Western Civilization

The Sophists believed that it was useless to think about the first principles—the foundations—of the universe. This kind of knowledge was beyond human grasp. They instead argued for more practical considerations. Individuals should improve themselves and their city-state through civic activities. Arête for the Sophists was political excellence—the ability to create laws, policies and have success in public life. Not surprisingly, the Sophists often became tutors to political ambitious people, especially in the democracy of Athens.

Sophists tended to be relativists. No truth, they argued, was universally valid. Keep in mind they believed first principles were beyond human grasp. There were no universal standards. Laws and morality were determined by communities and individual judgment. Sophists challenged the religious traditions and moral values of Athens and other Greek City States. Many sophists contended that religion was the contrivance of man to simply make people obey traditions and laws.

For Socrates, arête was Moral Excellence—the perfection of moral character. According to Socrates, there were objective standards in the world. Those objective standards could be reached through the active use of a person's reason. Moral excellence was achieved when a person lived their life in accordance with these standards. Socrates argued for universal standards of truth and justice.

Knowledge would give the ability to do right. Rationality was perhaps the most distinctive part of being human, according to Socrates. The highest form of excellence ( arête ) was "taking control of one's life and shaping it according to ethical values reached through reflection." (Perry 81)

Perry, Marvin. Western Civilization: Ideas, Politics and Society, 9th Edition. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage, 2009.

Socrates argued, "No greater good can happen to a man than to discuss human excellence every day" (Plato's Apology).

Plato argued that the existence of a higher reality existed. This reality was a world of Ideas, or Forms . These Forms are unchanging, eternal, and absolute. They were the standards of arête —excellence. Arête was attempting to live life in accordance with these standards—standards for beauty, goodness, justice and truth. 

Aristotle was very much a Greek in the era of the city-state. He believed deeply that the city state was the primary institution of Greek life. The good life could only be lived within the city-state.  (Section 4: Aristotle)

For a person to reach their full potential—human excellence (arête)—it had to be done in the context of a political community.

What is our ultimate purpose? What is the "good life?" Aristotle argues that happiness is the chief end of humankind. Happiness is always an end in itself. All other activities, according to Aristotle, are a means toward happiness.

Happiness, however, according to Aristotle, is not instant gratification. Happiness is the final goal of the totality of a person's life. It is not merely seeking pleasurable experiences but rather how well you have lived your life. Ultimately, you cannot judge your success until the end of your life. Aristotle argues, "it is not one [bird] or one fine day that makes a spring, so it is not one day or a short time that makes a man blessed and happy." (Nicomachean Ethics,1098a18)

What is the key asset in human happiness—reason. Unlike Plato, Aristotle focuses a great deal on studying the natural world. But they come to the same conclusion that reason is the most important part of being a human.

Aristotle had a hierarchical view of nature. At the bottom were the inanimate objects such as rocks. Next came vegetation such as plants. These seek nourishment and life, therefore, they are alive. Above vegetation came animal life. They were higher than plant life because they seek pleasure. At the top of this hierarchy are humans; only humans are capable of living life according to principles, taking responsibility for their actions. The key to this difference is reason. Therefore, if one wants to lead a happy life, that person must live a life in accordance with reason.

Aristotle argued, the function of man is to live a certain kind of life, and this activity implies a rational principle, and the function of a good man is the good and noble performance of these, and if any action is well performed it is performed in accord with the appropriate excellence: if this is the case, then happiness turns out to be an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue. (Nicomachean Ethics,1098a13)

Unlike instant gratification, Aristotle argued that in order to live a happy life, humans must live life based on moral virtue. He wrote: "He is happy who lives in accordance with complete virtue and is sufficiently equipped with external goods, not for some chance period but throughout a complete life. (Nicomachean Ethics,1101a10). Unfortunately, Aristotle admits that many people cannot live this way because they are slaves to their immediate desires. He lamented: "the mass of mankind are evidently quite slavish in their tastes, preferring a life suitable to beasts (Nicomachean Ethics, 1095b 20)

As you will see with Epicurus, Aristotle argues that friendship is key to living a life of virtue and happiness. This does not mean every friendship leads to virtue. Rather, friendships based on the pursuit of arête—excellence—is best. The best friendships are those where the people "are good and alike in virtue."

Greek art was characterized by two things: the belief in universal standards and an appreciation for the individual human experience. Greeks applied the idea of reason and universal standards to art. Greek art was realistic, although often bordering on idealistic.

Sculpture : Greek sculpture attempted to present objects as they were found in nature. For example, a statue should reflect real human anatomy. But Greek art was also idealistic. Statues aspired towards the perfect standard; therefore, a Greek statue was portrayed as flawless without wrinkles or scars. Portrayals of human likeness affirmed that human beings were worthy of dignity and honor. 

Literature : Greek poetry and drama often portrayed the sufferings and triumphs of individuals. Greek literature focused on the meaning of the human experience, revealing growing awareness of the individual. Like the Greek philosophers, Greek writers believed in a logic that controlled the universe—Fate or Destiny. The Greek tragedy form brings Fate into sharp focus. In Greek tragedies, an individual struggles against the cosmic forces which eventually crush him. The tragedies revealed in the inescapability of Fate but they also affirm individual courage, choice and determination in the face of Fate. 

  Marvin Perry argues, "The Greeks did not respond to the Macedonian threat as they had earlier rallied to fight off the Persian menace because the quality of citizenship had deteriorated…when people no longer regarded law as an expression of sacred traditions ordained by the gods but saw it as a merely human contrivance, respect for the law diminished, weakening the foundations of the society" (Perry 69-70).

As Alexander conquered, he brought with him Greek culture. Alexander was less narrow than other Greek thinkers and leaders. He broke down the walls of Greek versus non-Greek and was willing to blend Greek culture with Eastern culture. He married a Persian woman. Thousands of Greeks in Alexander's army married Asian women. He incorporated Persians into his army.  This cultural interaction and cultural mixing broke down their earlier focus on the city-state. There was a shift from life and philosophy focused on the polis (the city-state) to life and philosophy focused on the cosmopolis (the world community).

Hellenistic philosophers were far more concerned with "providing the individual with practical guidelines for living" with emphasis on achieving happiness in a hostile, competitive and imperial world.  Two of the leading philosophies of this era were Epicureanism and Stoicism.

Epicurus argued that to achieve individual happiness a person should withdrawal from civic life. Citizenship was not a pre-requisite for the good life or the achievement of human excellence ( arête ). People achieved happiness when their bodies were free from pain and their minds were free of worry and fear. Epicurus saw the increase of pleasure and happiness as the goal for a human (arête). For example, heavy drinking or over-eating has unpleasant aftereffects; therefore, it did not help a person achieve happiness. So for the most part, Epicurus argued from moderation. Pursuit of fame, wealth or power would only bring anxiety. He believed happiness had to be achieved rationally—through the use of reason. People should act justly because unjust actions are burdened with troubles. Love and hate should be avoided. Fear of the gods brought anxiety so Epicurus argued that, while the gods existed, they did not intervene in this world. He especially emphasized the necessity of having a good company of friends to achieve happiness.

Stoicism: argued that the universe contained a principle of order called the Divine Reason/Logos. This was the foundation for all reality and permeated all things. The Logos was implanted in every human soul. This allowed human beings to act rationally and to comprehend the order of nature. Since reason was common to all humans, they were fundamentally connected and equal. Certainly, this was a philosophy geared towards the cosmopolis, not the individual city-state. Greek and non-Greek, rich and poor, slave and free were all under this law of nature or natural law.. Stoics believed that happiness came from disciplining one's emotions by the rational part of the soul. Rationality was key to Stoicism. One wanted to live in accordance with the Logos. Self-mastery was also key. This led to inner peace. These were beyond a person's control. Individuals were responsible for their actions but one could not control all of life. Stoics encouraged people to take action in those areas that they would control. To neglect this would bring despair. But they counseled not to try and control what was uncontrollable. This too brought despair.