How Can the Just Man Suffer and Remain Happy?

The reality of suffering touches every human being at some point in their lives, no matter their race, gender, religious faith, or even moral virtue. Despite this, certain Ancient Greek philosophers, like Socrates and, at least the early, Plato believed that the truly ethical man could not be harmed by misfortune or unjust suffering because of his complete and total orientation towards the good. However, the last in the great trilogy of Ancient Greek philosophers, Aristotle, held that the morally virtuous could be befallen by misfortune and have their eudaimonia inhibited by external circumstances outside of their control. Nevertheless, despite the fact that he thought that misfortune could negatively affect one’s progress towards eudaimonia, he still maintained that “we are masters of our actions from the beginning right to the end” (NE 1114b25).

Aristotle’s idea that, in the final analysis, human beings are the ultimate root of all their actions makes sense in light of two key points. First, that human beings are unified persons such that their material and spiritual aspects are equally important and equally human. And second, Aristotle's view that contemplation is the highest form of human life implies that humans are capable of an interior freedom which enables one to detach from their particular material circumstances and act in true freedom. These two ideas will be examined after more thoroughly explicating Aristotle's position on the origin of human action. Ultimately, Aristotle’s belief in the authority of human beings over their own actions because of his holistic anthropology which acknowledges both material and spiritual aspects of the human person.

To begin, one must acknowledge that Aristotle does indeed think that human beings are the source of their actions, despite the fact that he also believes that external circumstances can affect one’s freedom. The quote stated earlier, “we are masters of our actions from the beginning right to the end”, proves that Aristotle believes humans are the ultimate ground of their actions, no matter the circumstances (NE 1114b25). Moreover, while admitting that the tides of fortune do actually impact the course of one’s life, he does not think that these tides prohibit one from attaining eudaimonia:

But the accidents of fortune are many and vary in degree of magnitude; and although small pieces of good luck, as also of misfortune, clearly do not change the whole course of life, yet great and repeated successes will render life more blissful, since both of their own nature they help to embellish it, and also they can be nobly and virtuously utilized; while great and frequent reverses can crush and mar our bliss both by the pain they cause and by the hindrance they offer to many activities. Yet nevertheless even in adversity nobility shines through, when a man endures repeated and severe misfortune with patience, not owing to insensibility but from generosity and greatness of soul. (NE 1100b24-34)

Aristotle’s position seems a quite hopeful one as it is realist in that it accepts the reality of naturally inequality in life, but nevertheless maintains that personal character and virtue can shine through and enable one to have achieve eudaimonia.

With this background in place, it becomes clear why Aristotle’s hylomorphic anthropology grounds his views on human freedom: both the material and spiritual are truly and fully human. Hylomorphism states that all substances are composites of matter and form where matter constitutes the principle of potentiality, or changeability in a substance, while form accounts for the actuality, or defined structure, in a thing. In the case of human beings, the physical body represents the matter of the person, while the rational soul is the form of the body. Human souls are unique in that they contain within them all lower levels of the soul, those lower levels being the vegetative and appetitive aspects of the soul. Therefore, Aristotle regards all these levels of the soul and their corresponding faculties, whether that be digestion, desire, or thought, to be equally human. Aristotle brings this view into light when he says that “nonrational feelings seem to be no less human than rational calculation” (NE 1111b2-3).

This metaphysical anthropology, and especially the last line of the previous paragraph, relates to Aristotle’s view on human freedom because he thinks that humans are the ultimate ground of their actions because emotions and lower level faculties are just as human as rationality. The parts of the human person which are most subject to influence by misfortune and external circumstances are the lower faculties of the human soul, in particular emotion. However, since “nonrational feelings seem to be no less human than rational calculation”, then humans control their actions from the beginning to the end of them because the non-rational forces which are typically viewed as inhibiting human freedom are, in reality, just as human as higher reason (NE 1111b2-3). Thus, as a result of how Aristotle views both material and spiritual faculties of the human person as both equally and fully human, he posits that “we are masters of our actions from the beginning right to the end” because the material conditions which influence the actions of higher reason are just as legitimately human as higher reason itself (NE 1114b25).

Moreover, Aristotle’s high view of the contemplative life implies his belief in an interior freedom which does not subject itself to the material conditions surrounding it. Aristotle says that the happiest life is the life of contemplation: 

And that happiness consists in contemplation may be accepted as agreeing both with the results already reached and with the truth. For contemplation is at once the highest form of activity (since the intellect is the highest thing in us, and the objects with which the intellect deals are the highest things that can be known), and also it is the most continuous, for we can reflect more continuously than we can carry on any form of action. (NE 1177a19-25)

Aristotle’s view of contemplation as the highest and happiest form of life indeed implies that he thinks humans capable of an interior freedom and detachment since contemplation requires an intellectual movement inward. This movement inward necessarily leads one to forget about the external circumstances in which one finds oneself as the move reorientation of consciousness from the exterior to the interior entails a certain ‘closed-mindedness’ with regard to the outside world. The forgetfulness with regard to the outside world which results enables one to be unaffected by the outside world, which is precisely why humans can be the source of their actions despite external factors. True human freedom requires a certain level of detachment from factors that could otherwise impinge upon one's freedom and the possibility for this detachment is implicitly acknowledged in how he praises the life of contemplation. Therefore, Aristotle believes that “we are masters of our actions from the beginning right to the end” because he believes that human beings can detach from their material conditions and act in true freedom as a result (NE 1114b25).

In conclusion, the question of whether or to what extent external factors, especially negative ones, affect human freedom and moral responsibility finds itself at the center of much moral philosophy from the ancient world up to the present. If one examines the positions of Socrates and Plato, one finds that they do not think human freedom can ever be inhibited by spells of misfortune. Aristotle, the prodigious student of the latter philosopher, thought otherwise and held a nuanced position which both maintained the reality of human freedom being affected by external factors, while also holding that people are the source of their actions through and through. This position becomes clear in light of his rich, hylomorphic anthropology, and his acknowledgement of interior freedom, implied in his views on the contemplative life. Aristotle’s robust and nuanced understanding of human freedom provides an excellent framework for deep philosophical reflection on free will and moral responsibility. Thus, philosophers should look to Aristotle for guidance when thinking through these major topics in philosophy.

Works Cited

Ainsworth, Thomas. “Form vs. Matter (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).” Stanford.edu, 2016, plato.stanford.edu/entries/form-matter/.

Aristotle. 2011. The Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by William D. Ross. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Kraut, Richard. “Plato (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).” Stanford.edu, Stanford University, 20 Mar. 2004, plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato/.

Nails, Debra. “Socrates (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).” Stanford.edu, 16 Sept. 2005, plato.stanford.edu/entries/socrates/.