15315-wolbert

Chapter 2 19 of human flourishing have diverged so far from Aristotle’s conception that they cannot be called eudemonistic or (neo-)Aristotelian. In other words, though formal criteria for the concept of human flourishing are best derived from Aristotle’s work, Aristotelian eudaimonia itself is just one conception of human flourishing. Readers should not expect a thorough Aristotelian exegesis. It has not been our main purpose to analyse Aristotle’s ethics and argue what we think he wrote that is important for educational theory today. We have looked into the roots of thinking about flourishing as a means to the end of better understanding the concept of human flourishing, by which we hope to show that ‘human flourishing’ is not only a better translation of eudaimonia , but a substantive concept for which formal criteria can be listed that are independent of Aristotle’s and (neo-)Aristotelian ethics. We are convinced that it is of great importance to first set up a clear framework of the concept of human flourishing, by means of formal criteria, in order to contribute to the quality of substantive discussions about education for human flourishing, diverse as they are. Ideally, the presented framework will function as a tool for these discussions. It is not meant to force agreement on one strict idea of flourishing human beings; for that purpose one would need much more substantive criteria than the formal, open, criteria we present here. It does, however, aim to set limits to too loose a use of the concept of human flourishing. We want to emphasise in this chapter that the concept of human flourishing is being used in various, but connected ways, and we make use both of the history and the current use of the concept to show this connectedness. However, those readers who expect a full elaboration on the importance of embedding the concept of human flourishing in the aims of education will be left unsatisfied. This chapter should be considered as a prelude to that kind of endeavour. In the last part of the chapter, we make a start by giving examples of what implications formal criteria for human flourishing can have for educational theory, by which we hope to underline the relevance of our endeavour. 2.2 F LOURISHING IN A RISTOTLE ’ S PHILOSOPHY In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle aims to elucidate the highest good in human life, ‘that at which all things aim’. 8 It is not difficult to establish what this highest good is, since there is general agreement that all things aim at eudaimonia , which is a quite objective matter. 9 Eudaimonia is the most final end, since it is always pursued for itself and never for the sake of something else. 10 As said, 8 Aristotle 2009, p. 3, 1094a. 9 Annas 1993, p. 41. 10 Aristotle 2009, p. 10, 1097b; and see criterion 1.