Like Plato, Aristotle believed that justice is the very essence of the state and that no polity can
endure for a long time unless it is founded on a right scheme of justice. According to him, justice is
virtue, complete virtue, and the embodiment of all goodness. It is not the same thing as virtue, but it
is virtue and virtue in action. Thus Aristotle makes it clear that ‘the goodness in the sphere of
politics is justice, and justice contains what tends to promote the common interest.”
Aristotle believes that justice saves the states from destruction; it makes the states and political life
pure and healthy. For Aristotle, justice is either general or particular. According to Aristotle, general
justice is complete goodness It is complete in the fullest sense, because it is the exercise of
complete goodness not only in himself but also towards his neighbours. Particular justice is a part of
complete or general justice.
Particular justice has two sub varieties, namely, distributive and corrective justice.
Corrective justice is mainly concerned with voluntary commercial transactions like sale, hire,
furnishing of security, etc: and other things like aggression on property and life, honor and freedom.
Distributive justice consists in proper allocation to each person according to his worth. This type of
justice relates primarily but not exclusively to political privileges.
From the point of view of distributive justice, each type of political organisation, its own standard of
worth and , therefore, of distributive justice. Distributive justice assigns to every man his due
according to his contributions to the society. Distributive justice is identifiable with proportionate equality.
Aristotle’s concept of distributive Justice does not apply to modern conditions. Based on the notion
of award of officers and honors in proportion to a man’s’ contribution to society, it could apply to a
small city states and is not applicable to modern sovereign states with huge population. Thus his
theory distributive justice is far away from the reality of the modern world.
EDUCATION
Like his master Plato, Aristotle was very keen on education. The end of the state, according to him,
is good life of the individuals for which education is the best instrument. Education was meant to
prepare the individual for membership of the state and as such had a political as well as intellectual
aim.
According to Aristotle, education must be adapted to the constitution of the state and should be
calculated to train man in a certain type of character suitable to the state. To him, the building of a
particular type of character was more important than the imparting of knowledge and therefore
proper educational authority was the states and not the private individuals. Aristotle was in favour of
setting of state controlled educational institutions. However, Aristotle’s view on education was less
comprehensive and systematic compared to his master, Plato.
REVOLUTION
The search for stability through polity made Aristotle examine the causes for instability,
change and revolution and prescribe remedies against unnecessary and incessant change. In
book v of the politics Aristotle discussed one of the most important problems which made it a hand
book for all state men for all time to come. The analytical and the empirical mind of Aristotle gives
numerous causes of revolution and suggest remedies to overcome them. As Prof. Ebenstein has
rightly pointed out Politics of Aristotle is more a book on the art of government than a systematic
exposition of political philosophy. In Aristotle analysis the evils that were prevalent in the Geek cities
and the defects in the political systems and gives practical suggestions as to the best way to avoid
threatening danagers. Aristotle points out that there are varying degrees of revolution. A revolution many take the
form of a change of constitution a state or the revolutionaries may try to grasp political power
without changing the constitution. A revolution may be directed against not the entire system of
government but a particular institution or set of person in the state. A revolution may be
completing armed or peaceful and personal or impersonal.
In order to diagnose a revolution we must consider the temper of the revolutionaries and
their motives and the causes and occasions of revolution. Aristotle discussed general causes of
revolution and then looked into the reasons why individual constitutions changed. Unlike Plato,
Aristotle perceived multiple reasons for revolutions rather than a regime’s prominent deficiency. He
placed greater responsibility on the rulers to ensure stability and justice.
Aristotle classifies the causes of revolution under two groups general and particular causes.
The general causes of revolutions were broadly categorised into three.
1. Psychological motives or the state of mind.
2. The objectives in mind;
3. The occasions that gave rise to political upheaval and mutual strife The psychological factors were the desire for equality in an oligarchy and inequality in a
democracy .The objectives in mind included profit, honor , insolence ,fear superiority in some form,
contempt disproportionate increase in some part of the state, election intrigues, willful negligence,
neglect of insignificant changes, fear of opposites and dissimilarity of component parts of the state.
The occasions that give rise to revolutionary changes were insolence, desire for profit and honour,
superiority, fear, contempt, and disproportionate increase in one part or element of the state.
The particular causes were analyzed in each constitution. Aristotle states that “poverty is the parent
of revolution and crime” and that when there is no middle class and the poor greatly exceed in
number, troubles arise, and the state soon comes to an end. In democracy the most important
cause of revolution is the unprincipled character of the popular leaders. Demagogues attack the
rich, individually or collectively, so as to provide them to forcibly resist and provide the emergence
of oligarchy. The causes of overthrow of oligarchies can be internal as when a group within the
class in power becomes more influential or external, by the mistreatment of the masses by the
governing class. In aristocracies few, people share in honour. When the number of people
benefiting become smaller or when disparting between rich and poor becomes wider revolution is
caused in a monarchy, sedition was usually due to fear, contempt, desire for fame, insults, hatred
and desire by neighboring states to extend their boundaries.
Remedies to prevent revolution
Aristotle has suggested a number of useful and practical remedies for preventing revolutions. The
first essential remedy are to inculcate the spirit of obedience to law, especially in small matters and
to watch the beginning of change in the constitution. Aristotle suggested that too much power
should not be allowed to concentrate in the hands of one man or one class of men and various
classes in the state should be treated with consideration. Great political offices in the state should
be outside the reach of unkind strangers and aliens, holders of offices should not be able to make
private gain. Public administration, particularly financial administration, should be subjected to
public scrutiny. Further, offices and honors should be awarded on considerations of distributive
justice and no class of citizens should have a monopoly of political power. Again the higher offices
in the state should be distributed only on considerations of loyalty to the constitution administrative
capacity and integrity of character, but each citizen must have his due.
Democracy
Aristotle believes that democracy is characterised by twin principles of freedom and majority -rule.
Aristotle was not opposed to democracy in the same measures as Plato was. According to him
democracy is a form of government in which supreme power is in the hands of freemen. He
believed that the aggregates virtue and ability of the mass of the people was greater than the virtue
and ability of a part of the population. It the mass of the people do not understand the technicalities
of a administration, they have the commonsense of appointing right administrators and legislators
and of checking any misbehavior on the part of the latter. Aristotle’s democracy means
aristodemocracy
of the free citizens because the large body of slaves and aliens can have no share in
the government of the day. Direct democracy is possible only in a small city state Aristotle
condemns only the extreme form of democracy namely mobocracy.
Assessment
Aristotle’s Politics has served as a foundation work for the whole western tradition. His
encyclopedic mind encompassed practically all the branches of human knowledge. Unlike Plato’s
Republic, Aristotle’s works were measured in thinking and analysis, reflecting the mind of a scientist
rather than that of a philosopher. He regarded as the father of political science because he was
perhaps the first political thinker to analyse political institutions and behaviour systematically and
scientifically. He considered man as a social animal and the state as a natural organisation which
exists not only for life but for the sake of good life. He was a great pioneer in political science and
no discussion is ever complete without a reference to his brilliant insights and method of analysis.
So friend this is all about it so thanks for reading.
endure for a long time unless it is founded on a right scheme of justice. According to him, justice is
virtue, complete virtue, and the embodiment of all goodness. It is not the same thing as virtue, but it
is virtue and virtue in action. Thus Aristotle makes it clear that ‘the goodness in the sphere of
politics is justice, and justice contains what tends to promote the common interest.”
Aristotle believes that justice saves the states from destruction; it makes the states and political life
pure and healthy. For Aristotle, justice is either general or particular. According to Aristotle, general
justice is complete goodness It is complete in the fullest sense, because it is the exercise of
complete goodness not only in himself but also towards his neighbours. Particular justice is a part of
complete or general justice.
Particular justice has two sub varieties, namely, distributive and corrective justice.
Corrective justice is mainly concerned with voluntary commercial transactions like sale, hire,
furnishing of security, etc: and other things like aggression on property and life, honor and freedom.
Distributive justice consists in proper allocation to each person according to his worth. This type of
justice relates primarily but not exclusively to political privileges.
From the point of view of distributive justice, each type of political organisation, its own standard of
worth and , therefore, of distributive justice. Distributive justice assigns to every man his due
according to his contributions to the society. Distributive justice is identifiable with proportionate equality.
Aristotle’s concept of distributive Justice does not apply to modern conditions. Based on the notion
of award of officers and honors in proportion to a man’s’ contribution to society, it could apply to a
small city states and is not applicable to modern sovereign states with huge population. Thus his
theory distributive justice is far away from the reality of the modern world.
EDUCATION
Like his master Plato, Aristotle was very keen on education. The end of the state, according to him,
is good life of the individuals for which education is the best instrument. Education was meant to
prepare the individual for membership of the state and as such had a political as well as intellectual
aim.
According to Aristotle, education must be adapted to the constitution of the state and should be
calculated to train man in a certain type of character suitable to the state. To him, the building of a
particular type of character was more important than the imparting of knowledge and therefore
proper educational authority was the states and not the private individuals. Aristotle was in favour of
setting of state controlled educational institutions. However, Aristotle’s view on education was less
comprehensive and systematic compared to his master, Plato.
REVOLUTION
The search for stability through polity made Aristotle examine the causes for instability,
change and revolution and prescribe remedies against unnecessary and incessant change. In
book v of the politics Aristotle discussed one of the most important problems which made it a hand
book for all state men for all time to come. The analytical and the empirical mind of Aristotle gives
numerous causes of revolution and suggest remedies to overcome them. As Prof. Ebenstein has
rightly pointed out Politics of Aristotle is more a book on the art of government than a systematic
exposition of political philosophy. In Aristotle analysis the evils that were prevalent in the Geek cities
and the defects in the political systems and gives practical suggestions as to the best way to avoid
threatening danagers. Aristotle points out that there are varying degrees of revolution. A revolution many take the
form of a change of constitution a state or the revolutionaries may try to grasp political power
without changing the constitution. A revolution may be directed against not the entire system of
government but a particular institution or set of person in the state. A revolution may be
completing armed or peaceful and personal or impersonal.
In order to diagnose a revolution we must consider the temper of the revolutionaries and
their motives and the causes and occasions of revolution. Aristotle discussed general causes of
revolution and then looked into the reasons why individual constitutions changed. Unlike Plato,
Aristotle perceived multiple reasons for revolutions rather than a regime’s prominent deficiency. He
placed greater responsibility on the rulers to ensure stability and justice.
Aristotle classifies the causes of revolution under two groups general and particular causes.
The general causes of revolutions were broadly categorised into three.
1. Psychological motives or the state of mind.
2. The objectives in mind;
3. The occasions that gave rise to political upheaval and mutual strife The psychological factors were the desire for equality in an oligarchy and inequality in a
democracy .The objectives in mind included profit, honor , insolence ,fear superiority in some form,
contempt disproportionate increase in some part of the state, election intrigues, willful negligence,
neglect of insignificant changes, fear of opposites and dissimilarity of component parts of the state.
The occasions that give rise to revolutionary changes were insolence, desire for profit and honour,
superiority, fear, contempt, and disproportionate increase in one part or element of the state.
The particular causes were analyzed in each constitution. Aristotle states that “poverty is the parent
of revolution and crime” and that when there is no middle class and the poor greatly exceed in
number, troubles arise, and the state soon comes to an end. In democracy the most important
cause of revolution is the unprincipled character of the popular leaders. Demagogues attack the
rich, individually or collectively, so as to provide them to forcibly resist and provide the emergence
of oligarchy. The causes of overthrow of oligarchies can be internal as when a group within the
class in power becomes more influential or external, by the mistreatment of the masses by the
governing class. In aristocracies few, people share in honour. When the number of people
benefiting become smaller or when disparting between rich and poor becomes wider revolution is
caused in a monarchy, sedition was usually due to fear, contempt, desire for fame, insults, hatred
and desire by neighboring states to extend their boundaries.
Remedies to prevent revolution
Aristotle has suggested a number of useful and practical remedies for preventing revolutions. The
first essential remedy are to inculcate the spirit of obedience to law, especially in small matters and
to watch the beginning of change in the constitution. Aristotle suggested that too much power
should not be allowed to concentrate in the hands of one man or one class of men and various
classes in the state should be treated with consideration. Great political offices in the state should
be outside the reach of unkind strangers and aliens, holders of offices should not be able to make
private gain. Public administration, particularly financial administration, should be subjected to
public scrutiny. Further, offices and honors should be awarded on considerations of distributive
justice and no class of citizens should have a monopoly of political power. Again the higher offices
in the state should be distributed only on considerations of loyalty to the constitution administrative
capacity and integrity of character, but each citizen must have his due.
Democracy
Aristotle believes that democracy is characterised by twin principles of freedom and majority -rule.
Aristotle was not opposed to democracy in the same measures as Plato was. According to him
democracy is a form of government in which supreme power is in the hands of freemen. He
believed that the aggregates virtue and ability of the mass of the people was greater than the virtue
and ability of a part of the population. It the mass of the people do not understand the technicalities
of a administration, they have the commonsense of appointing right administrators and legislators
and of checking any misbehavior on the part of the latter. Aristotle’s democracy means
aristodemocracy
of the free citizens because the large body of slaves and aliens can have no share in
the government of the day. Direct democracy is possible only in a small city state Aristotle
condemns only the extreme form of democracy namely mobocracy.
Assessment
Aristotle’s Politics has served as a foundation work for the whole western tradition. His
encyclopedic mind encompassed practically all the branches of human knowledge. Unlike Plato’s
Republic, Aristotle’s works were measured in thinking and analysis, reflecting the mind of a scientist
rather than that of a philosopher. He regarded as the father of political science because he was
perhaps the first political thinker to analyse political institutions and behaviour systematically and
scientifically. He considered man as a social animal and the state as a natural organisation which
exists not only for life but for the sake of good life. He was a great pioneer in political science and
no discussion is ever complete without a reference to his brilliant insights and method of analysis.
So friend this is all about it so thanks for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment