How Could Aristotle Defend The Self-sufficiency Of Political Life While Claiming The Superiority Of Contemplative Life?

Aristoteles Nikomakhos’a Etik X.7’de en yüksek mutluluğun teorik yaşamda bulunduğu görüşünü dile getirir. Bu yazı, söz konusu görüşün, politik yaşamın kendine yeterli olduğu―yani en yüksek türdeki felsefi bilginin kılavuzluğuna ihtiyaç duymaksızın insansal mutluluğu temin edebileceği―şeklindeki bir diğer Aristotelesçi görüşle uyumlu olup olmadığı sorununu ele alıyor. Yazının temel savı şu şekilde ifade edilebilir: Aristoteles, her ne kadar paradoksal gibi görünse de, teorik yaşamın üstünlüğünü ve politik yaşamın kendine yeterliliğini aynı felsefi zeminden hareketle savunmaktadır. Söz konusu felsefi zemini serimlemek üzere, yazıda ilk olarak Nikomakhos’a Etik VI’daki phronēsis analizi, ardından da Politika VII’deki teorik ve politik yaşam karşılaştırması inceleniyor.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

phronēsis, pratik akıl, teorik yaşam, politik yaşam, Aristoteles

How Could Aristotle Defend The Self-sufficiency Of Political Life While Claiming The Superiority Of Contemplative Life?

In Nicomachean Ethics X.7, Aristotle argues that perfect happiness consists in contemplation alone. The question that I want to take up in this essay is whether the superiority of contemplative life fits with Aristotle’s argument for the self-sufficiency of the political life, according to which politics can lead us to happiness without being guided by philosophical knowledge of the highest sort. My basic argument is that, paradoxical as it may seem, Aristotle is led to acknowledge that contemplative life is superior to political life by the same strand of argumentation which makes him plea for the self-sufficiency of the political life in the first place. In order to show how this argument unfolds, I take my point of departure from Aristotle’s analysis of phronēsis as stated in Nicomachean Ethics VI and bring it to bear on his discussion of the respective virtues of the contemplative and political ways of life in Politics VII.

Keywords:

phronēsis, practical reason, contemplative life, political life, Aristoteles,

PDF

___

Ackrill, J. L. (1974). Aristotle on eudaimonia. Proceedings of the British Academy, 60, 339-359. [Reprinted in Rorty, A. O. (Ed.). (1980). Essays on Aristotle’s ethics (pp. 15-33). Berkeley: University of California Press.]
Aristotle (1925). Nicomachean ethics. (W. D. Ross, Ed. & Trans.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Aristotle (1984). The politics. (C. Lord, Ed. & Trans.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Beiner, R. (1983). Political judgment. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Cooper, J. M. (1975). Reason and human good in Aristotle. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Gadamer, H.-G. (1986). The idea of the good in Platonic-Aristotelian philosophy. (P. C. Smith, Trans.). New Haven: Yale University Press.
Gadamer, H.-G. (1999). Aristotle and the ethic of imperatives. (J. M. Knippenberg, Trans.). In R. C. Bartlett & S. D. Collins (Eds.), Action and contemplation: studies in the moral and political thought of Aristotle (pp. 53-67). New York: SUNY Press.
Guthrie, W. K. C. (1981). A history of Greek philosophy, vol. 6: Aristotle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kraut, R. (1989). Aristotle on the human good. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Moline, J. (1983). Contemplation and the human good. Nous, 17, 37-53.
Nagel, T. (1972). Aristotle on eudaimonia. Phronesis, 17, 252-259. [Reprinted in Rorty, A. O. (Ed.). (1980). Essays on Aristotle’s ethics (pp. 7-14). Berkeley: University of California Press.]
Nussbaum, M. (1986). The fragility of goodness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
O’Connor, D. K. (1999). The ambitions of Aristotle’s audience and the activist ideal of happiness. In R. C. Bartlett & S. D. Collins (Eds.), Action and contemplation: studies in the moral and political thought of Aristotle (pp. 107-129). New York: SUNY Press.
Rorty, A. O. (1980). The place of contemplation in Aristotle’s Nicomachean ethics. In A. O. Rorty (Ed.), Essays on Aristotle’s ethics (pp. 377-394). Berkeley: University of California Press.