A Perfect Life
If we seek to improve certain aspects of our lives, it follows that the ultimate goal of self-improvement would be to lead a perfect life. According to Aristotle a good life is one lived in accordance with virtue; therefore, the perfect life would be perfectly virtuous.
In order to better understand the requirements of living well (and the possibility of living perfectly), Aristotle first describes the soul and virtue:
The soul is divided into two parts (contrasting with his mentor’s tripartite soul) the rational and irrational. The former encompasses scientific and calculative systems while the later contains the system of nutrition/growth and desires. The irrational part obeys the reason of the rational part and is the area associated with the soul’s moral and ethical virtue.
Each person usually focuses on a particular area of their life. Artists and scientists are often quiet and aloof, and a businessperson may not understand and practice charity. A person recognizes their focus and tends to stick to it without wasting time on other virtues of character and would therefore not be capable of living the perfect life with complete “virtue” in all virtues.
Is the human attention bound to a single focus, or are we simply too frightened to expend energy on other areas lest we discover our true limits?
Tom Martin
Feb 3, 11:03 PM
I think that human attention is bound to a single focus partly due to a fear of moving beyond what we know and are comfortable doing in our everyday life. The other part would be that our cultures tend to assign people to duties, which bind us to a single focus, because that is all we really know how to do, and we are (for the most part) uncomfortable trying something we do not know, or that doesn’t seem like it would be interesting/fulfilling to us.
Aaron Blohowiak
Feb 4, 05:50 PM
I for one know that my attention is by NO MEANS bound to a single focus (although I often wish otherwise!)
Thame
Feb 4, 07:10 PM
Tom:
“I think that human attention is bound to a single focus partly due to a fear of moving beyond what we know and are comfortable doing in our everyday life.”
Does that mean if we could overcome our fear of change, we would be capable of expanding our focus?
Aaron: I too like to think that my focus is not bound, but is one able to be excellent in multiple, and in the case of a perfect life, every area?
Brad
Feb 4, 10:42 PM
I think the best a person can do is strive to be the best possible at a small set of things at any given time. One may have a day job and a few hobbies, but one can’t feasibly tackle the entire world at once.
One can, however, tackle different things at different points in time. Some people live their lives in stages like this. For instance, they might learn all about Chinese history, Indian cooking, and rollerblading for two years, then switch gears into Greek mythology, web development, and skydiving.
I think living a perfectly virtuous life in all aspects is not only unreasonable but undesirable. When it comes down to it, the person who is happy near the end of his or her life will be truly happy because he or she lived well. This may have different definitions for different people, but for me it means a happy, successful, productive life that enriches me as well as those I love.
I don’t care for objective virtue or the opinions of others orthogonal to my pursuit in life, most certainly not those involving guilt.
Tom Martin
Feb 4, 10:57 PM
I think that we are capable of a lot more than we know we are. We’ve gotten this far, and we’re constantly expanding what we know to be “true” – but that is another topic.
We could possibly be capable of expanding our focus if we overcome our fear, though it most likely won’t be easy even then. That would also vary per person, seeing as everybody has a different view on what is desirable. The things that make me happy are the same things that others find utterly boring and/or uninteresting.
I am not sure if we would ever be able to be perfect in every area of life. Maybe that in itself would be undesirable, but we would only know that after we achieved it. The time that it would take to get there, and the hardships it’s bound to put one through, would make it seem undesirable to most I would imagine. We may very well be able to excel in multiple areas of life, and for a lot of people I know, that is good enough.
If everyone were able to attain such a perfect life, would we need our support network of family and friends as much as we do today? If everyone were equally good at everything, there would be no real reason to work with others, except to get things done faster. But then, wouldn’t working together make each person use a specific set of knowledge, not all of it like they might if they were alone? I think that the answers to these would have to be part of the answer of attaining a perfect life.
Thame
Feb 5, 02:02 PM
Brad:
“I think living a perfectly virtuous life in all aspects is not only unreasonable but undesirable. When it comes down to it, the person who is happy near the end of his or her life will be truly happy because he or she lived well.”
But the person who would be happiest (according to Aristotle) would be the one whose actions were in accordance with virtue and the one who performed the most actions in accordance with virtue.
I certainly would not want to attempt to live the perfect life (I’m busy enough as it is :D), but does this mean that Aristotle’s reasoning is wrong?
Tom:
“If everyone were able to attain such a perfect life, would we need our support network of family and friends as much as we do today? If everyone were equally good at everything, there would be no real reason to work with others, except to get things done faster.”
That’s a good question although I doubt perfect lives would ever be common under any conditions.
There are too many reasons why a perfect life would not be possible. Namely, it would be difficult to understand the requirements for such a life. There are too many activities to know about, much less perform them in perfect excellence.
floyd
Feb 6, 03:26 PM
Doesn’t Aristotle eventually conclude that while there are many virtues all which bring a degree of happiness, a life of philosophical contemplation is the highest virtue and the deepest happiness?
And so I ask you, what’s with all the web design crap? :]
Site is fantastic, by the way.
Thame
Feb 6, 04:22 PM
floyd:
Unfortunately, I’m only reading bits and pieces for a course I’m taking so I’m going to be misinformed at best. :D
And so I ask you, what’s with all the web design crap? :]
Well, web design is my job and a big interest of mine so I’ll but throwing up some thoughts from time to time. Would it be better for you if I made a separate section for that (or a separate feed)?
Thanks for the kind words too.
floyd
Feb 6, 09:50 PM
No, you misunderstood me. I was trying to refer to the fact that since philosophic contemplation is the highest virtue and true source of hapiness web design is nothing but a paltry waste of time. I was being sarcastic.
However, in answer to your serious question, I would say not a separate section but making use of categories might be a good thing.
Thame
Feb 7, 07:02 AM
Oh, I get it…
I believe I throw all my other articles into the catchall “Web” category with all the philosophical articles going into more specific categories. If you want, I could try to cook up a special feed for you.
floyd
Feb 7, 07:46 AM
That is incredibly, hilariously generous. I haven’t had customer service this good since I last paid for something. Hell, let’s face it—not even then.
No that’s ok, I’s sure I’ll catch your latest and greatest contributions on digg ;)
Thame
Feb 8, 04:39 AM
floyd: Thanks. See you around then.