Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Aristotle – How to live a good life

ralphammer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 183 posts

Re: Aristotle – How to live a good life

#161

Post by popalchemist »

stonethrowaway wrote: post #122
Asymo wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, Aristotle was born into a more privileged family, but I'm not sure if it's accurate to say that he was rich. However, his financial conditions and the fame that his life's work brought him seem to have had the opposite effect of what you suggested. There is a painting by Rembrandt that represents exactly this. The painting depicts Aristotle with one hand holding a chain of gold and the other hand resting on a bu…

It’s an allegorical painting by Rembrandt, nothing more.

Statements that end in "nothing more" are almost always incorrect. The only way one could make such a statement with total certitude would be to be omniscient, as the phrase implies an exhaustive understanding of all possible facts.

Re: Aristotle – How to live a good life

#162

Post by mbivert »

Almondsetat wrote: post #63

The very beginning of this post contains a critical passage. What makes a good knife? Of course, a good knife is a knife that cuts well. But what does it mean to cut well? Just the sharpness of the blade? What about grip comfort? And balancing? And stickiness? And weight? And what about the thing being cut? Can a knife cut everything well? As you can see, we are already dead in our tracks, as asking what makes a knif…

> and this is why ancient philosophers, many of whom didn't really explore nuance

Couldn't we say that most of Plato's is about progressively refining from a rough starting point for example? Or, consider even ITT how interpreting Aristotle properly requires understanding the nuances of his original vocabulary.

Regarding the knife example, while there's value in going deeper for those willing to study knife handling, it was probably not deemed relevant to the point being made: a tool is a good tool if it can perform a reasonably well-suited task, when used by someone reasonably skilled.

This is an abstract point of view, which can be appreciated by anyone working with tools, from cooks to programmers: in any domain, a good tool is one which fulfills the task for which it was originally conceived.

Re: Aristotle – How to live a good life

#163

Post by petsfed »

prewett wrote: post #158
petsfed wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my core criticisms to Plato and later Aristotle is not a criticism of Aristotle qua Aristotle, but in the way people give this almost religious reverence to the particular words they use. As if by saying that >Telos, or finality, also gives morality its proper and objective ground: what is morally right or wrong follows, ultimately, from one's nature. I have some intuitive understanding of what telos is and wh…

Not the parent, but as I understand it the post is saying that morality is not defined by outcome, but rather by consistency of the object's purpose. A sentient chair choosing to fall apart when you sit on it is being "immoral", opposed to its purpose. > I'd argue that Scholasticism, that is, the marriage of Middle-Ages Christianity to the truthy-sounding gobbledygook of Aristotle, set the case for the moral authorit…

a) Yeah, that's fair. Everything I know about Eastern and Russian Orthodoxy could fill 2 post-it notes, if I write big.

b) It is dismissive, because Aristotle's solutions should be dismissed. He and Plato before him are very good at identifying problems, but then they both present quasi-mystical solutions to those problems.

The grandparent talks at length about how materialism (that is, that we are made of matter and therefore have material concerns) completely denies us knowledge about what telos actually is. This might be my scientific instrumentalism showing, but if we postulate some entity X, and then say, because of the nature of the universe, we can never actually determine what X is then why do we care about X? That is, if a person dies before they can (as you say) love others sacrificially, did that person live a bad life? Or was their purpose to die early, to serve as some sort of lesson? How can you know? Can you even know?

That's what I mean when I say "truthy-sounding". It seems to wrap things in a nice neat little box, it certainly sounds profound, until you really look at it and realize, oh no, that didn't solve anything.

I'm not going to rise to the gender bait, but the concept of species is mutable, because speciation occurs on such long timelines that its impossible to point to just one generation and say "cousins from this branch are definitely species A and cousins from that branch are definitely species B". I'm strongly of the mind that "discrete species" is a lie we tell ourselves so we don't have lose too much sleep trying to reconstruct the extended family tree of all life on earth.

Re: Aristotle – How to live a good life

#164

Post by MichaelZuo »

dcre wrote: post #109
harimau777 wrote: post #101

It seems to me that this either underemphasizes the importance of happiness or assumes that happiness will be an inevitable byproduct of virtue; even if we define happiness very broadly to include things like "satisfaction" or a "sense of purpose". Part of me suspects that may be because Aristotle was likely upper class and therefore already had success and/or wealth. I'm not sure that I think his arguments work for…

The article says directly: “One might even suffer greatly and still live a virtuous—that is: a good—life. When Aristotle speaks of a “happy” life, he means a fulfilled or flourishing life rather than a pleasurable one.” Suffering certainly does make it harder to be virtuous, but you can interpret that not as disregarding the poor but as giving even more justification for orienting society toward satisfying everyone’s…

To go even farther, virtue, to any notable extent, only accumulates under hardship.

There’s very little virtue to be had in enduring insults when living in a palace, and waited on hand and foot by servants, but quite notable to endure insults when living in severe hardship.

Re: Aristotle – How to live a good life

#165

Post by HKH2 »

hasbot wrote: post #118

> Aristotle says that humans have a capacity to be good, but it is up to us to develop our character. This is best achieved through study and habit. Cool. So, then I just draw the rest of the owl? I have no idea where to begin to develop my character.

Well, you have decisions right in front of you. Character is made through action.

Re: Aristotle – How to live a good life

#166

Post by HKH2 »

pnut wrote: post #107
harimau777 wrote: post #101

It seems to me that this either underemphasizes the importance of happiness or assumes that happiness will be an inevitable byproduct of virtue; even if we define happiness very broadly to include things like "satisfaction" or a "sense of purpose". Part of me suspects that may be because Aristotle was likely upper class and therefore already had success and/or wealth. I'm not sure that I think his arguments work for…

Happiness and sadness are emotions - inherently transient. I have actually thought that "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" was aan error, and should have been "life, liberty, and the pursuit of fulfilment"

Yes, pursuing happiness is shortsighted.

Re: Aristotle – How to live a good life

#167

Post by dcre »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #164
dcre wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article says directly: “One might even suffer greatly and still live a virtuous—that is: a good—life. When Aristotle speaks of a “happy” life, he means a fulfilled or flourishing life rather than a pleasurable one.” Suffering certainly does make it harder to be virtuous, but you can interpret that not as disregarding the poor but as giving even more justification for orienting society toward satisfying everyone’s…

To go even farther, virtue, to any notable extent, only accumulates under hardship. There’s very little virtue to be had in enduring insults when living in a palace, and waited on hand and foot by servants, but quite notable to endure insults when living in severe hardship.

I think that’s a more Christian interpretation. I don’t think Aristotle would go that far.

Re: Aristotle – How to live a good life

#168

Post by Xen9 »

parenthesis wrote: post #152
Xen9 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idea: Web page of every phrase in (Koine) greek that meant different thing to the ancient great philosophers than in English language today. This'd help to get a good picture of the Greeks at once for one usually stumbles upon the "different interpretations" slowly.

There are these books: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Greek-Philosophical-Terms-Historica... https://www.amazon.co.uk/Greek-Philosophical-Vocabulary-J-Ur... I have the second one, which I found useful when studying ancient Greek philosophy in English translation.

I will have to make an analysis of regular expressions of heuristically most useful & heuristically highest quality academic source materials.

Re: Aristotle – How to live a good life

#169

Post by stonethrowaway »

popalchemist wrote: post #161
stonethrowaway wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s an allegorical painting by Rembrandt, nothing more.

Statements that end in "nothing more" are almost always incorrect. The only way one could make such a statement with total certitude would be to be omniscient, as the phrase implies an exhaustive understanding of all possible facts.

Yeah because Rembrandt had all the facts on Aristotle. Spitting image of the chap that painting.

Re: Aristotle – How to live a good life

#170

Post by namaria »

Xen9 wrote: post #138
dcre wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article says directly: “One might even suffer greatly and still live a virtuous—that is: a good—life. When Aristotle speaks of a “happy” life, he means a fulfilled or flourishing life rather than a pleasurable one.” Suffering certainly does make it harder to be virtuous, but you can interpret that not as disregarding the poor but as giving even more justification for orienting society toward satisfying everyone’s…

Idea: Web page of every phrase in (Koine) greek that meant different thing to the ancient great philosophers than in English language today. This'd help to get a good picture of the Greeks at once for one usually stumbles upon the "different interpretations" slowly.

Koine greek postdates Plato, Aristotle and Socrates by around 200 years.
Post reply on HN