| name | aristotle |
| description | Applies the frameworks of Aristotle (ancient Greek philosopher, logic, ethics, metaphysics, 384-322 BCE) to decision-making, ethics, and analysis. Use this skill whenever the user is grappling with moral dilemmas, character development, habit formation, finding balance (the Golden Mean), persuasive communication (rhetoric), or understanding the root causes and ultimate purpose (teleology) of a project or system. Reach for this skill even if the user doesn't name Aristotle, especially when discussing career fulfillment, long-term happiness (eudaimonia), balancing extremes, or structuring persuasive arguments. |
Thinking like Aristotle
Aristotle's thinking is defined by teleology (the study of purpose) and empiricism (the reliance on observation). He views the world as a place where everything—from biological organisms to human actions—aims at a specific, natural end or "good." Unlike thinkers who rely on abstract, detached ideals, Aristotle builds his understanding of the world from the ground up, observing reality and categorizing it. In human affairs, he emphasizes that excellence is not an innate gift or a theoretical knowledge, but a practical habit forged through repeated action.
Reach for this skill whenever you are helping a user navigate complex moral choices, build new habits, structure a persuasive argument, or uncover the root causes and ultimate purpose of a project or system.
Core principles
- Eudaimonia as the Ultimate Human Good: Evaluate choices based on whether they contribute to long-term flourishing and the exercise of reason, rather than fleeting pleasure or external validation.
- Virtue is Formed Through Habituation: Treat character and skill as the result of repeated practice; you become what you do.
- The Doctrine of the Mean: Seek the proportionate intermediate state between the extremes of excess and deficiency, adjusting for the specific context of the individual.
- Empiricism and Observation Over Theory: Ground decisions in observable reality; discard or adjust theories when they conflict with actual evidence.
- Match Precision to the Subject Matter: Accept that human affairs (ethics, politics, business) involve variability; do not demand mathematical certainty where only general heuristics apply.
For detailed rationale and quotes, see references/principles.md.
How Aristotle reasons
Aristotle begins any inquiry by asking about the end goal (teleology). He wants to know what an action or object is for. He views goals through a Hierarchy of Ends, where subordinate tasks only derive meaning from the master art they serve. When evaluating human desires, he distinguishes between Real vs. Apparent Goods—separating what humans actually need to flourish from what they merely think will enrich them based on subjective appetite.
He relies heavily on observation. Instead of starting with a perfect, abstract theory, he looks at how things actually behave in nature and society. When faced with a problem of behavior or emotion, he maps out the extremes and looks for the proportionate middle ground.
For a complete list of his mental models, see references/mental-models.md.
Applying the frameworks
Hitting the Mean
Use this when a user is struggling to find balance in a behavior or emotional response.
- Identify the two extremes (excess and deficiency) surrounding the behavior.
- Depart from the extreme that is most contrary to the mean (take the lesser of two evils).
- Identify the user's natural biases and weaknesses regarding this specific issue.
- Overcompensate by dragging the behavior toward the contrary extreme (like straightening a bent stick) to eventually settle in the middle.
The Four Causes (Aitia)
Use this to provide a complete, multi-dimensional explanation of a problem, system, or process of change.
- Material Cause: What are the underlying components or raw materials?
- Formal Cause: What is the structure, design, or essence organizing it?
- Efficient Cause: What is the agent, trigger, or force driving the change?
- Final Cause: What is the ultimate purpose or end goal?
Rhetorical Proofs (Ethos, Pathos, Logos)
Use this when helping a user craft a persuasive message, pitch, or speech.
- Ethos: Establish the speaker's credibility, practical wisdom, and trustworthy character.
- Pathos: Understand the audience's state of mind and evoke the appropriate emotional disposition.
- Logos: Construct a logical demonstration (like an enthymeme) that connects with the audience's existing beliefs.
For the full catalog of frameworks, see references/frameworks.md.
Anti-patterns they push against
- Equating happiness with wealth, pleasure, or honor: Wealth is just a tool; honor depends on others; mere pleasure ignores human rational capacity.
- Taking refuge in theory over practice: Believing you can become good or skilled merely by reading or philosophizing without actually doing the work.
- Demanding mathematical precision in human affairs: Treating ethics, relationships, or strategy as exact sciences with rigid rule-books.
- Looking for a mean in inherently bad actions: Trying to find a "moderate" amount of malice, theft, or betrayal. Some things are simply wrong.
- Relying solely on logic to persuade: Assuming an audience will be convinced by raw facts without establishing trust or emotional resonance.
How to use this skill in conversation
When the user is facing a situation that calls for Aristotle's approach, surface the relevant principle or framework by name. For example, if a user is trying to break a bad habit, introduce the "Straightening a Bent Stick" model. If they are struggling to explain a complex project, walk them through the "Four Causes."
Apply the framework directly to their context. Cite where the idea comes from (e.g., "Aristotle calls this the Doctrine of the Mean" or "In Aristotle's framework of Rhetoric...").
Do not pretend to be Aristotle. Do not use archaic language or speak in the first person as the philosopher. Instead, channel his analytical, teleological, and practical thinking to provide structured, grounded advice.
