48. At the beginning
of his Politics Aristotle
claims that “the city is among the things that exist by nature, that a human
being is by nature a political animal, and that anyone who is cityless by
nature and not by chance is either of a depraved sort or better than a human
being” (1253a). Consider this view of the political nature of human beings in
the light of Plato’s exploration of the tensions that emerge between the
philosopher and the polis.
[AT note: What follows is a mash-up of Karl Aho 2011 and
“the old outline”.]
1. Aristotle
a. The city is the natural
unity of human community because it’s the smallest self-sufficient unit
b. Man is a political
animal. (Otherwise why would we have speech?)
i. Argument: Nature makes nothing
pointlessly. Humans have speech. Speech is for making clear what is beneficial
or harmful, just and unjust. So,
nature made humans to be able to investigate what is just and unjust. What is
made by nature to investigate what is just and unjust is by nature most a
political animal.
c. Man needs the
city to be happy and live well, in community, as a human (not
through participation)
i. There is no
leisure without the city. The
city it provides the leisure necessary for becoming a philosopher.
d. The city educates
(its laws and education are geared to produce virtuous people), and education
is necessary for happiness. (c.f. NE I & X)
e. His vision is for this life, not the life to come
f. Some virtues
(justice, generosity), as well as the political life, require the city.
2. Plato
(arguably) thinks that the city exists for the sake of the soul
a. in the Republic:
i. the philosopher must be
compelled to lead the city instead
of merely contemplating the forms.
ii. The myth of Er suggests that
living well will be rewarded, but there is no corresponding promise of reward
for the city. (The myth of Er suggests that moral people are rewarded and
immoral people punished after death.
Er is the name of a guy who died in battle but came back to life to tell
the tale.) (So, there’s a focus on not
this life.)
iii. And it’s unclear whether the Republic
is a political text at all, i.e. whether Plato thought that people could or
should build an ideal Platonic city.
The philosopher might need a city, but it needn’t be a political city. The city of artisans would work just
fine. We don’t need the city to
educate, except incidentally.
iv. Finally, the life of contemplation is the only
really happy life for Plato. The
political life isn’t really an option.
1.
Plato
does not think that man is a political animal. In fact, he thinks that the political life is getting in the
way because it requires us to interact with other people.
v. NOTE:
It’s less clear that Platonic virtues require others in the way that
Aristotle’s do, although other Platonic dialogues (that we don’t read, like the
Gorgias and the Statesman) do address the political life.
vi. In Plato’s city, you don’t educate everyone
(in contrast with Aristotle); e.g. you tell the myth of the metals. Education
is important for the existence of the city (to make sure there are philosopher
rulers), but the city doesn’t have a built-in educational system.
vii. Agrees there is not leisure without the city - There is a
sense in which Plato would have to agree that the city provides the setting
that makes philosophy possible. The democratic regime is in fact the only regime
besides the ideal regime in which philosophy can be practiced. He needs a city
in which he does not have to participate in the offices.
b. in the Phaedo:
i. Plato emphasizes philosophy as
preparation for death and the afterlife rather than for living well.
ii. The Phaedo and Republic
suggest that the happy life is one separated from the body.
No comments:
Post a Comment