Lauren Bianco Period 4
When talking about philosophers and their teachings, people often listen to them and appreciate their words of wisdom, but it is a lot harder to take those teachings and put them to use. Catholics have a very specific view on the world and its creator, and these teachings influence the beliefs of the purpose of life and how one should live. Aristotle does not speak of a God, and therefore, his teachings do not involve living in accordance with God. If a Catholic were to read Aristotle, he or she would have to take time to think about how they could implement his teachings in a way that did not challenge their own personal beliefs. They must find a way to respect Aristotle but also follow their faith.
Aristotle teaches that the function of man is to exercise reason and to act in accordance to reason, for reason is the highest excellence of man. He states that happiness if the final end and happiness is “exercise[ing] his faculties in accordance with perfect excellence, being duly furnished with external goods, not for any chance time, but for a full term of years and who shall continue to live so; and shall die as he lived.” Therefore, fulfilling one’s function is essential for man to achieve happiness. The excellence that Aristotle speaks of focuses on virtue. Aristotle views virtue as a kind of moderation. In his opinion, excess is just as bad as too little. To that, one might ask, “How can someone be too nice?” Aristotle would probably answer that if one is so nice that they give up their own person in order to please others, then they would be exerting an excess of niceness. He also states that pleasure is not the final good or the end. One should not live their life in order to find pleasure because it is not a meaningful life. Furthermore, Aristotle states that a life of contemplation is the highest form of life. He states, “Since, then, it is the reason that in the truest sense is the man, the life that consists in the exercise of the reason is the best and pleasantest for man—and therefore the happiest.” Aristotle also believes that man is a political animal and could not achieve the good life without the state, for the state is “the union of families and villages in a perfect and self-sufficing life, by which we mean a happy and honorable life. Aristotle also argues that justice does not treat unequals equally. Aristotle’s conclusions would tell the person to try to achieve happiness which can be found by using one’s reason to make virtuous decisions. However, one must be consistent with this throughout one’s life. As man becomes closer and closer to this idea of happiness, he develops a life of contemplation, but not one of isolation, for man is a political animal and meant to live in a community. However, the summary of Aristotle’s teachings never mentions a God.
Catholics believe that eternal life with God is the final end, and they aim to live their lives practicing the teachings of Jesus Christ. In his encyclical, Pope Leo XIII states that God is the final end. He also touches on the idea of treating unequals as equals saying, “People differ in capacity, skill, health, strength; and unequal fortune is a necessary result of unequal condition.” Catholics have seven principles of social teaching that give guidelines on how to act: respect the human person, promote the family, protect property rights, work for the common good, observe the principle of subsidiarity, respect work and the worker, and pursue peace and care for the poor.[1] These seven principles help to form the basis on Catholic beliefs when it comes to issues. The principle of subsidiarity involves when the government should intervene. According to the principle of subsidiarity, problems should be solved at the lowest level possible. For example, if the state government has the capabilities of solving an issue, then it would be wrong for the federal government to intervene.
The major difference between Aristotle’s teachings and the Catholic teachings is that happiness could conceivably be achieved on Earth, according to Aristotle, while true happiness would only be found in heaven according to the Catholic Church. However, some of his teachings should be contemplated because they help give a general guideline on how to act. In fact, St. Thomas Aquinas, who the church looks to on his teachings of ethics, came to his conclusions by mixing Aristotle’s teachings with Catholic beliefs.[2] It would then make sense to take a further look at Aquinas’s teachings.
Aquinas states that all living beings have a form, and this form determines the nature of a being. He also says that all living beings strive for perfection. One can see Aristotle’s influence on these two statements. Many of Aristotle’s teachings revolve around the nature of a being. This nature determines the function and many other parts of one’s life. Also, his whole idea of happiness is based on the fact that humans are searching for this happiness, this state of perfection. Aquinas also states that one cannot achieve this perfection without the exercise of virtue and also that properly exercising this virtue is what leads a man to goodness, which also has a basis in Aristotle’s teachings. He speaks of “species-defining characteristics” which are characteristics that are unique to each species. Aquinas says that the species-defining characteristic for humans is reason, which perfectly correlates to Aristotle’s beliefs. Aristotle believed that reason was the highest form of man because it was unique to man. However, Aquinas touches on something that Aristotle doesn’t when he talks about how there can be different levels of perfection among each species. Therefore, the more one fulfills his functions by acting in reason, the more perfect he becomes. The more each being uses his species-defining characteristic, the closer he is to achieving human goodness. This idea that “human goodness ultimately consists in the proper exercise of a person’s rational capacities” leads Aquinas to use this basis in determining the morality of human action. So far, these views have been strikingly similar to Aristotle’s, but Aquinas believes that we also depend on God to help us with many things. He believes that final happiness can only be achieved in communion with God in heaven. To be able to live with God in heaven, he must change our nature so that it is capable of living in this state of perfection. Aquinas also believes that because of original sin, human nature was corrupted and relies upon the grace of God in order to achieve goodness.[3] Therefore, this happiness is not somewhere that we can get by ourselves. In this he differs from Aristotle, who believes that performing one’s function for an extended amount of time can lead someone to achieving perfect happiness.
As we can see with Aquinas, the best way to deal with learning about Aristotle is to compromise. Aquinas took his teachings at the basics and expanded upon them to include God. Aristotle’s idea that we must act in accordance with reason to achieve happiness is not something that we should disregard just because he does not mention a God. He talks about using virtue and reason, which are all things that God calls Catholics to do. While Aristotle states that virtue is merely the moderation of two vices, the complicated world might not always conform into that definition. We look to the Church to give us more guidelines on how to deal with complex issues. For example, Catholics have the Catechism, the seven principles of social teaching, the Ten Commandments, and the other teachings of the Bible as well as teachings from church leaders in order to help us. This is often a relief to Catholics because they do not have to make all decisions on their own. In conclusion, Aristotle’s teachings are a great basis for guidance, but they can also be expanded upon to include the teachings of the Church to better understand the idea of ethics.
[1] “Seven Principles of Catholic Social Teaching.” Catholic Answers Magazine. http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/seven-principles-of-catholic-social-teaching (accessed April 27, 2014).
[2] “Aquinas: Moral Philosophy.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/aq-moral/ (accessed April 27, 2014).
[3] “Aquinas: Moral Philosphy.”
Bear Market 
This blog provides a solid interpretation on how a Catholic approaches the Aristotelian teachings. I loved how you opened with the point that Aristotle never mentions a higher power; however, you then went on to explain that even with the absence of God, his texts still play an important role in the Christian way of life. The uses of Pope Leo and Thomas Aquinas flowed very well, and it helped create a cohesive conclusion to the initial question.
Kendall Kazor
Aristotle doesn’t mention God much in the Ethics, but in other books he does have the argument that the world must have its source in what he calls an ‘unmoved mover,’ which is also an influence on Aquinas’s proofs of the existence of God. Of course, you are right that there are significant differences, but I think that if you really look at Aristotle’s arguments about the final end, there are some clear gaps that are only filled when,like Aquinas, you bring God into the picture. For example, he says rational action is the final end, right? But the end of action is to know the truth, isn’t it? If so, then it follows that the mind can only be satisfied when it can encounter that which is perfectly true, which is arguably God himself. An interesting article.