Here in America we often assume that the pursuit of happiness is a tenant of existence, and an "inalienable" right, here in the States. When in fact, it was little more rhetoric to drive a point home to an overbearing colonial power. Regardless, the thinkers of early America did, indeed, pull from much more established sources. And while I haven't done the research necessary to suggest the specific sources from which Thomas Jefferson pulled, the concept of happiness is one that is often a concern for the ardent thinker, the philosopher, the political theorist. So this is where we'll begin... with a quick look into a timeless concept from the perspective of ancient individuals.
Though ancient political thought includes thinkers from multiple civilizations, Greek philosophers were some of the earliest contributors to political theory. And while some had differing approaches, it is quite evident that the philosophy of some is, at times, best when complimented by the thoughts of another. This is the case with Aristotle and Plato. Aristotle addressed happiness as the primary end of government within the polis. As social and political animals, it is only natural that happiness, the highest and most fulfilling state of being, is a consequence of a governed life. Though Aristotle adequately identifies the components of such a claim, it is still critical to understand Plato’s analyses of the human soul to gain a full understanding of how the potential for happiness is often contingent on the presence of government.
Plato defines happiness as a quality of existence that results from the ordering of one’s soul. According to Plato, every soul is comprised of three components: reason, spiritedness, and passion. For an individual to have an ordered soul, reason must rule over the other two components. Therefore, in line with Plato’s teachings, to attain true happiness, one must allow their rational sense to surpass the whims and desires of their more spirited and passionate sides (Wiser 18-19). Plato will argue first and foremost that moderation is the key to ordering one’s soul. Yet in the seventh installment of his Epistles, he emphasizes the importance of government claiming that “…no city nor individual can be happy except by living in company with wisdom under the guidance of justice…” (Wiser 18). Therefore, as Plato utilizes the Kallipolis, or the ideal city, to identify the need for the “guidance of justice,” he begins to suggest that true happiness is, in part, contingent upon a life governed by politics.
As Plato clearly provides the groundwork, Aristotle continues to illustrate the important relationship between happiness and government. In chapter nine of Book 1 of his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle explicitly identifies “politics,” or the essence of government, as the primary means of ensuring happiness for its people. “…We stated the end of politics is the best of ends, and the main concern of politics is to engender a certain character in the citizens and to make them good and disposed to perform noble actions” (Wiser 43). For Aristotle, good government and structured life within the polis promotes virtue among the governed, and virtue in turn breeds happiness. Aristotle argues that as life within the polis not only satisfies our political and social needs, but is a vital aspect of attaining true happiness as it lends order to the soul.
Aristotle continues on to answer the question of how governed society can support happiness. First, as social animals, humans require community and friendship. Unlike modern thinks who are more prone to view friendship as a distinctly personal concern, Aristotle clearly identifies it as the mortar of political life (Wiser 47). Therefore Aristotle highlights the importance of society and its subsequent levels within the polis. While a life of moderation and individual devotion are important, life within the family and village are just as critical. All three levels of the polis ultimately promote homonoia, a kind of friendship that involves a sense of equality of mind and virtue between individuals. These particular relationships are critical in attaining true happiness as it preserves the political life in the polis.
There is one other aspect of society that helps identify the importance of the polis; the magnanimous man. The magnanimous man is one of good virtue who embraces a life of moderation. Since Aristotle claims that a good society depends of the imitation of such virtues, these magnanimous men serve to illustrate true happiness within the community and answer the call to govern. As rulers, these men innately desire to foster goodness among their citizens not only for the preservation of their regime but to ensure the individual citizen’s happiness as well (Wiser 48). Therefore the combination of community within the polis and tangible examples of virtuous men allow a properly governed society to promote happiness among its constituents.
By assessing the works of both Plato and Aristotle, it is evident personal happiness is contingent on the structure and governance of social living. Plato assists in this analysis by highlighting the importance of the soul and suggesting that government plays an inescapable role in one’s pursuit of happiness. Aristotle then proceeds to solidify this argument both in his emphasis on virtue as well as his approach to life within the polis. Overall, according to ancient political theory, the government is in part responsible for personal happiness as its primary end is to provide an environment when the individual can thrive and reach his potential as a part of a governed community.
**be sure to check out this text by James Wiser , it was very instrumental in the creation of this post**
Good stuff.
ReplyDeleteHave you thought about doing a post on anarchism in contrast to this? I personally have a pretty profound distaste for anarchists' shtick but it might be interesting to see how their view of happiness and the government's role (or lack of role) in it stands up against Plato's.
Also your reflections on it obviously.
Keep posting hope to read more!