The book of Genesis tells us that we are made in
God's image and the Garden of Eden was a paradise
where all needs were met in abundance. There was no
need for toil of any kind, in fact it could hardly
be considered a paradise if toil was necessary.
Yet for most of us, work or toil occupies a
considerable portion of our time. All of us who
work for a living contrast that with our free time
for leisure. Most of us have to work or toil (8 +
or - hours a day) for subsistence compensation, we
need to sleep and take care of our biological needs
also consuming approximately 8 hours a day. This
leaves about 8+ or - hours a day left for what?
And Plato's Socrates at his trial in the Apology
tells the court, ...you will not believe that I am
serious if I say that daily to discourse about
virtue, and the other things about which you hear
me examining myself and others, is the greatest
good of man, and that the unexamined life is not
worth living...
And Aristotle in his great book on Ethics
says, ...It is not unreasonable that what men
regard the good or happiness to be seems to come
from their ways of living. The mass of people
regard it as being pleasure, ...they appear to be
quite slavish in choosing deliberately a life
suitable to beasts, but their view has some support
because many of those in high places share their
tastes.
Perhaps to say that happiness is the highest
good is something which appears to be agreed upon;
what we miss, however, is a more explicit statement
as to what it is. Perhaps this might be given if
the function of man is taken into consideration.
For just as anyone who has a function or an
"action" to perform the goodness or excellence lies
in that function, so it would seem to be the case
in a man, if indeed he has a function. But should
we hold that, while a carpenter and a shoemaker
have certain functions or "actions" to perform, a
man has none at all but is by nature without a
function? Is it not more reasonable to posit that,
just as an eye and a hand and a foot and any part
of the body in general appear to have certain
functions, so a man has some function other than
these? What then would this function be?
Now living appears to be common to plants as
well as to men; but what we seek is proper to men
alone. So let us leave aside the life of nutrition
and of growth. Next there would be the life of
sensation; but this, too, appears to be common also
to a horse and an ox and all animals.
Then comes Mortimer Adler, who defines toil as
work that no one would do if they were not
compelled to do so. He goes on to say, There is
nothing intrinsically good about toil, neither in
itself nor as a means to a good human life.
However, this is mitigated by two extrinsic
considerations, which cast some measure of
favorable light upon toil. Toiling is a more
honorable way of obtaining a needed livelihood than
stealing. It is also a more dignified way to take
care of one's economic needs or the needs of one's
family than receiving a welfare handout. To this
extent the person compelled to engage in toil
preserves his self-respect by doing so.
We all aspire to live a good life or become
happy. But unless we think that the money we earn
is the sufficient means for living a good life,
Aristotle reminds us that the life of a
money-maker, is one of tension; and clearly the
good sought is not wealth, for wealth is
instrumental and is sought for the sake of
something else.
How are we to answer Aristotle's question: Does
man have a function, and if so, what would this
function be? Can we state it at least in a general
way or outline as to what it is that we ought to do
with the time of our lives?
Max Weismann is Co-Founder (with Mortimer Adler)
and Director of the Center
for the Study of The Great Ideas in Chicago and
editor of its journal Philosophy is Everybody's
Business. He also edited Dr. Adler's recent
book How to Think About the Great Ideas: From
the Great Books of Western Civilization.