Abstract
The previous chapter was about poor survival. To be more precise, it was about Foucault’s description of the disciplines. We argued that attached to them there are six disquieting features, all related to the instrumental use of trivialized behavior to realize contingent goals of organizational production processes. By analyzing the disciplines, we arrived at a set of general cybernetic and social systemic principles underpinning all management of organizational behavior. The question arose whether the application of these principles in organizations necessarily leads to “discipline-like” forms of management. This question is disquieting because an affirmative answer would mean that all organizations trivialize the behavior of their members, using it as an instrument to their contingent and possibly evil ends.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In this chapter, we take our citations from the Oxford translation edited by Barnes (Barnes, 1991).
- 2.
Of course, this does not mean that the vegetative has nothing to do with eudaimonia. For instance, health and nutrition can contribute to living a fulfilled life. However, by themselves they do not constitute it.
- 3.
Some authors arrange the constitutive elements of choice in the form of a ‘syllogism’ (e.g. Kenny, 1979 who is also critical of this arrangement; Sherman, 1989; Hughes, 2001). Kenny (1979) calls syllogisms pertaining to choices of ends sought for their own sake ‘ethical syllogisms’ (as opposed to ‘technical syllogisms’). The desire to do the apparently good thing is the ‘major’ of this syllogism, which is also called the ‘premise of the good’. The minor of this syllogism is the particular act that instantiates doing what is apparently good in the given circumstances. As this act must be in our power to realize, the minor is also called the ‘premise of the possible’. This premise is the result of deliberation and judgment. The ‘conclusion’, then, is the desire to act in this particular way in the given circumstances.
References
Barnes, J. (ed). (1991). The complete works of Aristotle: The revised Oxford translation (The Bollinger Series LXXI 2nd ed., Vol. 1 and 2). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.
Burnyeat, M. F. (1999). Aristotle on learning to be good. In N. Sherman (Ed.), Aristotle’s “Ethics”: Critical essays (pp. 205–230). Lanham: Rowan & Littlefield.
Hughes, G. (2001). Aristotle on ethics. London: Routledge.
Kenny, A. (1979). Aristotle’s theory of the will. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Nussbaum, M. C. (1997). The fragility of goodness: Luck and ethics in Greek tragedy and philosophy. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Ricoeur, P. (1994). Oneself as another. K. Bamey (Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sherman, N. (1989). The fabric of character: Aristotle’s theory of virtue. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sherman, N. (1999). The Habituation of Character. In N. Sherman (Ed.), Aristotle’s “Ethics”: Critical essays (pp. 205–230). Lanham: Rowan & Littlefield.
Vasiliou, I. (1996). The role of good upbringing in Aristotle’s Ethics. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 56(4), 771–797.
Wolf, U. (2002). Aristoteles’ “Nikomachische Ethik”, Werkinterpretationen. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Achterbergh, J., Vriens, D. (2010). Towards Rich Survival: Aristotle. In: Organizations. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14316-8_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14316-8_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-14315-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-14316-8
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)