In today's world, business is of course deeply engaged in catering to, indeed fueling, such an ideal of a life of pleasure, both through encouraging mass consumption of goods and services and enlisting as employees people whose main objective in work is making enough money to fund that way of life. A materialistic culture is most “successful” when people's conception of themselves is dictated by how much money they possess and, accordingly, how much they are capable of consuming. Paul Nystrom coined the phrase “philosophy of futility” to denote a disposition triggered by the boredom attending the industrial era for people to pursue gratification from shallow aspects of life such as fashion. As Nystrom puts it:
One's outlook on life and its purposes may greatly modify one's attitude toward goods in which fashion is prominent. At the present time, not a few people in western nations have departed from old-time standards of religion and philosophy, and having failed to develop forceful views to take their places, hold to something that may be called, for want of a better name a philosophy of futility. This view of life (or lack of a view of life) involves a question as to the value of motives and purposes of the main human activities. There is ever a tendency to challenge the purpose of life itself. This lack of purpose in life has an effect on consumption similar to that of having a narrow life interest, that is, in concentrating human attention on the more superficial things that comprise much of fashionable consumption.10
The Life of Politics
The next account of happiness that Aristotle examines, the life of politics, seems at first glance to be disconnected from the life of business. But Aristotle believed that the life of politics mainly is about the governance of people with an eye to gaining honor, or stated in modern parlance, an outstanding reputation. “A consideration of the prominent types of life shows that people of superior refinement and of active disposition identify happiness with honour; for this is, roughly speaking, the end of the political life.”11 So it is not much of a stretch to connect the life of politics in Aristotle's sense to the life of business. The structure of many of today's business firms parallel governmental organizations. Within such top-to-bottom structures managerial and executive positions empower people to govern substantial numbers of other individuals. In the course of exercising their power, business leaders are as quick to seize opportunities for burnishing their reputations as politicians are. Just think about the eagerness of corporate CEOs to get in the limelight on CNBC to brag about themselves and their firms.
The Life of Contemplation
The life of contemplation is the third of Aristotle's alternatives. Concerning distractions of the mind, Aristotle reckons it is ludicrous to labor for the sole purpose of paying for diversions. “Now to exert oneself and work for the sake of amusement seems silly and utterly childish.”12 Today most of us would agree. After all, what would you think of a person who told you that their sole objective in slaving away at their job was to pay for video games, trips to amusement parks, and visits to comedy clubs? To Aristotle's way of thinking, it is more reasonable to see amusements as recreation that revivifies us while on the way to more important endeavors. “But to amuse oneself in order that one may exert oneself, as Anacharsis puts it, seems right; for amusement is a sort of relaxation, and we need relaxation because we cannot work continuously. Relaxation, then, is not an end; for it is taken for the sake of activity.”13 Although Aristotle accords merit to the acclaim people seek from governing others, ultimately he deems such a pursuit as deficient because it makes people dependent on others' opinions. We should not deem something a supreme good if it remains outside our influence. Plus, Aristotle notes that people who are ostensibly pursuing public approval are actually seeking to have their virtues acknowledged. For Aristotle, this shows that virtue lies at the heart of the good life. He writes:
A consideration of the prominent types of life shows that people of superior refinement and of active disposition identify happiness with honour; for this is, roughly speaking, the end of political life. But it seems too superficial to be what we are looking for, since it is thought to depend on those who bestow honour rather than on him who receives it, but the good we divine to be something proper to a man and not easily taken from him. Further, men seem to pursue honour in order that they may be assured of their goodness; at least it is by men of practical wisdom that they seek to be honoured, and among those who know them and on the ground of their virtue; clearly, then, according to them at any rate, virtue is better.14
In Aristotle's view:
If happiness is activity in accordance with virtue, it is reasonable that it should be in accordance with the highest virtue; and this will be the best thing in us. Whether it be reason or something else that is this element which is thought to be our natural ruler and guide and to take thought of things noble and divine, whether it be itself also divine or only the most divine element in is, the activity of this in accordance with its proper virtue will be perfect happiness. That this activity is contemplative we have already said.15
Quite a number of thinkers in the Western tradition, from Socrates and the Stoic philosophers to Schopenhauer and Adam Smith, espoused the notion that some form of deliberation constitutes the supreme good of life. In Eastern thought, one sees this view endorsed in the Buddhist, Confucian, Zen, and Taoist quest for a tranquil state of mind. Lao Tse's query runs:
Do you have the patience to wait
till your mud settles and the water is clear?16
Aristotle's ideas about contemplation resemble the Zen-like state creative artists experience when, intensely focused, ordinary thought is suspended. In this state, troubles seem to disappear. The artist Botero said he only started existing when working in his studio, a refuge from the world's violence. He felt superb fulfillment, finding harmony in precise form coupled with correct color. A profound joy he likened to lovemaking issued from a magical, unexpected moment. A sense of peace pervaded the canvas and his heart.17
How about the quest for riches? Aristotle dismisses this pursuit with the claim that we do not go after money for its own sake. What people genuinely want is not wealth as such. They seek to get at something else by means of their wealth. As Aristotle states, “The life of money-making is one undertaken under compulsion, and wealth is evidently not the good we are seeking; for it is merely useful and for the sake of something else.”18 What a person is truly after will fall into one of three categories: pleasure, recognition, or using the intellect in leisure. A skeptic might argue that Aristotle is overlooking the possibility that one might gleefully go after treasures, reveling in the hunt itself, as one might enjoy fishing or hunting. Acquiring immense wealth is like a game, a critic might say: the more money you make, the higher your score. We've all heard the line, “The one with the most toys at the end wins.” Yet this view is implicit in Aristotle's observation that “some men turn every quality or art into a means of getting wealth; this they conceive to be the end, and to the promotion of the end they think all things must contribute.”19 To be sure, Aristotle has a ready response. Someone chasing money for sport is in fact most interested in showing how great they are in winning the money game. On this point, Aristotle has the winning argument. He shows that, in the end, virtue is actually the good. Taking another swipe at the obsession for money grabbing, Aristotle claims that it not only saps our opportunity for engaging in leisure, it also tends to make us forget that, after all, wealth is not itself an end, but rather a means to attain the end of happiness. In Aristotle's words, “Some persons are led to believe that…the whole idea of their lives is that they ought either to increase their money without limit, or at any rate not to lose it. The origin of this disposition in men is that they are intent upon living only, and not upon living well; and, as their desires are unlimited, they also desire that the means of gratifying them should be without limit.”20
Many people get trapped in a vicious cycle: unaware of the endless futility that occurs when no matter how much you get, you only want more. So Aristotle's thinking equips us with a way of understanding our own greed beyond that which our culture provides. Aristotle's thought gives a powerful vantage point from which to look at contemporary business. Consider the claim that some business practices leave people endlessly treading a hamster wheel. Aristotle is not averse to one's acquisition