Activity
Mon
Wed
Fri
Sun
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
What is this?
Less
More

Memberships

Basecamp

1.1k members • Free

1 contribution to Basecamp
AristotleTidBit and Reflection
Currently going through Aristotle for a research paper, and thought I’d share a fundamental idea of his that seems relevant to the ongoing discussion. This is a piece of quoted commentary on Aristotle’s general view of what nature and/or natural objects are: “Nature is, or natural objects are, that which itself contains the determination of what it is or is to be, while art is, or artificial objects are, that which has this determination elsewhere. In the plant the determination is in the plant; in the house it is in the builder. The plant makes itself under the conditions of its making. This the house does not do.” For Aristotle, the final end of a natural object, its purpose, its destiny, in some sense dwells within it from the moment it comes into being. This end, or telos, guides the growth and development of its matter, and its environment shapes this natural progression. Its path of becoming, then, is already set from its conception, and changes depending on how other natural objects and forces act upon it. While plants and animals certainly have this kind of determination in themselves, they do not have agency or possession over it. But humans do. And this is what it is to be an human being: to have a destiny, a journey of its own becoming, and perhaps more importantly, the capacity to intentionally engage the journey. Artifacts on the other hand, i.e., tools, buildings, machines, receive their end in a preconceived way. A builder has an end in mind, and chooses and shapes matter to bring his idea into existence; and it’s fitting and good for humans to work with the world in this way to bring forth art, expressing ideas by doing so. But something else happens in machine time. In machine time, an externally preconceived end is placed on the human person in way that’s indifferent to the end already existing within them. This industrial framework not only competes against the destiny of the human person, but blinds them to it. It also shapes the environment in which the person lives, making it difficult to even recognize the existence of the frame.
2 likes • 4d
@Robert Gray No apologies needed, I think you raise a lot of important points and questions. I think our gut, or intuition, is super important for pursuing happiness and purpose because it might the earliest sign that we need to pause and do exactly what you suggested, namely, seeking what is new and challenging. It’s probably important that we seek for what may challenge us because the challenge ensures that we’re not falling into the trap of seeking novelty for novelty’s sake, but rather, seeking new life that comes organically out of the place we find ourselves in. When circumstances become difficult, it can be easier to run away from changing what needs to be changed than to change what we are being called to renew. Spending time in continual and intentional reflection seems to be one of the best ways to properly face these circumstances. It’s interesting that you’re relating peace with doing, striving, and openness. When I hear discussion about peace, it often seems to point to a static state that’s closed off to change; but you almost seem to be suggesting that peace has a certain dynamic characteristic which is likened to openness. And openness is necessary for growth, and thus, for achieving our end as humans. I’m sure a lot more could be said about how openness connects with the process of becoming, but I’ll leave it at that.
1-1 of 1
Nicholas Meneses
2
10points to level up
@nicholas-meneses-7684
Catholic Seminarian for the Diocese of Orange County

Active 4d ago
Joined Feb 17, 2026
Powered by