- Joined
- Jan 10, 2019
True. But to Aristotle,the good life isn't really just about producing offspring. It's more about actualizing the potential ability of a creature to become the best version of it it can be. Thus, the eudaimonia or good life for a plant is Likewise, the good life of an animal is to fully actualize it's potential in becoming the most representative member of that species . For humans, Aristotle notes that unlike plants and (most) animals, our souls are rational and are able to problem solve and deliberate on higher more abstract things. This is important since to Aristotle, the soul is the first potentiality that makes a potentially living thing alive. The final end of all living things is to reach the second actuality which is "the good life", which can be explained with an analogy going like this: The body is like an infant in that it can be potentially alive in the same way an infant can potentially speak; the soul is a speaker of a language being silent and the second actuality of the soul (i.e. the soul doing what the soul was meant for) is like a speaker of a language speaking. With that said, Aristotle comes to the conclusion that the teleological end of the human person sure is technically to reproduce and make more humans due to them being percieving animals and desiring those sorts of pleasures (along with avoiding the pains of social outcastdom and loneliness) just as much as humans have nutritive parts of the soul and have a final end to drink and eat, but in a more deeper sense to self-actualize and put the rational soul to use and dedicate themselves to a life of study (since this is the final end that puts the human's rational soul in motion, just like sex/reproduction and eating does for the perceptive and nutritive parts of the soul in a human), which he says in Nichomachean Ethics Book X (which is a sort of a summary of the previous 9 books and how he sees virtue coming in two flavors: those of character and those of intellect and how the two are related to the "deliberation on one's own moral judgements and the execution/non-execution thereof", "theoretical wisdom of higher, more abstract matters" and "skillsets" (which are the least important in his mind), all of which fall under the umbrella of the self-actualization of the rational soul. (Mind you, when Aristotle speaks of a soul, he's not talking about a ghastly force that keeps you alive. He's talking of something more like the emblem inside a mound of clay that turns the clay into a seal).Nihilism isn't even really an ideology. It prescribes no behaviors and defines nothing other than a general rejection of meaning. It can be a facet of ideologies but in and of itself it is, appropriately, nothing.
Mindlessly reproducing yourself is not much of a cause. People need to find their own passions and reasons to live. Although if someone is just that dedicated to getting as many fucks in as possible, or less cynically, raising a huge family, more power to them if that's what makes their life fulfilling.
TL;DR: Sort of, but that's only taking into consideration the perceptive part of the human soul. The highest goal of the human soul is essentially to learn, teach and to be rational about judgements and do so on a consistent basis.