Interested in hearing from others better versed in Aristotle regarding the subject of "habit." — Xtrix

Habits are repetitive patterns of behavior. Some physicists refer to "natural laws" as merely "habits", in order to avoid the implications of a Law-giver, or of Teleology in nature. Human habits vary from simple personal Routines that have been found to facilitate activities without the necessity of conscious thought. In that case, conscious thought may have been used to find a sequence of events that works for behaviors that can be done almost without thinking. For example, I divide my home-bound Covid day at home into roughly one hour chunks devoted to particular tasks in a regular sequence. This routine only works at home, because at work my time is regulated more by the needs & goals of other people. Nature's "laws" are also regular routines, where effects seem to follow causes without exception, and without forethought. That's presumably because the many possible cause/effect relationships have been worn-down to those that work best -- Darwinian survival of the fittest (for a particular situation, or niche).

But another sense of "habit" is applied to Addictions, in which certain "learned" behaviors, such as smoking, are motivated by subconscious emotional urges, rather than conscious reasons. Addictive behaviors are technically not natural (breathing air), but are artificial, due to past conscious choices (breathing smoke). At first, the choice seems to be reasonable, due to the anticipated Dopamine rewards of feeling stimulated, or of looking cool to peers. But once the Addiction has taken charge of your breathing behavior, the original positive goals become irrelevant, and the most powerful motivation becomes the avoidance of bad feelings --- negative feedback rather than positive impulse. Such habits are often done without awareness, and without conscious reasoning,

For Aristotle though, Habit is a natural "disposition", due to the inherent "Potential" of its "Form" (it's design). Form is a pattern of inter-relationships that makes a thing different from other things -- its uniqueness, its essence, its purpose. Accidental patterns tend to be random, and disorderly, while Intentional patterns are organized for a particular purpose. So, Aristotle's use of "habit" or "disposition" implies goal-directed teleology. But the scientist's use of the same word is intended to signify the opposite meaning : random, meaningless, purposeless behaviors. Human habits or instincts bypass the conscious mind, leaving only a few important behaviors under the control of conscious intention, and meaningful goals. That may be why some have asserted that we typically use only 10% of the Potential of the human Mind. :nerd:


Disposition :
1. a person's inherent qualities of mind and character.
2. the way in which something is placed or arranged, especially in relation to other things.

Design :
1 : to create, fashion, execute, or construct according to plan

Teleology :
1. the explanation of phenomena in terms of the purpose they serve rather than of the cause by which they arise.
2. the doctrine of design and purpose in the material world.

The Aristotelian conception of habit : He classifies habits into three categories: (1) theoretical, or the retention of learning understood as “knowing that x is so”; (2) behavioral, through which the agent achieves a rational control of emotion-permeated behavior (“knowing how to behave”); and (3) technical or learned skills (“knowing how to make or to do”).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4217385/

In my view, this aspect has been largely ignored in philosophy -- with the exception (in my reading) of Aristotle's Ethics. — Xtrix

Hume.

I think understanding habits have to play a major role in applying various answers to the philosophical question of "What is a good life?" — Xtrix

Agreed.

3.6 The "will" is weak (re: akrasia, cognitive biases), so habit seems key to reliable judgment. (See. 2.61)

3.61 Cultivating (a) intellectual habits via pedagogy & discipline* and (b) moral habits via social experience & civic/political engagé, I think, expands Agency, or the capacity for judgment (i.e. adaptive conduct (see 2.62)). — 180 Proof

I'm confused at this point. There's the notion of out-of-our-control proclivities/tendencies/preferences that has everything to do with free will, specifically its absence and then there are habits which have to be, from the way people treat them, under our control. Presumably, habits are manifestations of out-of-our-control proclivities/tendencies/preferences. Why in Heaven's name do habits have a bad rep?

I just read Gnomon's post about how the so-called laws of nature are considered habits. It smacks of determinism and you know the rest...habits and free will form an odd couple and the received wisdom, if one can call it that, is that we can change our habits.

Habits are repetitive patterns of behavior. Some physicists refer to "natural laws" as merely "habits", in order to avoid the implications of a Law-giver, or of Teleology in nature. — Gnomon

I've heard of the latter, but I myself prefer to use "habit" in the former sense of human behavior. I have nothing against the latter use other than personal preference.

Human habits vary from simple personal Routines that have been found to facilitate activities without the necessity of conscious thought. In that case, conscious thought may have been used to find a sequence of events that works for behaviors that can be done almost without thinking. For example, I divide my home-bound Covid day at home into roughly one hour chunks devoted to particular tasks in a regular sequence. This routine only works at home, because at work my time is regulated more by the needs & goals of other people. — Gnomon

Right, this is more what I'm thinking. Thanks for the example.

Such habits are often done without awareness, and without conscious reasoning, — Gnomon

But this applies to "positive" habits as well. Smoking is a good example of a "bad" habit (depending on one's goals), but things like driving a car (perhaps more of a "skill") or brushing one's teeth before bed could also be considered "without conscious reasoning."

So, Aristotle's use of "habit" or "disposition" implies goal-directed teleology. — Gnomon

Yes that's my reading as well.

But the scientist's use of the same word is intended to signify the opposite meaning : random, meaningless, purposeless behaviors. — Gnomon

What scientists do you have in mind? Psychologists don't talk this way. It's not that habits are "purposeless," it's that they're mostly unconscious. We can turn a doorknob unconsciously, but the purpose is clear: open the door, to enter a room, to join a meet, etc. In fact, embedded in many of our daily habits are various purposes.



Thanks -- but can you elaborate a little further here?



I appreciate that.

BTW, does anyone know exactly what Greek word is getting translated as "habit"?

BTW, does anyone know exactly what Greek word is getting translated as "habit"? — Xtrix

Either hexis or ethos, depending on context.

BTW, does anyone know exactly what Greek word is getting translated as "habit"? — Xtrix

If I remember correctly, in Aristotle, a habit is described as a sort of property, what something has. So the word used is similar to "having", and in Latin this is associated with the verb "to have", then in English we have "habit". You can see that if a habit is a property, it is special type of property, involving a propensity toward acting in a specific way.

Thomas Aquinas had a lot to say about habits, and wrote many pages on the subject, especially intellectual habits which are very important in learning. Using the Aristotelian principles of potential and actual, he tried to determine where exactly the habit exists, within the potential, or within the act itself. I believe he concluded that the habit resides in the potential, as a sort of property of the potential. This is a difficult concept to grasp, because properties are commonly features of the form, and it is not well explained how a potential could have a property.

Another person who wrote extensively about habits is Jean-Baptiste Lamarck. Lamarck explored the relationship between habits and evolution. He was a little bit earlier than Darwin in his theorizing, and his ideas that habits were the cause of variations, which lead to different species, was replaced by Darwin's hypothesis of random variations.

I merely think I understand Hume to have pointed out that justification (or reason or logic or derivation or inference) is sometimes deductive but just as often inductive (habitual or associative).

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/331201 — bongo fury

What scientists do you have in mind? Psychologists don't talk this way. It's not that habits are "purposeless," it's that they're mostly unconscious. — Xtrix

Yes. Human habits may begin as conscious voluntary behaviors, but later become subconscious involuntary (hard to quit) routines. Natural Laws are also routine repetitive predictable behaviors that are involuntary.

Actually, Theologian Thomas Aquinas interpreted Aristotle ("the Philosopher") to mean that natural regularities (laws, habits, properties) are not voluntary acts, but necessities due to the inherent Potential (design) of an object. More recently, Biologist and Parapsychologist Rupert Sheldrake enunciated his distinction between physical Habits and mental Laws.

In that case, the current usage of "habit" seems to refer to personal mental properties (typical ways of thinking and acting) due to innate or learned character (personal qualities). When a teenager takes-up smoking, by imitating his cool classmates, he is voluntarily adopting a Meme, which eventually becomes involuntary (habitual). The smoking "habit" has both physical (dependence) and mental (memetic) aspects. :smile:

Aquinas on Natural Habits : “Three things belong to the soul: powers, habits, and emotions,” as the Philosopher says in the Ethics. But the natural law is neither a power of the soul nor an emotion.Therefore, the natural law is a habit.. . . . Therefore, the natural law is a habit, not an act. On the contrary, Augustine says in his work On the Marital Good that “habits are the means whereby we do things when we need to.” But the natural law is not such, since that law belongs to infants and the damned, who cannot act by reason of its presence.
https://faculty.fordham.edu/klima/blackwell-proofs/MP_C45.pdf

Sheldrake : Habits are less human-centred. Many kinds of organisms have habits, but only humans have laws. . . . Habits are subject to natural selection; and the more often they are repeated, the more probable they become, other things being equal. Animals inherit the successful habits of their species as instincts. We inherit bodily, emotional, mental and cultural habits, including the habits of our languages.
https://www.sheldrake.org/research/most-of-the-so-called-laws-of-nature-are-more-like-habits

Memes : A meme (/miːm/ MEEM) is an idea, behavior, or style that becomes a fad and spreads by means of imitation from person to person within a culture and often carries symbolic meaning representing a particular phenomenon or theme. ... Prominent researchers in evolutionary psychology and anthropology, . . . .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme

I appreciate that, thanks.



Some interesting stuff in there, thank you.