Yan Ying S Soup, Aristotle S Aesthetic Harmony and Market Economy

Yan Ying’s soup, Aristotle’s aesthetic harmony and market economy

By

Charalampos Magoulas

Introduction

3.6 trillion dollars. To this astronomical price will amount the cost of the global financial crisis for the banks, according to Nouriel Roubini, Professor of Economics at New YorkUniversity.[1] The French newspaper Le Monde (23/01/2009) published the results of a research made by him and his partner, Elisa Parisi-Capone, who estimate that the American banks will incur the half of the abovementioned loss. That is why he claims that the American bank system is currently in the limits of insolvency. Even if we could ignore Roubini’s predictions – although in 2006 he was called Cassandra and later on Dr. Doom, for he forewarned that home prices and loans will gradually lead to a deep economic recession – the actual effects of this situation are already visible: foreclosures, homelessness, layoffs, wide and violent rupture of the social fabric.

If the goal of the Social Contract signed by the people and their government is protection and social harmony, at least according to numerous political philosophers of all eras, the question, which is sometimes considered sufficiently responded and thus self-evident, in periods when abnormalities in social life menace the regular function of institutions, becomes crucial and concerns the definition and the substance of these terms: protection against who and from what and what is social harmony. The answer to the first part of the question depends on the answer to the second one, because otherwise it could effectively be nothing more than a simplistic tautology: protection against individuals or groups of persons who disturb the social harmony and therefore from their systematic activities. Hence, it is preferable to tackle the question of social harmony.

Given that in that effort we will have to evoke firstly Aristotle’s theory on harmony, notwithstanding that it will be analysed within the context of aesthetics, and secondly the soup allegory regarding the social harmony in Confucianism, it is fundamental to specify some basic characteristics of the contemporary political and economical system in which the social harmony is established. Indispensable principles of the political organisation of most countries in the world are a democratic regime, liberal economy and the idea of a continuous progress for the achievement of prosperity for the society. After the Second World War, the theory that the transformation of totalitarian regimes into democratic ones will be possible only through the increase of prosperity was dominant among the political scientists and economists. However, this identification of democracy with money and market is not correct according to the Italian politologist Giovanni Sartori (2008).

Nevertheless, and before we study the contribution of market economy to social harmony, it is plausible to examine the nature of the relation between political system and economic structure of the society. As the political system provides in any case the frames within which the economy operates and brings harmony to the society, we could metaphorically represent their relation as a scheme of form and content in linguistic terms: language provides the frames within which the content (i.e. thoughts) is expressed and brings success and harmony to the communication. Let us now explore this binary relation in Aristotle’s aesthetic theory.

1. Aesthetic harmony in Aristotle

This juxtaposition does not seem that arbitrary if we take into account the fact that Aristotle’s doctrine on music harmony is included in his Politics. The harmony in art could be used as an example of what the citizens of a society should aim at and what kind of form and content could social and political actions have, in order to assure social harmony. Umberto Eco (1993: 149) in his research on the archaeology of aesthetic theories, refers to the eighth book of Politics, where Aristotle classifies melodies into three categories, ethical melodies, melodies of action, and passionate or inspiring melodies, the first ones being useful for pedagogical purposes and the others for theatrical spectacle. The educational dimension of art in Politics, as it is explored regarding the music harmonies, is not entirely distinct from pleasure: the melody represents the composer’s state of mind and transmits aesthetic values through the mediation of senses to the spectator and thus modifies the state of mind of the later. However, music does not only contribute to the education of human beings, but also provides enjoyment and satisfies the spirit (1340a 38 ff.).

Aristotle describes in Poetics how both goals of art, education and satisfaction can be accomplished. It is not only the content (myth) of the tragedy that is important but also the configuration of external elements, such as extension and language (1451a 21-29). The symmetry of the parts of a play presupposes an exterior (lexical items) as well as an interior (plot) coherence. These norms ensure the organic balance, the harmony and the aesthetic quality of the tragedy. Eco is right when he remarks that there is a quantitative conception of aesthetics in Aristotle: the right proportion among the parts of the tragedy (episodes and chorals) is a sine qua non rule for the construction of a well-structured and homogeneous play. The beauty in ancient Greek philosophical tradition, not only the Aristotelian one, is strongly associated with proportion (Eco, 1993: 90). This principle of symmetry is generalisable, forasmuch as it is used as a normative rule in figurative arts.

Nonetheless, the proportion for Ancient Greeks does not only describe a mathematical relation, but also represents a metaphysical principle. Thus, beauty is the measurement of the elements of the external form (in the case of tragedy, the metre, the symmetry of the parts, the number of syllables, the number of verses) as well as the aesthetic harmony which the play transmits as total to the spectators (in the same case, the content must be neither superior nor inferior to the chosen form; otherwise the form would give the impression of grotesque or inadequate). Eco in his research on ancient aesthetics (1993: 109) cites the comment of Thomas Aquinas on Aristotle’s On the Soul (426a), where the Greek philosopher seems to identify the voice and the sense of hearing. The conclusion is that both philosophers agree on the fact that harmony is a certain proportion. We will proceed now to explore the application of this principle to the concept of social harmony.

2. Confucian allegory on social harmony

Modern semiotic theories refuse actually to separate form from its potential significations and study content as an independent value. However, just as the form of a piece of art is not the simple addition of the form of its parts, so neither could the content of it be the addition of the signification of its parts. What really guarantees the success of an artistic creation is the harmonious melange of the adequate or just available components. In terms of social or global harmony what is called society or community of nations is not the simple addition of cultural characteristics, ideological background, religious and other beliefs of social groups or nations, but the harmonic dialectic interaction between them. In terms of politics, the harmony of a system is not the coexistence between a political regime and an economic practice, but the degree of their contribution to the welfare of human beings.

A very good example that advocates Aristotle’s theory that harmony is a certain proportion, could be taken from the Chinese culture and especially the culinary art. As a matter of fact, dining is a ceremony in the Chinese – as well as in the Greek – tradition, and a harmonic dinner requires the overcoming of prejudices, class difference and generation gaps (Wang, 2005: 13), just as social harmony entails. The harmony (he) in Chinese practical philosophy is not only a capital concept that leads the actions of everyday life but also a strategy for the solution of social problems, the stabilization of relations and the formation of social groups. An illustration of this principle is the allegory of Yan Ying soup as it is presented by Zuozhuan (Wang, 2005: 14-15). The flavour of the soup consists in the harmonious melange and the right proportion of the ingredients. A lack or the excess of one of them would disturb the whole soup. This allegory is narrated along with the example of the ruler and the courtier, where the later keeps observing and indicating the wrong decisions of the former and in that way rein peace and harmonyin the state.

A noticeable conjunction in the soup allegory is this between the harmonisation of five flavours (sweet, sour, bitter, spicy and salty) and the harmonisation of five sounds (gong, shang, jue, zhi, yu) which is equivalent to the five note-scale in music (Wang, 2005: 15) and ensures calmness of mind in handling state affaires. Apart from the fact that number five is very important in Confucian philosophy (e.g. the five elements which are the basic creations of nature: wood, fire, earth, water and metal), the metaphor of the music harmony remind us the Aristotelian melodies, which hold a significant role in youth education and delight.

What this allegory of Yan Ying soup teaches us is that harmony either in art or in politics is the concept that encourages the elimination of wrong elements in favour of the right ones, indicates the process of transformation of all elements through their interaction both in art and social contexts and proposes the dialectic union of opposites. Yin-Yang theories to be found in Confucian philosophy, promote this dialectic relation between the weak and passive female energies (Yin) and the strong and active ones (Yang).

3. Aristotle and market economy

This intercultural approach of the concept of harmony in aesthetic and social theories could be a guideline for the verification of the hypothesis regarding the relation between market economy, non-interventionist policies in modern democracies and social balance: does market economy ensure welfare, peace and harmony in modern globalised societies?

If we want to answer properly to this extremely crucial issue we have to investigate first whether there is social and global harmony. As far as social harmony is concerned, a measure could be the modern diseases of civilisation such as depression, diabetes, fatness, stress etc. The British epidemiologist Richard Wilkinson considers that the origin of such illnesses and the current death rates are connected directly to social inequalities (2005). In countries where inequalities are more intense, people feel more stressed to earn and consume, because class differences and competition force the citizens to work more hours and thus live in worse conditions. For thousands years, the best way for the improvement of the quality of life was the improvement of the material standard of living. Nowadays, mankind is at the end of the road, given that there is no clear connection between income and happiness, GNP and social harmony. According to Wilkinson, economic development can not do anything more for us; the issue right now is not our material needs but the quality of social relations.

As far as the global harmony is concerned it would be more than sufficient to quote Noam Chomsky’s data originated from the UN, according to which, in 1997, 30 billion dollars would be enough to cover the basic needs of global population, while 780 billion were the global armament expenses (1999: 14). It would be odd to analyse why these inequalities are the obvious reasons of poverty, famine, wars, terrorism, environmental risks across the world, factors that disturb global harmony.

However, the impossibility of market economy to ensure global harmony is diagnosed centuries before the rise of the bourgeoisie after the industrial revolution and the appearance of capitalism. The sociologist Karl Polanyi mentions that, twenty centuries before economic liberalism, Aristotle in his Politics – forasmuch as he distinguishes home economics (i.e. household management) from market economy – argues that the harmony between production for use (i.e. home needs) and production for profit is not disturbed when both take place at home (i.e. the farm) (2001: 55-56). Although he is not aware of concepts like “division of labour”, “capital” and “credit”, he clearly identifies the divergence between the principle of use and the principle of profit and its consequences for the social harmony. This distinction is the core element for the development of a radically different civilisation. Criticising the principle of production for lucrative purposes as abnormal for the human beings, Aristotle focused his thought on this very point, this crucial issue, namely the detachment of a completely separate economic motivation from the body of social relations. Profit is described therefore as the wrong ingredient of the soup, the wrong note of the melody, the weak link in the chain of global and social harmony.

Conclusion

In conclusion, nowadays market economy has received too much criticism and it seems quite understandable, when a crisis threatens the societies, to try to locate the causes of an irregularity such as this that we actually witness. The essential however is not only to reject but propose alternatives which could possibly re-establish social and global harmony. As the main issue concerns the relation between democracy and market economy, it would be an omission to leave unmentioned the fact that a market economy could function without democratic institutions at least in the way the western political systems are structured. Another interesting point is that democracy does not necessarily lead to prosperity. The example of Latin America is always present.

Nevertheless, two contradictory observations describe the relation between democracy, development and prosperity: on the one hand prosperity reinforces democratic institutions – e.g. through the improvement of education – but on the other hand money can corrupt and bribe. The relation between state and economic activity used to be submitted to the law of intervention. Nonetheless, the recent recession and primarily its causes prove that such interventionist policy did not exist. The main problem with the development however is that during the last decades is not sustainable any more, namely we consume more than we can produce or more than the planet can afford and this is not an issue that can be solved by the market.

Sartori (2008) argues that market comes to late and in an incorrect way to deal with the dramatic changes taking place today, because at the same time it accelerates and aggravates them through this “blind development”. The economist Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, proposes two simple initiatives to resolve the great social and environmental problems of the planet: firstly, to emphasize on the sustainable use and management of natural resources (e.g. air, water, earth, forests, biodiversity) and secondly to provide equal opportunities for everyone. Western countries must accept to reduce the consumption of energy and goods in order to promote the convergence in living standards; otherwise the global society will have to face the fatal increase of terrorism and wars in the developing countries which will suffer the effects of environmental changes of which they are not responsible.

The same opinion seems to be shared by the French economist Serge Latouche, who believes that a development according to the principles of market economy is based on the unlimited economic growth, the infinite production and consumption and the exploitation of natural resources; this kind of development is not sustainable in the first place (2006). Since the economy, as we understand it today, depends on the infinite accumulation and consumption and is holistic (i.e. it is impossible not to have a market society when market economy rules), the only solution that could be proposed is de-growth. Even if now it is not clear how urgent is for mankind to follow this direction, some thinkers claim that it is already late and in a few years the loss of social, environmental and global harmony will be irreversible.

References

Aristotle, On the soul.

Aristotle, Poetics.

Aristotle, Politics.

Chomsky N. (1996). Class Warfare: Interviews with David Barsamian. A. Filippatos (trans.). Athens: Kastaniotis, 1999.

EcoU. (1970).Le problème esthétique chez Thomas d’Aquin. M. Javion (trans.). Paris: PUF, 1993.

Latouche S.Le pari de la décroissance. Paris: Fayard, 2006.

Polanyi, K. (1944).The great transformation.K. Gaganakis (trans.). Skopelos: Nisides, 2001.

Sartori, G. La democrazia in trenta Lezioni. Milano: Mondadori, 2008.

Wang, K. Chinese philosophy on life. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 2005.

Wilkinson, R. The Impact of Inequality: How to Make Sick Societies Healthier.New York: The New Press, 2005.

1

[1] Cf.

monitor/255236/total_36t_projected_loans_and_securities_losses_18t_of_which_at_us_banksbrokers_the_specter_of_technical_insolvency