Critique of Aristotle’s thoughts on human nature

Many philosophers have attacked Aristotle’s conception of human beings as rational and self-directed, capable of setting goals and making plans to achieve them, and driven to achieve happiness. Aristotle (384-322 BC) presented his thoughts on human nature in his works “Eudemian Ethics,” “Nicomachean Ethics” and “Politics.” All of them were written or dictated in the years 335-321 BC after Aristotle had opened The Lyceum, his school in Athens. The optimism in Aristotle’s work is seldom shared by later philosophers. Aristotle viewed the achievement of happiness as normal. He considered that human beings are normally able to attain their goals by means of intelligent, steady work. John Locke (1632-1704) outlined his ideas on epistemology in his “Essay Concerning Human Understanding” published in 1690. Locke subscribed to Aristotle’s rejection of innate ideas and other Platonic delusions. Like Aristotle, Locke affirmed that human minds are born as a blank slate. As time goes by, experience and reflection will write on the blank slate. Both experience and reason play a key role in knowledge accumulation. Locke also shared Aristotle’s conception of human beings as political animals. Happiness, they argued, can be attained more easily by collaborating with other humans. Collaboration will entail trade, friendship, exchange of ideas, love, etc. Aristotle had underlined the need for freedom to achieve the primary goal (“eudaimonia” or happiness) in life and defended a balanced system of government. Without good governance, Aristotle warned, corruptions and abuses will ensue. Good governance, according to Aristotle, can be achieved if power is divided within society (monarchs, aristocracy, and the people) and amongst the different branches of government (the legislative, executive, and judicial). Like Aristotle, Locke believed that humans are guided by reason. In normal circumstances, humans seek to preserve their own lives and protect their property. Even in situations where government doesn’t exist (ancient cultures), the normal human behaviour is to seek peace and cooperation, not war and theft. Locke viewed property rights as natural rights derived from an individual’s labour. If you have the right to life and liberty, you must have the right to accumulate property through labour. In his view of human nature, Locke emphasised individual rights and limited government. He regarded those as the best forms of social organisation; governments are bound to protect the rights enshrined in the constitution, said Locke. The essential difference between Locke and Aristotle is that Locke expected constitutions to be good enough to protect the rights of individuals. In contrast, Aristotle viewed the division of power in society as a better guarantee of individual rights. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/critique-of-aristotles-thoughts-on-human-nature/