Politics (aristotle)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Politics , book 2,1262b (OCT lines 8 πόλεσιν - 25 γινόμενα τέκνα) in the manuscript written by Theodoros Gazes Udine , Biblioteca Arcivescovile, 258, fol. 24r (mid 15th century)

The policy ( Greek  Πολιτικά , Politiká , "the political things") is the most important political philosophy signature of Aristotle . The work, which is divided into eight books, deals mainly with various real and abstract constitutions.

In this work, Aristotle puts forward four theses that have been "recognized without contradiction for centuries". They are:

  1. man is a zoon politikon - a social, community-based and community-building creature
  2. the polis is the perfect community
  3. the polis is natural
  4. the polis "is naturally earlier than the house and the individuals."

content

Contents overview

book Contents The numbers relate to the division into chapters
I.
 State formation, anthropology (foundations of political Aristotelianism), economics.
II
 Critique of well-known constitutions, especially Plato's Politeia .
III
 Basic political terms: citizens, constitution; (6–8) so-called first theory of the form of the state , (14–17) monarchy .
IV
 Constitutions: (4, 6) democracy (including the typology of democracy), (5, 7–6) oligarchy , (7) aristocracy , (8–9, 11–12) politics , (10) tyranny .
V
 Constitutional change and preservation; (10-12) Tyranny .
VI
 Constitutions: (4–5) democracy , (6–8): oligarchy .
VII-VIII
 The best state and the education of its citizens.

Man as a zoon politikon

Aristotle describes humans as zoon politikon ( Greek  ζῷον πολιτικόν , social being, in Politika I, 2 and III, 6). This term has become a basic term in Western anthropology. The basic determination of humans is to live with others. Only in this way can he realize his nature, which, unlike animals , has endowed him with language and reason and thus with the opportunity to form ideas of right and wrong and to exchange ideas with others. Whoever lives outside the state is, according to Aristotle, "either an animal or a god".

The teleological concept of nature

Like Plato , Aristotle believes that order does not come about by chance. Likewise, it does not arise from a divine intelligence. Nature is built according to a coherent plan, which is fulfilled when every thing realizes its purpose and thus fulfills its essence and fulfills its function as a whole.

Definition of the state

For Aristotle, the state is the amalgamation of smaller communities into one large one, which fulfills the goal of happiness . Developed from the logical sequence of growing communities (family - house community - village - polis), the state exists as a natural unit to enable a perfect life. Complete self-sufficiency (independence) is only possible in the polis .

According to Aristotle, what rulers and ruled exists by nature. The one who can look ahead is ruling. Free men should determine the affairs of state according to the form of government. Free women and children are distinguished from slaves .

Forms of State

First theory of forms of government

Scheme of forms of government
according to Aristotle (Pol. III, 6–8)
Number of
rulers 		Common good Selfishness
One monarchy Tyranny
Some aristocracy oligarchy
All Politics democracy

In politics , a systematic analysis of forms of government is undertaken for the first time . In the so-called first theory of the form of the state (Pol. III 6 ff.) A total of six basic types of government are counted. These are grouped into three: once as “correct” forms of government and once as their three “missed” deviations.

The three “good” constitutions, which are all geared towards the common good or the state ( monarchy , aristocracy and politics ), are contrasted with the three “degenerate” constitutions that only serve the good of the rulers, their self-interest ( tyranny , Oligarchy and democracy ). For him, democracy is the rule of the many free and poor in the state, at the expense of the able and to the detriment of the wealthy. Nor is it permissible for Aristotle that the poor are more powerful than the rich. Since they are more numerous and the majority is decisive in a democracy, democracy brings about a dominance of the poor.

He accused this of the extreme form of democracy that does not serve the common good. The three bad forms of government thus all failed to achieve the “perfect life” in the Polis community.

Second theory of forms of government

Aristotle pays special attention to democracy in Book IV of Politics . The so-called second doctrine of the form of the state of Chapter 4 examines the various forms of democratic constitutions on an empirical basis and finally comes to a much milder judgment regarding this form of government, which, however, does not apply to its extreme form (cf. Pol. IV and VI). With regard to the subspecies of popular rule, he mentions five in one place (IV. Book), in another four (VI. Book). If you expand the information of the first position with those of the latter, the following picture emerges:

Forms of democracy according to Aristotle (Pol. IV 4; VI 4)
Type: in the government participate: without rights are: Government:
I
politics 		Rich and poor in equal parts Dispossessed, strangers, non-citizens, unfree legally
II the rich and all
haves ( census )		 Dispossessed, strangers, non-citizens, unfree legally
III all of native origin Strangers, non-citizens, unfree legally
IV all citizens Non-citizens, unfree legally
V
extreme
democracy 		all free residents Unfree (slaves) illegal,
arbitrary
  • The first form actually describes politics as defined by Aristotle. In it, the poor and the rich have an equal share in the government, no one has priority and it is true that "no part governs the other, but both are completely equal."
  • The second form is no longer based on equal equality of the poor and the rich (as essential parts of the city) in the government, but is based on the property of the individual. However, due to the low census, the vast majority participate in the political right. However, the offices (in oligarchic manner) are only given to the wealthy, while all (more or less) haves can vote and control the officials.
  • In the third form of democracy, anyone who is of impeccable parentage, i.e. a native, can take part in government, regardless of their material circumstances.
  • In the fourth form of democracy, only citizen status counts. In addition to the rich and the haves, the poor, the dispossessed and foreigners with civil rights can also participate in government.
  • The most extreme form of popular rule, the fifth, involves everyone in government who are not slaves. Aristotle is thus indirectly criticizing the Athenian democracy in its radical phase, but this assessment seems clearly exaggerated.

While the first four forms of democracy govern by law, this is not the case with the fifth form. Aristotle continues: “Where the laws do not decide, there are the people's leaders ( Greek: demagogues ). For there the people are sole rulers, even if they are composed of many individuals. [...] Such a single ruling people seeks to rule because it is not ruled by the law and becomes despotic where the flatterers are honored, and so this democracy under the sole rule corresponds to tyranny. "

For Aristotle, the best form of government is ultimately politics , although the identity of this form of government (described in Pol. IV 8–9 ff.) With moderate democracy (see above, Type I) remains unclear. Politics is actually a mixed constitution and is made up of elements from oligarchy and democracy : from the oligarchy, for example, it assumes that officials are appointed by elections and from democracy that participation in the popular assembly is not done by any - or only one very low - census dependent. In politics there is - correctly understood - equality of the parts of the state, so that this constitution is really just and only serves the common good without being at the expense of any part of the state.

Economics

The oikos , the house community, is "the community of noble life in houses and families for the sake of a perfect and independent life." (Pol. 1280 b 33) Aristotle is not concerned with an economic theory in the modern sense, but with the position of the oikos as a solid, natural element in the predominantly agriculturally structured polis . The polis is the unit of social life that is able to self-sufficiently meet all vital needs. The place of economic activity is the house community. This is determined by natural power relations. "Wherever one is composed of several and something common arises, there is a ruling and a ruled, and this is found in the ensouled living beings due to their entire nature." (Pol. 1254 a 29–32) Hereby Aristotle justifies the Subordination of women and children to the masters of the oikos, but also the natural existence of slaves .

Property is a legitimate and integral part of practical life. "Two things above all arouse the care and love of man: what is his own and what is protected." (Pol. 1262 b 22-23) What speaks for private property is that the individual gives goods more care than the community. (Pol. 1262 b 3) The existence of property gives rise to clear legal claims (Pol 1263 a 15–16) and there are fewer disputes (Pol. 1263 b 22–25). Finally, having property improves economy. (Pol. 1263 b 28) One can also enjoy property to a right degree: “It is also great to furnish one's house according to one's wealth (because this is also an ornament) and, above all, to make expenditures for permanent works (because these are the most beautiful) and in everything to consider what is appropriate. "(NE IV, 1123 a 6–10)

For Aristotle, an appropriate distribution of property is an important element of an appropriate form of government. "If the measure and the middle are recognized to be the best, the middle possession of all is also the best with regard to the goods of happiness, because in such circumstances one obeys reason most easily." (Pol. 1295 b 5–6) However, Aristotle rejects a principle of egalitarianism : “Equality seems to be just and it is, but not among everyone, but among equals. And equally the inequality seems to be fair, and it is, but among the unequal. ”(Pol. 1280 a 13-16) If these structural differences are not taken into account, dissatisfaction arises. “When it is said, 'The common and the noble are equally honored', […] the educated will be annoyed as if they do not deserve to own just as much as the others, and that is why they will often conspire and revolt make. "(Pol. 1267 a 39–41)

For Aristotle, a moderate economy in the Oikos is the basis of a good life and a stable polis. The exchange of goods and services between farmers, artisans and merchants also serves this purpose. This exchange transaction requires money , which has the function of keeping value, the means of payment and the yardstick for the value of goods. (Pol. 1257 a 34 - b 10) In this use, money is a means for supplying goods to the household community and for establishing self-sufficiency in the polis. But when money is no longer a means, but an end of action, then it comes to the art of making money, the chrematistics . It is then no longer a question of exchanging use values, but of accumulating money. (Pol. 1257 b 29) Aristotle regards such behavior as unreasonable and unnatural. “Since enjoyment consists in overabundance, they look for the art that creates the overabundance of enjoyment. And if they cannot achieve this through acquisition, they try other ways and use all abilities to do so, but against nature; for bravery should not earn money, but generate courage, and the art of generals and medicine should not do that, but should bring victory and health. But they make one money acquisition out of all of them, as if this were the goal towards which everything must be directed. ”(Pol. 1258 a 1–14)

Accordingly, interest is also something unnatural. It arises because of greed, the pleonexia , and is something "hateful, because it draws the income from money itself." (Pol. 1258 b 2) Aristotle rejected any further discussion of the art of making money. “This is only discussed here in general. Describing it in detail is useful for undertakings to stop us from doing it, but it would be too vulgar . ”(Pol. 1258 b 34–35) In this respect, Aristotle's view of economics has a completely different perspective than modern economics . It is geared towards the right means and a good life and not towards the efficient and constant increase in material wealth.

The three basic theorems of politics

David Keyt distinguishes three basic theorems in Aristotle's politics . The first comes from Aristotle after he has shown that the polis consists of several villages, and a village in turn consists of several house communities.

1. The polis (the state) exists by nature .

Since every person only lives to fulfill the plan resting in him (teleological concept of nature) and he needs the polis for this, as this enables him to achieve his eudaimonia , the polis exists from the first moment when there are people.

2. Man is a political animal (a sociable living being).

This theorem contains two parts: (a) A zoological classification of humans as political gregarious animals (with bees, ants, etc.) and (b) a distinction between humans and other animals on the basis of language, which enables them to distinguish what is right from what is unjust to distinguish.

3. The polis is earlier than the individual.

Different interpretations:

  • By nature, prior means that a thing X precedes a thing Y if X can exist without Y, but Y cannot exist without X. Example: parents and children.
  • The substance prior means that a thing X precedes a thing Y if X represents a higher level of development than Y. In substance, the polis is prior to the individual because it represents a higher level of development than the individual.
  • Epistemological: In cognition, the polis precedes the individual, since only the polis recognizes the individual. The substance of the polis is the individual. The concept of the individual only receives its meaning through the polis.

criticism

Otfried Höffe appreciates that political anthropology is still convincing today, “but one must restrict: only in the fundamentals.” Höffe criticizes two points. First, public powers are glossed over, since Aristotle “primarily perceives the potential for order and diminishes the character of power.” Second, Höffe accuses Aristotle of having no panhellenic perspective, although there are corresponding institutions. The fact that this is missing, according to Höffe, "is all the more astonishing as it is necessary for both political goals: both for the survival ( zen ) of the individual polis [...] and for their successful life ( eu zen ) ..." . Höffe concludes from this that a “global unity encompassing all of humanity” must be created.

Höffe gives the doctrine of the three good and three bad or degenerate forms of government a special meaning for Western government thinking. Jochen Bleicken speaks of these categories as “conceptual structures of a later time, which were found or invented with more or less forethought in the past to legitimize the democratic idea and above all from a critical attitude towards it” historical value from. He rejects the idea of ​​a “radical” democracy and regards the democracy that existed in the middle of the fifth century as the only historical one. Angela Pabst also denies the existence of a “'moderate democracy' of the archaic” as well as a “development of one from the other system variant”.

See also

literature

Editions of works (in selection)

The best commented version is:

  • Aristotle: politics . Volume 9 of the works in German translation , founded by Ernst Grumach, edited by Hellmut Flashar , translated and explained by Eckart Schütrumpf, Akademie Verlag, Berlin from 1991. Book I (Volume 9.1, 1991), Book II – III (Vol. 9.2, 1991), Book IV – VI (Volume 9.3, 1996), Book VII – VIII (Volume 9.4, 2005).

Other versions can also be used, but they do not offer such extensive commentary:

  • Politics. Writings on the theory of the state . In: Franz Ferdinand Schwarz (Ed.): Reclams Universal Library . Bibliographically supplemented edition. tape 8522 . Philipp Reclam jun., Stuttgart 2010, ISBN 978-3-15-008522-6 .
  • Aristotle: Politics , Reinbek: Rowohlt 1994; Very good and inexpensive translation by Franz Susemihl, with a detailed introduction, bibliography and text summaries.

Secondary literature

  • Manuel Knoll: Aristocratic or Democratic Justice? The political philosophy of Aristotle and Martha Nussbaum's egalitarian reception, Munich / Paderborn 2009.
  • Günther Bien : The foundations of political philosophy in Aristotle. Freiburg / Munich 1973 ff., ISBN 3-495-47581-8 .
  • Aristotle: politics . Edited by Otfried Höffe, series classics interpreting, Berlin 2001, ISBN 3-05-003575-7 (important collection of articles).
  • Alexander Fidora / Johannes Fried / Luise Schorn-Schütte u. a. (Ed.): Political Aristotelianism and Religion in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Times . Akademie-Verlag, Berlin 2007, ISBN 978-3-05-004346-3 .
  • Otfried Höffe (Ed.): Aristoteles Lexicon (= Kröner's pocket edition . Volume 459). Kröner, Stuttgart 2005, ISBN 3-520-45901-9 .
  • Otfried Höffe: Aristotle. Politics . In: History of Political Thought. A manual ed. by Manfred Brocker, Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft 1818, Frankfurt 2007, ISBN 3-518-29418-0 , pp. 31-46.
  • Henning Ottmann : History of Political Thought. The Greeks. From Plato to Hellenism , Vol. 1/2, Stuttgart / Weimar 2001.
  • Peter Koslowski : Politics and Economics in Aristotle , 3rd edition, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 1993.
  • Peter Weber-Schäfer : Aristotle . In: classics of political thought I . Edited by Hans Maier, Heinz Rausch, Horst Denzer, Beck, Munich 2001, ISBN 3-406-42161-X , pp. 33-52.

Web links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Literally: "Things that affect the city (i.e. the community)".
  2. ↑ Aristotle: Politics , ed. by Otfried Höffe, p. 22, cf. also Otfried Höffe, Aristoteles , 2006, p. 241.
  3. ↑ Aristotle: Politics , ed. by Otfried Höffe, p. 22.
  4. ↑ This is in contradiction to Nicomachean Ethics 1162a: “The love between man and woman exists according to nature. For man is by nature a being more oriented towards the community of two than towards the polis. In this respect, the household is older and more necessary than the polis. "
  5. ↑ created on the basis of Henning Ottmann: History of political thinking. The Greeks. From Plato to Hellenism , Vol. 1/2, Stuttgart / Weimar 2001, pp. 172, 196–212.
  6. ↑ Aristotle expressly takes the state constitution and government into one, cf. Arist Pole. III 1278 b 9 ff.
  7. ↑ In the Aristotelian theory of forms of the state, this is the rule of the best, as is the literal translation from the Greek. The best are the best in virtue or in ability.
  8. ↑ created on the basis of Aristotle, Politik IV, 4 and VI, 4 as well as: Henning Ottmann: History of political thinking. The Greeks. From Plato to Hellenism , Vol. 1/2, Stuttgart / Weimar 2001, p. 207.
  9. ↑ Arist. Pole. IV 4, 1291 b 33 f.
  10. ↑ Arist. Pole. VI 4, 1318 b 22 f.
  11. ↑ See Ottmann, p. 207
  12. ↑ Arist. Pole. IV 4, 1292 a 10 ff.
  13. ↑ See Arist. Pole. IV 9, 1294 a 35 ff.
  14. ↑ However, it should be noted that Aristotle states elsewhere, namely in Nicomachean Ethics 1162a, that humans are “due to their nature more (mallon) a zoon syndyastikón (a living being intended for a community of two) than a zoon politikón ”.
  15. ↑ a b c Aristotle: Politics , ed. by Otfried Höffe, p. 34.
  16. ↑ Aristotle: Politics , ed. by Otfried Höffe, p. 35.
  17. ↑ Otfried Höffe. 2008. Brief history of philosophy , Munich: Beck, p. 60
  18. ↑ Bleicken, Jochen, 1995, Die Athenische Demokratie 4th ed., Paderborn: Schönigh, p. 73 f.
  19. ↑ Angela Pabst, 2010, Die Athenische Demokratie , Munich: Beck, p. 105