What does it mean to be a rational human? Though both are from different time periods, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Aristotle sought out the answer to the latter. Both philosophers had different opinions on the subject. For instance, Aristotle believed that human rationality was entirely primary while Rousseau refused to accept this notion. Despite both philosophers providing valid arguments for their theses, I have to agree with Aristotle’s beliefs.
To begin, Aristotle provides an in-depth reasoning behind his thesis that human rationality is primary. He believed that to be a human, one, among having many other qualities, must be rational. Aristotle closely linked being rational to being happy, and thus flourishing as a human being. He exemplifies …show more content…
Rousseau theorized that in the origins of humanity, there was a “State of Nature”, as he coined, and in the state humans were asocial beings that lived only for immediate needs. There were no tools, families, attachments, and most importantly, no philosophy, which is where he believes that as humans, we are not fundamentally reasonable creatures. Instead, Rousseau believes that there are actually two characteristics prior to reason: compassion/pity and an interest in self-preservation. Rousseau believes that these two qualities are prior because one can find compassion/pity through physical love which only exists in the State of …show more content…
Rousseau argues that self-preservation, or survival, comes prior to rationality. Under normal circumstances, I would agree with that. However, humans need rationality to determine what they need and what is necessary in order to survive. Humans require reason to conclude whether or not something is a danger to them. If whatever it may be is a danger, humans will avoid the thing or situation; this involves reason. In addition, I do not believe that compassion/pity come before rationality either. In fact, Rousseau may have hindered his argument with this. I say this because nature can obviously be cruel and demanding. In order to survive, humans may not express compassion or pity if it comes to individual survival. As humans, we have the capacity to be aggressive and manipulative to get what we want. Human rationality determines if what we want is really what we want. Humans can certainly express compassion and pity, and aren’t always ruthless, it is just within the human’s best interest of oneself to protect oneself to survive. I also agree with Aristotle’s viewpoint on what it means to be a human being. Besides being sentient beings that are self-aware, rationality is the key component of being characterized as a
To begin, Aristotle provides an in-depth reasoning behind his thesis that human rationality is primary. He believed that to be a human, one, among having many other qualities, must be rational. Aristotle closely linked being rational to being happy, and thus flourishing as a human being. He exemplifies …show more content…
Rousseau theorized that in the origins of humanity, there was a “State of Nature”, as he coined, and in the state humans were asocial beings that lived only for immediate needs. There were no tools, families, attachments, and most importantly, no philosophy, which is where he believes that as humans, we are not fundamentally reasonable creatures. Instead, Rousseau believes that there are actually two characteristics prior to reason: compassion/pity and an interest in self-preservation. Rousseau believes that these two qualities are prior because one can find compassion/pity through physical love which only exists in the State of …show more content…
Rousseau argues that self-preservation, or survival, comes prior to rationality. Under normal circumstances, I would agree with that. However, humans need rationality to determine what they need and what is necessary in order to survive. Humans require reason to conclude whether or not something is a danger to them. If whatever it may be is a danger, humans will avoid the thing or situation; this involves reason. In addition, I do not believe that compassion/pity come before rationality either. In fact, Rousseau may have hindered his argument with this. I say this because nature can obviously be cruel and demanding. In order to survive, humans may not express compassion or pity if it comes to individual survival. As humans, we have the capacity to be aggressive and manipulative to get what we want. Human rationality determines if what we want is really what we want. Humans can certainly express compassion and pity, and aren’t always ruthless, it is just within the human’s best interest of oneself to protect oneself to survive. I also agree with Aristotle’s viewpoint on what it means to be a human being. Besides being sentient beings that are self-aware, rationality is the key component of being characterized as a