The present essay is an attempt to assess Aristotle’s claim that man as “a political animal” made in his treatise The Politics. Obviously, such an assessment requires clear understanding of what the philosopher meant by his definition given three hundred years BC. And the only way to grasp the meaning of Aristotle’s writings is to put them into historical context and learn more about the philosopher’s personality, background and methods of reasoning. That’s why the initial part of the present essay will be devoted to Aristotle, his time and teaching as well as to specific features of his Politics.
Aristotle (384–322 BC) is one of the most prominent philosopher of the ancient Greece. Born in Stagira, in Northern Greece, in a wealthy family of the Macedonian court physician he studied for twenty years in Plato’s Academy in Athens and in 343 BC was invited as a tutor to the young prince of Macedon (future Alexander the Great).[1] In 335 BC, Aristotle settled in Athens and opened his own school called Lyceum where were studied and explored such subjects as botany, biology, logic, mathematics, astronomy, medicine, cosmology, physics, the history of philosophy, metaphysics, psychology, ethics, theology, rhetoric, political history, government and political theory, rhetoric, and the arts.[2] Aristotle actively participated in researches in all the above areas and wrote about two hundred works on different topics out of which thirty survived to our days but not always integrally.[3]
All Aristotle’s teachings are based on the assumption that our world is a rational system inside which everything can be understood and explained. In other words, surrounding realities are knowable through expertise and can be successfully studied. In his studies, the philosopher is guided by the teleological approach according to which everything on earth has its telos, i.e. final end, purpose or goal, for instance, the telos of an acorn is to become a fully grown oak tree.
The above assumption and approach are used in particular in the treatise The Politics where Aristotle considers the origin, nature, constitution, functioning and rule of contemporary Greek poleis. In this connection, it is important to remind that each sovereign polis represented a city-state, which controlled surrounding territories with farms, villages and even small towns, formulated its own laws and had a specific form of government. Not less than one third of a typical polis population were slaves deprived of any civil rights. Women and metics, i.e. foreigners residing in the city, were also excluded from the political life.[4] And only freeborn adult males (above the age of 18) representing about ten percent of the entire polis population were considered as full-fledged citizens having the right to vote and under certain conditions defined by local laws to occupy official posts in the city administration.[5]
When reading The Politics we should bear in mind that the treatise is written from the position of a wealthy free man addressing to his peers and considering as quite natural the oppressed condition of slaves as well the strict subordination of women and children to their husbands and fathers.
The Politics represents an eulogy to the Greek polis which is qualified as the most authoritative of all partnerships aimed at the most authoritative good[6]. Aristotle proves this thesis by the description of the city genesis: first the instinct pushed the man to couple with the woman for reproduction, whereas the natural master associated with the natural slave for the sake of preservation, and out of these two partnerships a household appeared to satisfy daily needs of its members, then several households formed a village and later a number of villages united into the polis to attain self-sufficiency[7]. And self-sufficiency is considered by the author as the telos of all human partnerships.
At the same time, Aristotle insists that the polis exists by nature because all partnerships which led to its creation were natural. And this is very important for the philosopher who believes that nature does nothing in vain and always strives for excellence (eudemonia). In this context, Aristotle’s conclusion that “man is by nature a political animal”[8] means that men can fulfil their telos and attain completeness only as citizens of the polis which is perceived as the superior self-sufficient human community of that époque. In other words, only inside the city in cooperation with their peers, free men can achieve excellence or happiness (eudemonia), and this will be collective not personal accomplishment.
Aristotle indicates the capability to speak and reasoning (logos) given to men by nature as the main distinction between humans and animals[9], and simultaneously uses this natural gift as an evidence that men are especially intended to live in poleis only thanks to speech and reason they managed to establish such a complicated partnership as the polis.
The philosopher considers the citizen of a polis as “the golden mean” between the beast and the god[10], i.e. as the only real human being. He stresses the priority of the city as a whole to every individual or household making its part[11]. It means that for him public interests of an urban community always prevail over private concerns of its citizens.
All Aristotle’s reasoning and arguments proving the natural excellence of Greek city-states and the collective happiness of their freeborn male population looked absolutely irrefutable for his contemporaries. But from the modern point of view, his opinions and conclusions are not as incontestable as before. Nevertheless even today the human natural strive to share the society of his peers cannot be denied. People’s capability to communicate, cooperate and congregate into societies in search of collective safety, stability and prosperity is also proven by time and publicly recognized. Only joint efforts of the mankind ensured its economical, technical and political progress. It means that Aristotle correctly defined humans as a unique specie intended for creation of continuously improving society.
The philosopher’s idea about the natural character of slavery will be indignantly rejected by the modern public opinion.
Aristotle pretends that polis appeared and develops by nature but contradicts himself indicating that “the one who first constituted (a city) is responsible for the greatest of goods”[12]. Certainly, Greek city-states were products of human activity and in some cases even the name of the founder was known. By the way, poleis were not as self-sufficient as the philosopher depicts them, even Athens depended on continuous supply of grain from the Black Sea colonies and from Egypt.
The capacity to speak and reason (logos) was not a gift of nature, as Aristotle believes, but developed gradually in the process of communication and cooperation inside human communities.
Definitely, the Greek polis played an important part in the history of the ancient World and considerably contributed to further economic, social and political development of the entire human race. It was, indeed, the greatest achievement of the Hellenic culture.
Aristotle correctly appreciates city-states as the highest step in the development of the ancient Greek society. He is also right in his definition of humans as a superior specie capable to cooperate, establish complicated partnerships and distinguish between just and unjust. Many truths discovered by Aristotle in his Politics represent today an important part of his invaluable scientific legacy.
Bibliography:
Aristotle. The Politics, trans. by Carnes Lord. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Aristotle, 2008.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle/
Open Yale Courses Introduction to political Philosophy, 2006.
http://oyc.yale.edu/transcript/777/plsc-114
[1] Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Aristotle, 2008. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle/
[2] Ibid.
[3] Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Aristotle, 2008. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle/
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Aristotle. The Politics, trans. by Carnes Lord. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984., 138.
[7] Aristotle. The Politics, trans. by Carnes Lord. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984., 139.
[8] Ibid., 140.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid., 141.
[11] Aristotle. The Politics, trans. by Carnes Lord. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984., 140.
[12] Ibid., 141.