking that challenge my basic assumptions and upset my comfort level? Are those mechanisms in fact useful, or do they keep me from considering other, possibly more promising, ways of finding true happiness? Are those mechanisms the obstacles on my personal life map that prevent me from achieving the ends I desire?

© 2005 by James O'Toole. All rights reserved. No Part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any other information storage and retrieval system, without the written permission of the publisher.

About the Author

James O'Toole, is research professor in the Center for Effective Organizations at the University of Southern California and Mortimer J. Adler Senior Fellow of the Aspen Institute. He has written 14 books, the most recent being Leadership A-Z.