Preview

A Critique of Aristotle Politics Essay Example

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1347 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
A Critique of Aristotle Politics Essay Example
Introduction This paper aims to discuss the thoughts of Aristotle as the philosopher of his time. The paper will examine the applicability of his ideas in the world today. It will analyze the ethics of Aristotle against the way today’s governance. This paper will offer an informed critique of Aristotle’s politics. The paper will discuss the prepositions of Aristotle and the merits and demerits associated with each leadership.

Discussion Aristotle politics looks at the world scientifically and can differentiate the ideal and the practical. In his book one of politics, Aristotle outlines the different types of governments that he perceives. In each of these types of governance, he gives the sound and the bad. According to Aristotle, the philosopher king is the ideal governance. In this form, the kings’ interest is in the welfare of his people (Tacitus & Benario 18). The highest form of governance is the monarchy. It is hereditary in nature, and people can associate freely with the royal family. In a monarchy, the interests of the nation take priority above all other matters. When the respectable leadership of a monarchy becomes rogue, Aristotle terms it as tyranny. When leadership becomes self seeking the citizens of this state, suffers thus; cannot achieve happiness (Chuska 277). Aristotle considers aristocracy of philosophers to be the second best leadership. When this form of leadership gets crooked, it becomes oligarchy. Further, he views democracy as the worst form of leadership. In his opinion, the third best form of leadership is one whose polity would combine all the noble forms of leadership. According to Aristotle, a polity is a constitution. Aristotle is of the opinion that, for a polity to be viable, it has to consider the stability and security of its people. The aristocracy as Aristotle puts it is the rule of several. When a virtuous rule of law prevails the society enjoys solidity. In this rule, the needs of the wealthy get priority

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    When comparing Hobbes,’ Sandel’s and Machiavelli’s viewpoints regarding which of Aristotle’s three main categories of knowledge is the most significant for establishing good political systems or making good political decisions, one must consider what each theorists considers to be a good political system and create a link between the two. The most important category of knowledge for establishing and making good political systems for Aristotle is practical knowledge, the purpose of politics is to produce good, virtuous citizens, the law promotes just actions, purpose of legislators is to establish good laws. The most important category of knowledge for Hobbes is scientific knowledge, the absolute sovereign represents the commonwealth of its citizens, the absolute sovereign must uphold their self preservation, and all laws…

    • 1957 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The governing council allows for a collective organization to be in control compared to the masses. If the best intelligence is in rule together, then their combination of excellence will be able to act together and together have an adequate sense to make decisions. Aristotle’s system also favors the masses for them to collectively control different functions. In contrast, the Fuhrer holds all the choices and powers of the state as the dictator. Their rule is not to be questioned by the masses as they hold the Fuhrer Principle ("The Führer Principle."). This type of rule called for the “obedience of all subordinates”, whether it may be the people or top officials, as all aspects of life were to be determined and controlled by the party ("The Führer Principle."). In contrast, the US president has numerous powers and choices granted by the Constitution, but they do not hold all the power of the state due to constraints and checks. The US president has several executive powers as the commander in chief of the Army, making treaties, nominating ambassadors, calling executive orders, etc. (Trueman).” However, their powers and decisions are kept under control by the other institutions through approval, review, interpretation, etc.…

    • 865 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    government they want to live happily. As Aristotle said, every human has the capacity to distinguish between what is good or bad for the city and it is something that came since a person was born with their natural instinct. They just need the practice and that is the public education that in the city is implemented with virtues. Aristotle is also concerned that human beings are not perfect, or excellent, or always be good, a person can be bad also and it is the natural sense of life. “It follows that there cannot be a single excellence common to all the citizens” (Aristotle 92). Aristotle studies the human behavior in order to create this functional constitution with the needs of the people and the weakness of the human to heal every aspect…

    • 695 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Matrix 2

    • 679 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In the next column, based on Aristotle’s science of the first philosophy, analyze how Aristotle’s metaphysics may guide contemporary people to knowledge about the world.…

    • 679 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Another Ancient that makes the case that the regime or polis makes collective meaning, order, and justice possible is Livy. In his book, The Early History of Rome, Livy uses the history of Brutus to show the relationship between individuals in a polis and politics. Brutus’ political views tied directly with how he wanted Rome and its citizens to act and behave. He wanted to empower his citizens and give them strength during conflict or struggle. Brutus believed that if the people who occupy Rome are strong and powerful, Rome will also be. This is direct correlation to Aristotle in the fact that the polis and individuals who make it up are almost synonymous. This relationship is important in the fact that the model citizen in a regime and polis…

    • 588 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Please respond to the questions in bold. All your responses to this assignment should be based on the information given on “Was Aristotle Right or Wrong?”…

    • 1103 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    given the circumstances. Generally, however, the Aristocracy is brought down by the arrogance of the smart people or the corruption of the…

    • 736 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, by William Shakespeare is a play about honor, integrity, and political strife. Each character is faced with difficult decisions influenced either by ambition or honor. Marcus Brutus, one of the main characters of the play, although one of Caesar's best friends, is the head conspirator plotting for Caesar's death. Marcus Brutus is motivated by honor…

    • 747 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    No Title

    • 276 Words
    • 2 Pages

    In 250 to 500 words, based on Aristotle’s science of the first philosophy, analyze how Aristotle’s metaphysics may guide contemporary people to knowledge about the world.…

    • 276 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In Politics, Aristotle not only stresses the importance of law but also warns against the assignment of law as the absolute sovereign, since it could end up creating oligarchy or democracy, which in his respective interpretations are less virtuous forms of government. This is due to the facts that these unvirtuous regimes have the wrong political goals in mind. Oligarchy divides up people and devalue them based on wealth and as a result creates a wealth-based society, while democracy puts law at the risk of tyranny of the…

    • 1646 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Aquinas Vs Hobbes

    • 1535 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Through Aristotle’s work in Politics, he articulates several fundamental aspects of political philosophy that has been greatly influential. Two specific philosophers Thomas Hobbes and Thomas Aquinas, evaluate Aristotle’s perspective of the political nature in relation to mankind. Thomas Aquinas uses Aristotle’s principles as a foundation for his reasoning in writing “On Law, Morality, and Politics.” He modifies Aristotle argument by contributing the religious sphere into the fundamental principles of his political teachings. Thomas Hobbes, on the contrary, is a lot more critical of Aristotle and attacks a lot of his political principles in “The Leviathan.” Hobbes perceives individuals as corrupt, untrustworthy and selfishly motivated, without…

    • 1535 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Ancient Greek Government

    • 528 Words
    • 3 Pages

    An aristocracy has a small privileged class of people which rule over the city state. An aristocracy is similar to an oligarchy as they both are ruled by a small group of people. The difference is that an aristocracy is ruled by royal families and there is a blood connection for those in power, the group that rules an oligarchy is not a royal family (Cartwright, 2013).…

    • 528 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Throughout history there have been numerous varieties of governments and leaders. Each administers differently and their expectations for themselves and their citizens vary. Niccolo Machiavelli described his ideal government and nature of mankind in his writings The Prince; his beliefs can be seen in today’s society. He believes that mankind is willing to be deceived and that they are more concerned with property rather than relationships. Additionally, he believes that a ruler is better to be feared than loved and must be willing to do whatever it takes to maintain control over the people and the country.…

    • 575 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    <i>"But when a whole family, or some individual, happens to be so preeminent in excellence as to surpass all others, then it is just that they should be the royal family and supreme over all, or that this one citizen should be king."</i>(1288a15-20)<br><br>The key to Aristotle's quote is hidden in his definition of excellence. In Aristotle's context excellence refers to the excellence of a citizen "relative to the constitution of which he is a member." (III: 4, 30-32) A state is defined by its constitution. The salvation of the state's constitution is the common interest of every citizen of that state. A citizen's excellence therefore is measured by his ability to work towards the salvation of the constitution. With an understanding of Aristotle's definition of "excellence" the meaning of his quote becomes quite simple. When a family or a person demonstrates superior excellence relative to his constitution, that family or person should rule the state. <br><br>A citizen who is so preeminent in "excellence" is not the equal of the rest of the citizens of the state or at least his "excellence" does not equal that of the rest of the citizens. This citizen does not fit the mold of the common man. He is an outlier. Therefore, something must be done with him. The community could ostracize the supremely "excellent" citizen for having a quality different from the qualities of the majority. However, this course of action would only waste the gift of a small part of the whole and promote mediocrity. The other option, Aristotle's suggestion, is to utilize the gift of the preeminently "excellent" citizen to protect the state's constitution by making him the ruler of the state. Aristotle further justifies his position by stating that a citizen should not be made the ruler of a state because of his wealth or his ancestry. Unless by some chance wealth or ancestry affects the ability of a citizen to work towards the interests of the constitution. Of course the wealthy citizens and…

    • 487 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The two most common types of regimes are democracy and oligarchy. All regimes desire to be wealthy, therefore all regimes are oligarchical to some extent, but more specifically oligarchies are regimes where the wealthy rule. Democracies on the other hand are defined as the rule of the majority, which is assuming that the majority ruling are the poor. One main point that Aristotle usually refers back to about the possible arrangements for regimes is that the rule of law is fundamental to all regimes. Without the rule of law, there is no regime, as Aristotle states: "for where the laws do not rule there is no regime." He also mentions that "the law should rule in all matters, while the offices and the regime should judge in particular cases." Aristotle does recognize that law has limitations, that being it cannot specify how it should be applied to each…

    • 461 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays