1、Part I Aristotles thesis:“From this it is clear that that the polis exists by nature and that the human being is by nature a political animal.” 1252b32o anthrpos phusei politikon zon.Now, that man is more of a political animal than bees or any other gregarious animal is evident. 1253a1011.Zon transl

2、iterated as zon includes all living beings, men, animals and Gods. zon/z is not pejorative. It means “ensouled being” or “l(fā)iving being” in a wide and non-pejorative sense, which excludes only plants, but includes animals and Gods. (Animal by contrast, in the Roman and Christian traditions is pejorat

3、ive.)2Hans Jonas puts it “does not mean animal ( = bestia), but every ensouled (= living) being, excluding plants but including demons, Gods, ensouled stars, indeed the ensouled universe as the greatest and most perfect living being itself.” (Hans Jonas, Zwischen Nichts und Ewigkeit. Zur Lehre vom M

4、enachen cited in Gnther Bien, Die Grundlegung der Politischen Philosophie bei Aristoteles, Freiburg, Karl Alber, 1973, p. 123.)3Zon = mans natural existence, or the social existence of the polis existence “by nature” where this expression does not refer to (but specifically) excludes the teleologica

5、l meaning of nature.The instinctual basis of the polis desire for companionship.The metaphysical/reproductive basis of the polis.The drive for self-preservation.The economic and material basis of the polis.4Martin Heidegger interprets the phrase “politikon zon” as a reference to mans animal existenc

6、e.Martin Heidegger, On Humanism, 1949, p13“We must be clear that human beings in the final analysis are enclosed in the sphere of animal being (animalitas), even if he is not equated with beasts, but is given a specific difference. In principle one must always think of the homo animalisthis position

7、ing is a kind of metaphysics.”So Heidegger thinks that mans status as a zon, marks him out as an animal.5PolitikonIt is commonly claimed that Aristotle define the human beings as a Zon Politikon.A.Michel Foucault, History of Sexuality vol. III, p. 188“Ever since Aristotle defined man as a “political

8、 animal” modern man is an animal whose politics calls his existence as a living being into question.”B. Giorgio Agamben, Homo Sacer p. 2“It is true that in a famous passage Aristotle defines man as a politikon zon (Politics 1253a4)6C.Hannah Arendt“Aristotles definition of man as a zon politikon was

9、not only unrelated and even opposed to the natural association experienced in household life; it can be fully understood only if one adds his second famous definition of man as a zon logon ekhon.” Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition, Chicago, 1954, p. 277Still Arendt implies that Aristotle has severa

10、l definitions of man/human being/ and she is right about this. Man is the only animal who can speak.Man is the only animal who can deliberate and decide.Man is the only animal who can act.Man is the only animal who can count.Man is the only animal who can remember.Man is the only animal who can do s

11、cience.These are much better candidate definitions of man.8For in his biological writings, Aristotle allows that there are several different kinds of political animal. In History of the Animals he distinguishes between gregarious animals tn angelain and solitary animals tn monadikn. Some gregarious

12、animals are political animals“Animals that live politically are those that have any kind of activity in common, which is not true of all gregarious animals. Of this sort are: man, bee, wasp and crane.” Aristotle, (HA 1.1. 487 b33ff)9Political is a biological attribute and differentium of a small sub

13、-class of gregarious animals, including human beings but not limited to them. Look again at Aristotles supposed definition of man in Book I of The Politics:“It is clear that man is a political animal more than any bee or any gregarious animal. Aristotle, (Politics, 1253a7)”This cannot be a definitio

14、n because it does not distinguish man from other animals, and therefore does not define the human being10The specific difference that determines the genus of political animalsis that human beings have logos “man is the only animal who has speech/reason” logon de monon anthrpos ekhei tn zn (1253a9).

15、Through reason he works out his advantage, and what is just/unjust and good/evil.The shared collective endeavour that marks human beings out as political animals is organized on the basis of the reason for the end of justice.This is peculiar to humans, and makes them the most political among animals

16、.For, “the virtue of justice dikaiosun is what is political, and justice dik is the basis on which the political association is ordered, and the virtue of justice is a judgement about what is just”. (1253a33-5)11Part II: Aristotles Critique of Platos RepublicRepublic Book IV 420cSuppose while we wer

17、e painting statues some one should approach us and find fault with us for not applying the most beautiful colors to the most beautiful parts of the body, because the eyes, which possess the highest beauty, were not painted in purple but in black, I think we should make a reasonable reply to him by s

18、aying, My good sir, do not imagine that we must make the eyes so beautiful that they would not appear to be eyes, or that we should do the like to the other parts; but observe whether by giving to the several parts what rightly belongs to them we make the whole beautiful. Therefore do not now compel

19、 us to bestow upon our guardians happiness of such a kind as shall make them anything but guardians. 12PlatoStatesman 259b-cStr. And the householder and master are the same? Soc. Of course. Str. Again, a large household may be compared to a small state:-will they differ at all, as far as government

20、is concerned? Soc. They will not. 13Republic book V 462Or that again which most nearly approaches to the condition of the individual as in the body, when but a finger of one of us is hurt, the whole frame, drawn towards the soul as a center and forming one kingdom under the ruling power therein, fee

21、ls the hurt and sympathizes all together with the part affectedVery true, he replied; and I agree with you that in the best-ordered State there is the nearest approach to this common feeling which you describe.Shall they be a family in name only; or shall they in all their actions be true to the nam

22、e? For example, in the use of the word father, would the care of a father be implied and the filial reverence and duty and obedience to him which the law commands14Then in our city the language of harmony and concord will be more often beard than in any other.Is this the attempt to make the class of

23、 guardians into one big family trying to transform the fellow felling between the members of a meritocratic elite into thick relations of affection and kinship. Well known device for strengthening political unity. Arranged marriages.15Citizens, we shall say to them in our tale, you are brothers, yet

24、 God has framed you differently. Some of you have the power of command, and in the composition of these he has mingled gold, wherefore also they have the greatest honour; others he has made of silver, to be auxillaries; others again who are to be husbandmen and craftsmen he has composed of brass and

25、 iron; and the species will generally be preserved in the children. But as all are of the same original stock, a golden parent will sometimes have a silver son, or a silver parent a golden son. the fostering of such a belief will make them care more for the city and for one another. Just so, he said

26、. Republic III 415b-d16This has been taken to imply a very illiberal view of citizenship, and even implicit totalitarianism. “Further, the polis is by nature clearly prior to the family and to the individual, since the whole is of necessity prior to the part; for example if the whole body be destroy

27、ed, there will be no foot or hand, except homonymously, as we might speak of a stone hand; for when destroyed the hand will be no better than that. But things are defined by their function and power; and we ought not to say that they are the same when they no longer have their proper quality, but on

28、ly that they are homonymous. The proof that the state is a creation of nature and prior to the individual is that the individuaol, when isolated, is not self-sufficing; and therefore he is like a part in relation to the whole. But he who is unable to live in society, or who has no need because he is

29、 sufficient for himself, must be either a beast or a God, he is no part of the polis.” (1253a19)“the whole is naturally superior to the part.” 1288a25.17For these reasons Plato has been called a totalitarian, famously by Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies, 1945The identification of the

30、fate of the state with that of the ruling class; the exclusive interest in this class, and in its unity; and subservient to this unity, the rigid rules for breeding and educating this class, and the strict supervision and collectivization of the interests of its members. OS18What is meant by totalit

31、arian:Those regimes in which the political power is concentrated in one bloc, and the ruled have no alternative.Those regimes that exercise propagandistic control over the values and interests of the ruled.Any regime that has an extensive or almost total reach over individual live, that regulate eve

32、ry area of individual conduct.Any rgime that governs by systematic deception.19Part III: Aristotles Critique of Plato.(There is no form of the good, there are only various things that are good.)Communism is unworkable and undesirable.Note Aristotles alternative (1263b1).The idea of a community of wo

33、men is impracticable, against nature, and a misguided attempt at forging social soldarity/unity.2.1.It is a unity of the wrong kind because the state is not a family write large. (1252a8-16 &1261a1)2.2 The polis is not an individual a person writ large.20Plato/Socrates “claims that it is best for th

34、e whole polis to be as unified as possible. Is it not obvious that a polis may at length attain such a degree of unity as to be no longer a polis? sine the nature of a polis is to be a plurality/multitide, and in tending to greater unity, from being a polis, it becomes a family, and from the family

35、and individualSo that we ought not to attain this greatest unity even if we could because it would be the destruction of the polis.” (1261a16-25 & 1263b31-35)213.Plato deprives the guardians of happiness.“But the whole cannot be happy unless most, or all, or some of its parts enjoy happiness. In thi

36、s respect happiness is not like the even number principle in numbers, which may exist only in the whole, and not in either of the parts. (1264b19)22Part IV: Aristotles totalitarianism?Jonathan Barnes, Richard Mulgan, David Keyt, C.C. Taylor, Giorgio Agamben among other have all implied that Aristotl

37、es also has totalitarian tendencies.Evidence: “the city is prior by nature to the household and to each of us, since it is necessary for the whole to be prior to the part,So that the city both exists by nature and is prior to each individual is clear. (1253a-19)One ought not even to consider that an

38、yone of the citizens belongs to himself, for they all belong to the polis and are each of them a part of the polis1337a27-30.23Aristotle recommends that the statesman legislate on questions like:The health and physical fitness of its citizens.Who may marry?The age at which men should cease siring ch

39、ildren?The behaviour and manners of its womenfolk.Punishments for adulteryWhat should be done to deformed or weakly children they should be exposed, hardened.Book VII and VIIIIs this totalitarian?24But there was no private realm/private life in ancient Greece. The polis was a small a face to face, s

40、ociety, Mediterranean society, and almost every aspect of life was open to public scrutiny and government regulationM.I. Finley, Politics in the Ancient World, p. 82.All private actions were submitted to a severe surveillance. No importance was given to individual independence neither in relation to opinions, nor to labour, nor, above all to religion.Among the Spartans, Therpandrus could not string his lyre without causing offence to the ephors. In the most domestic of relations the public authority again and again intervened. The young Lacadaimonian could ha