Human Function Argument - Essay Example

Aristotle’s Human Function Argument: Based on the human function argument, Aristotle had argued that a clear concept of happiness can be realized if the human function could be studied and understood. It reflects that every function or activity of human beings contains the goodness or happiness in it based on the rationality of the function. Thus with the rational part of the human soul performing an activity or a particular function, goodness or happiness takes place. Aristotle had considered happiness to be the best good that could have happened to a human being.

Thus in order to determine the goodness in man, Aristotle’s function argument states that the function of the human needs to be ascertained. Also, according to him, human life has been stated to be common to plants, as well as to animals thereby having an active life element with rationality (Korsgaard 129-132). The arguments presented by Aristotle as part of the function argument includes: “(1) Humans must have a function, or else they would be idle, which is absurd; (2) Each human body part has a function, so the whole human must likewise have a function; (3) The human function is unique to only humans themselves; (4)Human function is not growth and nutrition because these aspects of life are shared with plant; (5)Human function is not sense perception because this aspect of life is shared with an animal; (6)The part of the human soul with reason is unique to human; (7) The bare capacity of the reason is insufficient to constitute a life function; and (8) Therefore, the human function is the activity of the part of the soul that expresses or requires reason” (Pritchett).

Failure of the Function Argument: Although Aristotle tried his best to determine the human function reflecting the happiness and goodness factors in humans, his beliefs could not stand alone against the questions and criticisms that were raised. Aristotle could not place his arguments successfully as he lacked supportive arguments over the premises he focused on. He could not explain the reason for the human function to be considered unique. When he said that human function is common to plants, it raised questions on the fact as to how two things can be similar only because they share some activities in common.

Also, when he stated about animals, it is not clear whether he meant to say that humans only have functions and animals do not have any function. Different functions can be associated with different features or the same function can be presented in different ways by different individuals or animals. Hence Aristotle’s arguments could not present clearly the meanings of the premises (Pritchett). Critics also could not realize how the goodness of a human being can be associated with the good performance or activity of the individual even if there is a function present in human beings.

Questions could be raised on several thoughts. For example, even if it is believed to be true that the goodness of a human is based on the good activity of the human, the question arises whether it is good to be a good human or whether the goodness of every single human can be determined the same, and so on (Korsgaard 131). Thus the uniqueness of human function could not be proved by Aristotle through his arguments. Evidence was also lacking that could prove two different life forms to be similar. Assumption of things could not be considered as correct that could lead to wrong premises as had been presented by Aristotle (Pritchett).

Conclusion:

From the above study, it could be obtained that Aristotle had tried to prove the human function relating it with the goodness of human beings, but failed to establish his arguments owing to lack of shreds of evidence on the premises he discussed, against questions and criticisms. It can be said that in order to prove his points, further research and analysis would be necessary such that the premises could be modified and actually connected with each other successfully establishing the argument of human function.