From Book II Chapter 15:
"In the generations of men as in the fruits of the earth, there is a varying yield; now and then, where the stock is good, exception men are produced for a while, and then decadence sets in. A clever stock will degenerate towards the insane type of character, like the descendants of Alcibiades or of the elder Dionysius; a steady stock towards the fatuous and torpid type, like the descendants of Cimon, Pericles, and Socrates."
I feel that this claim showcases the micro-perspective that haunts Aristotle's rationalizations of character. This statement ignores the various factors on a macroscopic level which, in my opinion, have a much greater influence on what Aristotle calls the degeneration of a clever stock.
When I first read this passage I felt as though I could identify with it. I felt that I was the clever stock succumbing to decadence. However, after thinking about it I realized that Aristotle's logic is flawed. Decadence does not set it as a result of the "stock" becoming accustomed to a lifestyle. This decadence in actuality is a facade. His rationalization of good stock is far to vulnerable to the fluctuations in almost every general state of affairs to be a legitimate contribution to the decline of a group. More often than we like to admit, as it makes us feel of little importance, we are the result of a much bigger picture.
I think it would be interesting if Aristotle were to argue that these two things go hand in hand. But, yet again, I am left with Aristotle's classic broad interpretation of things.
I'm not sure that I agree that lifestyle doesn't affect the "stock". In this age of time- and labor-saving devices, it would take a lot of practice (and whining) for me to raise myself back to the standard of a days' work that my grandmother had for herself. And I hate to think of how hard her grandmother worked. I don't think that our lifestyle of decadence and ease has contributed to insanity, but there is some basis for saying we've become, on average, more torpid and fatuous than our ancestors.
ReplyDeleteI would argue that a lifestyle of decadence and ease has contributed incredibly to insanity. I don't have the time to adequately justify that right now... I am having trouble managing everyone's interpretations with this blog! It is vastly time consuming. I took what Aristotle said to mean that things happen in waves... thus it wouldn't really apply to you and your ancestors, but more reveal a trend of the rise and fall of "good character." That was just how I took it though... I assume good stock is a relative characteristic...
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with you - stock doesn't necessarily become decadent over time, but rather becomes that way due to certain external circumstances. Some people may have been brought up in a good home, then dumped into poverty and forced to work their way back up and never stooping to using welfare, whereas others may be perfectly happy leeching off the government for their entire lives. It all depends on how that person was raised and the circumstances in which they grew up in.
ReplyDelete