The Theory of the Citystate – George H Sabine

The Theory of Citystate

Part – I

CHAPTER I – THE CITYSTATE

Modern political ideals such as justice, liberty, constitutional government, and respect for the law have their origins in the reflections of Greek thinkers on city-state institutions.
The meaning of these political ideals has evolved over time, shaped by the institutions and societies in which they were realized.
Greek city-states, particularly Athens, had political practices and institutions vastly different from those in the modern world.
Understanding Greek political philosophy requires grasping the institutions and ideals they had in mind, including citizenship and governance in Athens.
The ethical framework used to evaluate political life in ancient Greece differed significantly from contemporary standards.

SOCIAL CLASSES

Ancient city-states were small in both area and population compared to modern states, with Athens having a population of around 300,000.
Slavery was a universal institution in ancient Greece, with perhaps a third of Athens’ population being slaves. However, slaves did not have political rights.
The idea of a leisure class dominating Greek political philosophy is a myth; most Athenian citizens were tradesmen, artisans, or farmers who had to work for a living.
Greek citizenship was attained by birth and entitled individuals to some level of political participation, such as attending town meetings or being eligible for certain offices.
There were also resident foreigners called metics, who had no political rights but were freemen and not socially discriminated against.
Greek citizenship was seen as a shared participation in public affairs, unlike the modern legal concept of citizenship based on guaranteed rights.
Greek political philosophy focused on determining the rightful place of different classes or kinds of men in a society to ensure the smooth functioning of social work.

POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS

Athenian government had a democratic constitution with the Assembly (Ecclesia) composed of all male citizens aged twenty and above, meeting regularly to enact laws.
Direct democracy was more of a political myth than a reality; various forms of government in ancient Greece, including aristocratic ones, had assemblies.
Athenian governance focused on making magistrates and officials accountable to the citizen-body through a system of representation.
The Council of Five Hundred and popularly chosen juries in courts were crucial for popular control of government.
Athenian citizens were divided into demes (local units) for governance and representation purposes, combining elements of election and lot for office selection.
The ten generals were chosen by direct election and had significant influence over foreign affairs and domestic politics, resembling modern prime ministers.
The Council of Five Hundred was an executive and legislative committee, drafting measures and managing government affairs with significant powers.
The courts, nominated by the demes and chosen by lot, were key to popular control over magistrates and the law, with powers extending beyond judicial functions to executive and legislative aspects.
The courts could try not only individuals but also laws, suspending the operation of laws deemed unconstitutional until a court decision was made, which was considered final and binding.

POLITICAL IDEALS

Athenian democracy was characterized by the popularly chosen Council and independent juries, embodying certain ideals of political life.
Thucydides’s Funeral Oration, attributed to Pericles, emphasized the love and pride Athenians had for their city, valuing citizenship as their highest glory.
Pericles urged citizens to recognize Athens’ greatness, acquired through courageous and dutiful citizens, who sacrificed for the city’s honor and glory.
The Athenian ideal emphasized the harmonious common life within the city, where all citizens could actively participate, regardless of rank or wealth.
Athenians believed in rotation in office, filling offices by lot, and involving as many citizens as possible in government to achieve a common life.
Athenians valued public service over private interests, considering neglect of public affairs as useless and valuing participation in civic life.
The Athenian ideal was optimistic about the natural political capacity of the average man, emphasizing the importance of active participation and discussion in public affairs.
The ideal also included freedom, respect for law, voluntary cooperation in public life, and the power of discussion to frame and implement public measures.
Despite the ideal, Athenian democracy faced challenges like factional quarrels and selfish political behavior, leading to criticism and reflection on the democratic notion of “happy versatility.”
The Athenian ideal of a harmonious common life, active citizen participation, and the value of discussion in public affairs continues to influence Greek political thought and philosophy.
Custom was seen as the presumption of an underlying rational principle in ancient Greek political thought.
Plato criticized skepticism that viewed right as blind custom and political institutions as tools for personal gain, emphasizing government based on conviction, not force.
Greek faith held that government rests on rational conviction and free discourse, not coercion or mystery.
Freedom in ancient Greece implied respect for law, distinguishing between arbitrary subjection and self-imposed restraint under lawful rules.
Tyranny was universally condemned as the worst form of government due to its unlawful application of force, which destroys self-government.
The sovereignty of law over rulers was a fundamental principle, ensuring the citizen’s respect for law even when it might not benefit them individually.
Freedom and the rule of law were essential aspects of good government, according to ancient Greek political thought.
The Athenian ideal was summarized as free citizenship in a free state, governed by impartial law and valuing individual contributions based on merit and capacity.
The goal was to create a life in common where individuals could contribute significantly to civic life, leading to pride in Athenian institutions and philosophy.

CHAPTER II – POLITICAL THOUGHT BEFORE PLATO

Athenian public life peaked in the third quarter of the 5th century B.C.
The era of significant political philosophy emerged after Athens’ downfall in the conflict with Sparta.
Reflection on political principles often followed tangible achievements in history.
Athenians in the 5th century were not avid readers or writers, limiting the preservation of political treatises from that time.
Despite limited written records, active thought and discussion on political issues were evident during the 5th century.
Many concepts later found in Plato and Aristotle had already begun to take shape during this period.
The exact origins and development of these ideas are challenging to trace, but they laid the groundwork for explicit political philosophy in the following century.

POPULAR POLITICAL DISCUSSION

Athenians in the 5th century were deeply engaged in political discussions and public affairs.
The Athenian culture thrived on oral discussions and conversations about politics.
Athenians had ample opportunities for political inquiry due to the diverse political institutions across the Greek world.
Comparisons between Athens and Sparta, and the influence of Persia, contributed to political discourse and analysis.
Herodotus’s History reflects a curiosity about foreign laws and institutions, showcasing a variety of anthropological lore.
Herodotus also presents a popular theorizing on government forms, such as monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy.
The rapid changes in Athenian government and the ongoing struggles between aristocracy and democracy fueled intense political discussions.
The triumph of democracy in Athens led to active debates and discussions about political questions and social changes.
Aristophanes’ Ecclesiazusae comedy reflects radical ideas about women’s rights, marriage abolition, and social restructuring, indicating a familiarity with subversive criticism of the political system.
Plato’s later works on social issues like women’s roles were not innovations but reflections of ongoing debates and discussions in Athenian society.

ORDER IN NATURE AND SOCIETY

Active thought and discussion preceded explicit political theory in ancient Greece.
General conceptions, not solely political, formed the intellectual framework within which political thought evolved.
The Greek idea of the state emphasized harmony and proportionality, reflected in early philosophy and ethical principles.
Greek philosophers initially applied the concept of harmony or proportionality in physical and ethical contexts.
Physical philosophy led to the development of the atomic theory, but a shift towards humanistic studies emerged in the 5th century.
The rise of humanism was driven by factors like growing wealth, urbanization, and the influence of Sophists like Protagoras.
Protagoras’s statement “Man is the measure of all things” exemplifies the shift toward human-centered knowledge.
The new humanism retained an interest in finding permanent principles amidst human flux and diversity.
Greek political and ethical philosophy continued the search for permanence and unity amid changing human circumstances.
The core question was identifying the unchanging core of human nature and determining its implications for customs, laws, and ethics.
Different philosophical perspectives offered various solutions based on their interpretations of human nature and natural laws.

NATURE AND CONVENTION

Greek literature and philosophical discourse in the fifth century explored the conflict between natural law and human convention.
Antigone by Sophocles exemplifies the conflict between divine law and human law, highlighting the tension between duty to God and duty to society.
The identification of nature with the law of God and the contrast with human laws became a recurring theme in Greek criticism of societal norms and laws.
Criticism of social distinctions and challenges to conventional norms were expressed through appeals to natural right and justice.
The later Sophists, like Antiphon, questioned the basis of social hierarchies and argued that laws are merely conventional, contrary to nature.
Antiphon viewed nature as egoism or self-interest, opposing conventional moral principles.
Thrasymachus in Plato’s Republic and Callicles in Gorgias presented similar arguments that justice is based on the interests of the stronger or the powerful.
Thucydides depicted Athenian policy as influenced by the belief that power and strength determine the rule.
Glaucon in the Republic proposed a social contract theory where men agree not to harm each other to avoid harm themselves.
Aristotle criticized the view that self-interest and enlightened self-interest are the basis for living together in a community, as it lacks the spirit of true communal life.
A contract-theory, possibly developed from the principle of self-interest, was attributed to the Sophist Lycophron in the Politics.
By the close of the fifth century, the contrast between nature and convention had developed in two main directions:
- One view saw nature as a law of justice and right inherent in humans and the world, leaning towards moral and religious interpretations.
- The other view saw nature non-morally, representing self-assertion, egoism, desire for pleasure or power, potentially leading to Nietzschean self-expression or utilitarianism.
These ideas, although not yet systematic or abstract, contained suggestions of philosophical systems that emerged in the fourth century.
The contemplative nature of Athenians after the Peloponnesian War contributed to the development of philosophical ideas, turning Athens into a center for philosophical exploration.

SOCRATES

Socrates played a crucial role in transforming suggestive ideas into explicit philosophy, influencing thinkers with diverse interpretations of his teachings.
Antisthenes viewed Socrates’s self-command as the secret of his personality, leading to an ethics of misanthropy, while Aristippus saw Socrates’s boundless power to enjoy as the key to his personality, resulting in an ethics of pleasure.
Socrates’s greatest pupil, Plato, incorporated more of Socrates’s personality and ideas into his teachings, particularly focusing on ethics and the pursuit of true and abiding right amidst changeable conventions.
Unlike the Sophists, Socrates combined humanism with the rational tradition of older physical philosophy, leading to the belief that virtue is knowledge and can be learned and taught, as well as the method of precise definition.
Socrates’s vision of a rational science of politics, where ethical concepts are defined and applied scientifically, influenced Plato’s lifelong pursuit of understanding and creating a society of demonstrable excellence.
While Socrates’s specific political conclusions are unknown, his identification of virtue with knowledge suggests he was critical of Athenian democracy’s presumption that anyone can hold any office, as hinted in the Apology and stated by Xenophon in the Memorabilia.
The intellectualist approach in Plato’s Republic, seeking salvation in an educated ruler, reflects Socrates’s belief that political virtue is a form of knowledge and can contribute to a well-ordered society.

CHAPTER III – PLATO: THE REPUBLIC

Athens transitioned from imperial ambitions to becoming a prominent educational center in the Mediterranean world after the Peloponnesian War.
Despite losing political independence, Athens retained influence through its schools of philosophy, science, and rhetoric, attracting students from Rome and various ancient regions.
Plato’s Academy, focusing on philosophy, and Isocrates’s school, emphasizing rhetoric and oratory, were among the earliest institutions, followed by Aristotle’s Lyceum, the Epicurean, and Stoic schools.
Some may view the academic specialization in Athens as a decline compared to the vibrant spontaneity of the Periclean Age in life and art.
However, Athenian schools marked the beginning of European philosophy, particularly in relation to politics and social studies, with Plato and Aristotle’s writings pioneering European intellectual development.
The completion of Aristotelian writings around 323 BCE established a general outline of knowledge, including philosophy, natural science, human conduct sciences, and art criticism, shaping European thought for centuries.
The advancement of specialization and professional accuracy in Athenian Schools was significant, despite its academic and somewhat detached nature from civic activities.

THE NEED FOR POLITICAL SCIENCE

Plato was born around 427 B.C. into an eminent Athenian family, which some attribute to his critical stance towards democracy, although other factors like his association with Socrates played a more significant role.
His intellectual development was greatly influenced by Socrates, particularly the idea that virtue is knowledge, leading to the belief in an objectively good life for individuals and states that can be studied and defined through intellectual processes.
Plato’s early political thoughts, as seen in the Republic, reflected a skepticism toward democracy and a preference for a disciplined society, influenced by his experiences during the Peloponnesian War and the Athenian political landscape.
His disillusionment with the Athenian political scene led him to praise philosophy as a means to discern what is just for communities and individuals, indicating a need for philosophers in political leadership.
The founding of Plato’s Academy around 388 B.C. may have been partly motivated by a desire to cultivate philosophical understanding in potential leaders rather than training them specifically for administrative or legislative roles.
Plato’s involvement in political matters included journeys to Syracuse in 367 and 361 B.C. to advise Dionysius, hoping for radical political reform, but the efforts ultimately failed due to Dionysius’s lack of willingness to heed advice and political missteps.
Despite the failure of his political endeavors, Plato believed in the importance of philosophy in politics and saw the need for philosophers to engage in practical tasks rather than remain solely in the realm of abstract ideas.
Plato’s Dialogues discuss various aspects of political philosophy.
Three main dialogues focus on political philosophy: Republic, Statesman, and Laws.
Republic written in Plato’s early manhood, possibly over several years.
Laws written in Plato’s old age, with a significant gap of around 30 years between Republic and Laws.
Republic reflects enthusiasm and idealism of Plato’s early maturity and the founding of his School.
Laws reflects disillusionment and possibly influenced by Plato’s failed venture in Syracuse.
Statesman written between Republic and Laws, closer in time to Laws.

VIRTUE IS KNOWLEDGE

Plato’s Republic defies classification, covering various aspects of philosophy and human life.
It touches on good man, good life, good state, and means to attain them.
Encompasses politics, ethics, economics, psychology, art, education, and philosophy.
Dialogue form allows inclusiveness and freedom of arrangement.
City-state life was not compartmentalized as in modern times, influencing the breadth of subject matter.
Despite its richness, the political theory in Republic is unified and logically structured.
Main propositions: virtue is knowledge, objective good exists, philosopher’s knowledge justifies power in government.
Society depends on reciprocal needs, specialization of functions, natural aptitude, and education.
Plato’s theory focuses on government as an art based on exact knowledge and society as mutual satisfaction of needs.
Two main theses: government as an art of knowledge, society as mutual satisfaction of needs.
Second thesis logically precedes the first but may have been an extension of the Socratic principle that virtue is knowledge.

THE INCOMPETENCE OF OPINION

Plato’s concept of the good as exact knowledge stems from the ancient distinction between nature and convention, as seen in Socrates’ debates with the Sophists.
Themes explored in earlier dialogues include the analogy between statesman and physician, criticism of Sophist teachings, and the role of reason vs. intuition.
Plato’s ethical convictions include a belief in human nature being at war with itself, leading to a need for self-examination and discipline.
The Republic critiques ignorance and incompetence in politics, particularly in democracies, contrasting with admiration for Spartan discipline.
Plato emphasizes the importance of expertise and professional training in various fields, beyond just military oratory.
Factionalism and selfishness in party struggles are seen as major flaws in all forms of government, leading to instability and a lack of civic loyalty.
Economic disparities contribute to factionalism, with Plato suggesting radical solutions like abolishing private property or mitigating extreme wealth inequality.
Education of citizens to prioritize the common good is deemed crucial alongside educating rulers.

THE STATE AS A TYPE

Plato’s principle emphasizes the pursuit of objective knowledge about the good for individuals and states, distinct from subjective opinions.
He employs analogies with professional or scientific knowledge, likening the statesman to a physician or skilled artisan.
The Republic outlines an ideal state as a scientific study to understand the nature of the good and the essential characteristics of a state.
Plato’s approach mirrors geometric methodology, seeking precise explanations and identifying general principles rather than focusing on practical feasibility.
His philosophy draws from Greek mathematics and astronomy, emphasizing the importance of grasping types and idealized concepts.
The goal is not to describe existing states but to uncover fundamental sociological principles applicable to any society aiming for a good life.
Plato’s approach is akin to Herbert Spencer’s deductive “Absolute Ethics,” aiming for an ideal standard of reference despite doubts about its utility or feasibility.

RECIPROCAL NEEDS AND DIVISION OF LABOR

Plato’s principle that the statesman should be a scientist who knows the idea of the good serves as a basis for criticizing the city-state and devising the ideal state.
He applies the rule of specialization to analyze the typical state, drawing parallels between the statesman and skilled workers or professionals.
Plato views society as a system of mutual services where members both give and receive, emphasizing the value of work and the importance of one’s role.
His theory differs from contract-based theories, focusing on nature rather than convention to justify social arrangements and the role of the state.
Exchange of services implies division of labor and task specialization, leading to better production and quality through cooperation.
Plato emphasizes human psychology, different aptitudes, and the importance of steady application to develop skills.
The philosopher-ruler’s claim to power is justified by the same principle of specialization and mutual cooperation present throughout society.
Society and the state rely on forces like specialization, aptitude, and training, requiring wise use to meet genuine needs rather than lower desires.
Knowledge of the good enables the philosopher to answer crucial questions about societal organization and governance.

CLASSES AND SOULS

Plato’s argument assumes that well-bred human beings, when properly educated, will result in a harmonious social group.
He believes that existing disharmony in society is due to wrong education, and improving breeding or education will resolve the issue.
Plato presumes inherent social aptitude in individuals, leading to the assumption that there is no inherent conflict between individual inclinations and societal duties.
His theory posits a parallelism between individual development and societal harmony, where the development of individual powers aligns with the needs of a harmonious society.
Plato’s ethical ideal suggests that morality should be both private and public, with a focus on correcting the state and improving individuals for harmony.
However, Plato’s assumption simplifies the complexity of political problems and creates a rigid structure that limits individual capacities within society.
The theory of “three souls” and corresponding social classes in Plato’s Republic is not extensively developed and does not align perfectly with the actual depiction of society in the text.
Plato’s emphasis on knowledge as the possession of experts leads to a hierarchy where rulers possess all intelligence, while workers are relegated to a passive role, lacking political capacity.
His distrust of “happy versatility” results in artisans and workers having limited capacity for public service beyond their trades, eradicating the free exchange of ideas and participation in civic activities.

JUSTICE

Plato’s theory of justice in the Republic emphasizes harmony in society.
Justice is defined as giving each individual what is due to them based on their capacity, training, and role in society.
Social justice is seen as the principle of a society where different types of individuals combine under mutual need and contribute to the whole.
Plato’s definition of justice does not focus on legal rights or protection but on providing a fulfilling life with social opportunities.
The state, according to Plato, provides citizens with opportunities for social interchange and a civilized existence rather than just freedom and protection.
Rights and duties in Plato’s theory are inherent in the services or functions that individuals perform rather than being individualistic rights.
Plato’s political theory does not emphasize sovereign power or authority like the Roman magistracies but focuses on social cooperation and mutual needs.
The theory constructs society around the idea that the good must be known through methodical study, with the goal being a perfect adjustment of individuals to the state’s opportunities for employment.
The means to achieve this adjustment are through either removing hindrances to good citizenship (communism) or developing positive conditions for good citizenship (education).

PROPERTY AND THE FAMILY

Plato’s communism in the Republic involves the abolition of private property and permanent monogamous relationships, particularly for the ruling class.
The prohibition of private property extends to rulers living in barracks and having common meals.
The replacement of permanent monogamous relationships with regulated breeding aims to produce the best possible offspring for the state.
Plato’s communism only applies to the guardian class (soldiers and rulers), while artisans are allowed to maintain private families and property.
Plato’s state in the Republic seems to operate without slavery, as no specific mention or role for slaves is provided.
Plato’s concern with economic cleavage in society was common among Greeks, with economic differences often determining political affiliations.
Plato believed that great diversity of wealth was inconsistent with good government and aimed to abolish wealth for rulers to achieve unity in the state.
Plato’s communism had a political purpose of removing disturbing influences in government rather than aiming for wealth equalization.
The abolition of marriage in Plato’s theory was driven by the belief that family affection and private interests compete with loyalty to the state.
Plato also criticized the casualness of human mating and believed in a more controlled and selective type of union for the improvement of the race.
Plato’s abolition of marriage also served as a critique of the position of women in Athens, aiming to utilize the potential of women in political and military duties.
Plato’s arguments for communism and the abolition of marriage reflect a doctrinaire radicalism aimed at securing unity in the state, despite practical challenges and common sense considerations.
Aristotle critiqued Plato’s radical ideas, pointing out the potential pitfalls of unifying the state to the point where it loses its essential nature.

EDUCATION

Plato emphasized education as the primary means of shaping human nature and achieving harmony in the state.
Education was considered the most essential aspect of a good state, with Plato viewing the state primarily as an educational institution.
Plato’s educational system was state-controlled and compulsory, encompassing both elementary and higher education.
The elementary education focused on training individuals up to age twenty, combining Athenian and Spartan training methods but revising their content significantly.
The curriculum included gymnastics for physical training and “music” for mental training, with music referring to the study of poetry and literature.
Plato’s approach to education was more focused on moral and intellectual cultivation rather than aesthetic appreciation.
Plato proposed censorship of poets and literature to ensure they aligned with moral and religious education.
Higher education, for selected individuals aged twenty to thirty-five, focused on preparing them for leadership roles in the guardian class.
The higher education curriculum included mathematics, astronomy, and logic, reflecting Plato’s belief in the importance of exact studies for philosophy and governance.
Plato’s concept of higher education was innovative and unique, as it aimed to produce philosopher-kings capable of precise and scientific understanding of governance.
Plato’s emphasis on education reflects his belief in the power of trained intelligence and the potential for a science of politics akin to mathematics.
The Republic is highly regarded for its close reasoning, originality, and provocative ideas, making it a timeless work that has inspired diverse interpretations.
Its greatest importance lies in its philosophical and intellectual aspects rather than specific imitations.
Plato’s focus on an enlightened despotism based on scientific knowledge simplifies the complexities of human relations and individual autonomy.
The Republic omits considerations of law and public opinion, assuming that rulers’ superior knowledge renders public judgment irrelevant.
Plato’s ideal state denies the political faith of the city-state, emphasizing the rule of the wise over free citizenship and participatory government.
The omission of law from Plato’s ideal state is a logical consequence of his philosophical framework, but it overlooks the moral aspect of freedom and dignity under the law.
Plato’s later work, the Laws, explores the role of law as a ruling force in the state, indicating a reevaluation of his earlier ideas and philosophical principles.

CHAPTER IV – PLATO: THE STATESMAN AND THE LAWS

Plato’s later works, the Statesman and the Laws, were written several years after the Republic and reflect his mature reflections on city-state problems.
The Laws, written in Plato’s old age, is considered to show signs of declining literary quality compared to the Republic, being described as rambling, wordy, and repetitious.
Despite its literary shortcomings, the Laws contains fine passages and maintains philosophical depth, indicating a decline in literary but not intellectual prowess.
Unlike the Republic’s speculative construction, the Laws focuses more on political actualities and complexities, resulting in a less ordered presentation but a deeper engagement with political theory.
While the Republic’s principles are timeless and influential, the later works had a greater impact on subsequent political philosophy, including Aristotle’s Politics, especially concerning the constitution of states, political organization, and the theory of mixed states.

THE READMISSION OF LAW

Plato’s earlier political theory in the Republic prioritized the philosopher-king’s authority over all aspects of the ideal state, leading to the exclusion of law and emphasizing education and philosopher rule.
This approach conflicted with Greek ideals of freedom under law and citizen participation in self-government, prompting Plato’s later reflections in the Laws to restore law’s importance in the state.
The Laws presents a government where law is supreme, ruling over both rulers and subjects, in contrast to the Republic’s emphasis on philosopher-kings.
Plato’s shift from the Republic to the Laws was not due to personal disillusionment but rather a gradual realization of the complexities and practical challenges in governance.
The dilemma between an ideal ruled by pure reason and a second-best state governed by law reflects a fundamental problem in Plato’s philosophy regarding the role of intelligence, perception, and convention in politics.
Plato’s view of intelligence as separate from and sometimes opposed to conventional wisdom posed challenges in reconciling a rational state with the wisdom of experience embodied in law and custom.
This dilemma remains relevant today in the tension between planned governance and the non-rational yet deeply ingrained aspects of social conventions and customary practices.

THE GOLDEN CORD OF THE LAW

The Statesman is not primarily a political work but an exercise in definition, focusing on the statesman as an artist with knowledge.
Plato discusses the assumption of political absolutism in the Republic and justifies enlightened despotism based on rulers possessing science and knowledge.
The dialogue differentiates between the ruler as an artist and the tyrant, highlighting the importance of voluntary rule over forceful rule.
Plato’s classification of states in the Statesman reflects a departure from the Republic, with democracy given a more favorable position.
The ideal state of the Republic is relegated to a model for imitation but not attainable, while the Statesman acknowledges the necessity of law and compromise in governance.
Law is considered a civilizing force and a surrogate for reason in the state, leading to the emphasis on temperance or self-control as the chief virtue in the ideal state described in the Laws.
Plato criticizes states like Sparta that prioritize courage and military success over civic virtue and harmony, advocating for obedience to law as a means to achieve social harmony.

THE MIXED STATE

Plato introduces the principle of the “mixed” state in the Laws, aiming for harmony through a balance of forces and a combination of diverse principles.
The mixed state is a precursor to Montesquieu’s separation of powers concept, emphasizing a balance between monarchic wisdom and democratic freedom.
Plato’s philosophic history in the Laws traces the development of human civilization, marking progress and decay to derive political stability laws.
He criticizes Sparta’s downfall due to its military focus and discusses the ruin caused by extreme monarchy in Persia and excessive democracy in Athens.
Plato advocates for a state that combines monarchy with democracy, emphasizing wisdom and power shared by the masses subject to law.
The ideal city’s foundation involves consideration of geographical factors, favoring agricultural communities over coastal ones and emphasizing common race, language, law, and religion.

SOCIAL AND POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS

In the Laws, Plato concedes to private ownership and family structures due to human frailty, although he still views communism as ideal.
He imposes stringent regulations on property ownership, limiting personal property and prohibiting certain economic activities for citizens.
Plato’s social system in the Laws reflects a new division of labor, with agriculture designated for slaves, trade and industry for non-citizen freemen, and political functions for citizens.
The economic part of the population in the Laws is composed of non-citizens, creating a state based on economic privilege rather than citizenship.
Plato’s political constitution involves town meetings, councils, and magistrates, with a complex electoral system favoring the wealthier citizens and weighted voting based on property classes.
Despite Plato’s intentions for a mixed constitution, the Laws’ system heavily favors the law-abiding elements and wealthier citizens, resembling more of an oligarchy than a monarchy and democracy blend.
Plato’s plan of government in the Laws prioritizes differences in property over differences in virtue, leading to inconsistencies in his intentions and the practical implementation of his social and political ideas.

EDUCATIONAL AND RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS

In the Laws, Plato’s plan of education remains similar to that in the Republic, focusing on music, gymnastics, rigorous literary censorship, compulsory education for men and women, but with more emphasis on organized, publicly regulated schools and paid teachers.
He institutionalizes education with the magistrate in charge of schools becoming the chief of all magistrates, outlining a system of educational institutions.
Plato’s attention to religion increases in the Laws, regulating it similarly to education, with public rites only allowed in temples by authorized priests, aiming to prevent disorderly religious practices.
He introduces a creed and a law of heresy, punishing atheism with imprisonment or death, marking the Laws as the first reasoned defense of religious persecution in Greek philosophy.
The Laws concludes with the introduction of the Nocturnal Council, composed of elders, educators, and priests, given supreme power outside the law, resembling a clerical body contradicting the state’s purpose of law supremacy and resembling a departure from the philosopher-king concept in the Republic.

THE REPUBLIC AND THE Laws

Plato’s political philosophy, when viewed in its entirety and in relation to its development, suggests that the theory of the state presented in the Republic had a flawed beginning.
The Republic contributed a thorough analysis of society’s general principles, emphasizing mutual exchange of services for personal satisfaction and social progress, framed in the context of virtue as knowledge of the good.
However, the Republic’s emphasis on rulers as the learned and subjects as ignorant led to the exclusion of law from Plato’s state, undermining the ideal of free citizenship central to the city-state concept.
Plato’s later attempts to reintegrate law into his political philosophy, as seen in the Laws, were somewhat hesitant and incomplete, acknowledging it as a second-best solution.
The Laws marked a shift towards a more careful analysis of actual institutions, laws, and historical context, suggesting a balance of interests and claims as essential for a constitutional state.
Aristotle built upon Plato’s general principles from the Republic but heavily drew on the insights from the Laws, conducting more extensive and empirical examinations to form a logical and consistent body of political philosophy.

CHAPTER V – ARISTOTLE: POLITICAL IDEALS

Plato was asked by Dion to assist in educating Dionysius and improving the government in Syracuse, around the time when Aristotle, his greatest student, joined the Academy.
Aristotle was not Athenian but hailed from Stagira in Thrace, born in 384. His father was a physician, likely influencing Aristotle’s interest in biological studies.
Aristotle joined Plato’s school for advanced studies, remaining there for twenty years until Plato’s death in 347, deeply influenced by Plato’s teachings.
After Plato’s death, Aristotle left Athens and spent twelve years in various roles, including tutoring Alexander of Macedon starting in 343.
However, Aristotle’s political writings do not reflect much influence from his Macedonian connection or Alexander’s conquests.
In 335, Aristotle established his own school in Athens, where he wrote most of his books over the next twelve years.
Aristotle passed away in 322 in Euboea, having left Athens due to anti-Macedonian disturbances following Alexander’s death.

THE NEW OF POLITICS

Aristotle’s extant works were primarily used for teaching rather than as finished books for publication; they were organized by his students and remained within the School.
The Politics, considered one of Aristotle’s great works, may have been compiled by editors from various manuscripts and lectures, and it was not arranged in its current form by Aristotle himself.
The Politics reflects two main stages of Aristotle’s political philosophy:
- The first stage focuses on the ideal state, criticism of previous theories (including Plato’s), and construction of the ideal state in Books II, III, VII, and VIII.
- The second stage addresses actual states, types of government (democracy and oligarchy), causes of their decay, and methods of stability in Books IV, V, and VI.
Werner Jaeger’s hypothesis suggests that Aristotle’s Politics evolved over time, with the ideal state concepts developed early on and the general treatise on political science expanded later.
Aristotle’s early political philosophy was influenced by Plato’s ethical ideals, emphasizing the construction of an ideal state to produce the highest moral type of human beings.
However, Aristotle later expanded his political science to encompass empirical and descriptive aspects, including the art of governing various types of states regardless of their moral status.
The Politics can be divided into two parts:
- The first part (Books II, III, VII, VIII) explores Aristotle’s relationship with Plato’s ideas and his initial steps towards an independent political philosophy.
- The second part (Books IV, V, VI) delves into Aristotle’s final thoughts on government types, social forces influencing politics, and the practical aspects of governance.
Book I of the Politics addresses fundamental philosophical problems related to nature versus convention and reflects Aristotle’s mature political reflections.

THE KINDS OF RULE

Aristotle’s book on the ideal state begins with a survey of previous writers’ works on the subject, including criticism of Plato’s political philosophy.
Aristotle criticizes Plato’s abolition of private property and the family in the Republic, considering them too radical and speculative.
His criticism of Plato’s Laws is focused on detailed matters and sometimes inaccuracies, indicating a cautious approach to radical ideas.
Aristotle values common experience and practicality over radical speculation, showing a sober and less original perspective compared to Plato.
Aristotle’s ideal state is constitutional rather than despotic, contrasting with Plato’s second-best state in the Republic.
He accepts the Laws’ view that the law must be the ultimate sovereign in a good state, emphasizing moral equality between rulers and subjects.
Aristotle distinguishes between different kinds of rule: constitutional rule in a good state, master-slave relationships, and household authority.
He criticizes Plato’s analogy of the state to the family, arguing that true political relationships require a degree of moral equality among citizens.
Aristotle’s ideal state includes a democratic element, aiming for a community of equals pursuing the best possible life, with virtue as a unifying factor.

THE RULE OF LAW

Aristotle emphasizes the supremacy of law as a mark of a good state and argues that even the wisest ruler cannot replace the impersonal quality of law.
Constitutional rule, according to Aristotle, includes rule in the public interest, lawful rule based on general regulations, and government of willing subjects.
He values law as embodying collective wisdom and experience, arguing that the knowledge of the wisest ruler cannot surpass customary law.
Aristotle criticizes Plato’s view of law and custom, breaking down the rigid distinction between nature and convention.
The purpose of the state for Aristotle is ethical, aiming at the moral improvement of citizens and achieving the best possible life.
He maintains an ideal of the city-state as self-sufficient and conducive to the highest moral development, akin to Plato’s concept.
Aristotle’s theory of political ideals incorporates the necessity of law, subordination to law, freedom, and consent as integral to the ideal state.
While Aristotle does not fully construct an ideal state, he discusses conditions for the good life, including physical and mental aspects derived from Plato’s Laws.
Education is crucial in molding citizens, with Aristotle placing importance on habit formation and liberal education over utilitarian considerations.
The ideal state’s government includes private property, common use of property, slave labor for agriculture, and exclusion of artisans from citizenship based on their occupations.

CONFLICT OF THE IDEAL AND THE ACTUAL

Aristotle faces discrepancies and difficulties in reconciling his political ideals with actual institutions and practices of cities, unlike Plato who didn’t require ideals to be embodied in practice.
He is constrained by common sense and wisdom of the ages, unable to dismiss facts that don’t align with ideals as easily as Plato could.
Aristotle’s view evolves toward incorporating ideal forces within actual conditions, gradually shaping them toward a better state, reflecting a pragmatic reformist approach rather than radical revolution.
The complexities and difficulties of Aristotle’s problem are evident in Book III of his work, where he discusses crucial questions about the nature of a state, citizenship, and the virtue of a good man versus a good citizen.
Aristotle’s ideal state is characterized by a high moral life, but he acknowledges the practical need for distinctions in actual states, such as different kinds of citizens and variations in forms of government.
He adopts Plato’s sixfold classification of forms of government, distinguishing between true (constitutional) states and perverted (despotic) states, but he also points out serious difficulties and limitations in this classification.
Aristotle critiques the popular classification of governments based on the number of rulers as superficial and misleading, emphasizing that the essence lies in the competing claims to power based on property rights and the welfare of the majority.

CONFLICTING CLAIMS TO POWER

Aristotle’s correction of the formal classification of governments raises questions about the justifiable claims to power in the state and how to reconcile conflicting claims.
He examines the relative merits of democracy and oligarchy, recognizing the complexity of moral considerations such as wealth, education, and social status in determining political influence.
Aristotle concludes that no class has an absolute claim to power, reinforcing the principle of the supremacy of law, although he acknowledges that legality itself is relative to the constitution and may not guarantee goodness.
He considers monarchy and aristocracy as potentially ideal states but finds them practically problematic, especially monarchy according to law, which he argues is not a true constitution.
Aristotle’s examination of existing monarchies and empirical study of governments lead him away from the construction of an ideal state and towards a more pragmatic analysis of actual constitutions.
His shift towards empirical investigation and the study of actual governments marked a turning point in his political thought, emphasizing the need for adjusting political ideals to the complexities of real-world governance.

CHAPTER VI – ARISTOTLE: POLITICAL ACTUALITIES

Aristotle’s conception of political philosophy in Book IV of the Politics involves a significant enlargement, focusing on the complete art of the statesman.
He emphasizes the need for political science to cover the whole subject, including the best government in ideal circumstances, what is best relative to specific conditions, and what is attainable for most states considering common virtues and intelligence.
This approach diverges from the ethics of individual morality, highlighting a distinct branch of investigation concerning the art of governance and legislation.
Aristotle suggests studying constitutions to understand the causes that preserve or destroy states, leading to the writing of Books IV to VI of the Politics.
He aims to determine which constitution is best, how each should be organized, and what laws and customs they should adopt for optimal functioning.
This distinction between ethics and politics, while connected, represents Aristotle’s logical organization of scientific knowledge, demonstrating his capacity to outline major branches of inquiry that have endured over time.

THE POLITICAL AND ETHICAL CONSTITUTIONS

Aristotle’s analysis in Book IV of the Politics is connected to the previous discussion in Book III, particularly regarding monarchy and aristocracy as ideal states.
He delves into a closer examination of oligarchy and democracy, aiming to understand their various forms and the suitable laws for each.
Aristotle introduces distinctions between the constitution as an arrangement of offices, the law, and the social and economic structure behind the political organization.
He acknowledges the interaction between political agencies and economic classes, recognizing that a political constitution may not always align with the actual functioning of government.
Aristotle’s classification of democracy and oligarchy considers political regulations, economic conditions, and their combinations, leading to various forms and degrees of each type.
The analysis emphasizes the complexity of political and social factors influencing the functioning of states, highlighting the interplay between political structure, economic interests, and the rule of law.

THE DEMOCRATIC AND OLIGARCHIC PRINCIPLES

Aristotle discusses the variations in democracies based on their political inclusiveness and property qualifications for voting and holding office.
Democracies may differ in economic structure, with some being farmer-dominated where gentry govern and others having a large urban population actively participating in public affairs, leading to potential demagoguery.
Different kinds of oligarchies are distinguished by property qualifications, the broadness of power within the population, and the extent of factional control over public offices.
The distribution of property plays a crucial role in determining the nature of oligarchies, ranging from broadly based rule to exclusive control by a wealthy elite.
Aristotle outlines three branches of government present in all forms: deliberative, administrative, and judiciary, each of which can exhibit varying degrees of democratic or oligarchic organization.
Within these branches, factors such as inclusiveness, methods of selection, terms of office, and power dynamics contribute to the overall democratic or oligarchic nature of a government’s functioning.

THE BEST PRACTICABLE STATE

Aristotle introduces the concept of the “polity” or constitutional government, which he views as the best practicable average between democracy and oligarchy, avoiding their extremes.
The polity is a mixed form of constitution that combines elements from both democracy and oligarchy, relying on a large middle class as its social foundation.
Aristotle emphasizes the importance of balance in the polity, balancing quality (influence from wealth, birth, education) and quantity (sheer numbers) to achieve stability and avoid tyranny.
The middle-class state aims for a balance between political influences and numerical strength, believing that a large middle class fosters stability, sober public opinion, and administrative efficiency.
Aristotle discusses the risks of excessive oligarchy or democracy, which can lead to oppression by factions or mob rule, respectively, and potentially degenerate into tyranny.
He provides advice for tyrants, suggesting tactics to maintain power and loyalty while avoiding the public display of tyrannical behavior.
Aristotle’s analysis focuses on preventing revolution and maintaining stability in government, highlighting the significance of political and economic forces, particularly the middle class, in ensuring a state’s long-term viability.

THE NEW ART OF THE STATESMAN

Aristotle’s political science represents a continuation of fundamental ideas derived from Plato but involves an important modification and readjustment.
He aims to direct political life towards morally valuable ends through rational means, distinguishing this approach from mere political manipulation or demagoguery.
Aristotle’s method differs from Plato’s free intellectual construction and speculative philosophy, as he focuses on empirical analysis and a more realistic understanding of political and social elements.
The polity or constitutional government, as advocated by Aristotle, represents a mixed form of constitution that balances elements from democracy and oligarchy, relying on a large middle class for stability.
His analysis of communities and the state emphasizes the distinction between household relations (like slavery) and political rule, defining the state as an intermediate entity that facilitates a civilized life and human development.
Aristotle’s method of definition by approximation and historical development helps distinguish the state from other forms of community and highlight its unique role in fostering civilization.
He stresses the importance of the city-state as the pinnacle of human development, enabling the fulfillment of rational capacities and the creation of science, art, religion, and other aspects of civilization.

NATURE AS DEVELOPMENT

Aristotle’s argument against the conventionality of law and morals is based on the partnership of the state in all sciences and arts, as articulated by Edmund Burke.
He redefines “nature” to adapt it to every branch of science, emphasizing the gradual unfolding and development of inherent capacities.
Nature, for Aristotle, is a system of growth forces directed towards characteristic ends, requiring favorable material conditions for development.
The statesman’s art involves understanding the potentialities of growth in society and selecting courses that lead to a better development of social institutions and human life.
Aristotle’s method combines empirical and descriptive investigations with consideration of ideal dimensions, enabling the statesman to use means effectively for optimal outcomes.
Aristotle’s political science represents a departure from Plato’s speculative construction and focuses on observing and analyzing the structure and functioning of states based on historical and observational data.
His method of investigation, combining empirical observation with consideration of ideal possibilities, has been highly influential and fruitful in the study of politics.

CHAPTER VII – THE TWILIGHT OF THE CITYSTATE

Plato and Aristotle’s political philosophy lacked immediate practical and theoretical influence post-Aristotle’s death.
They comprehensively outlined political ideals and principles for the city-state, leaving little room for further progress in that direction.
Their work was foundational for social sciences, emphasizing rational study and intelligent direction of human relations.
Aristotle’s political theory stressed a state based on free citizens, moral equality, law, discussion, and consent rather than force.
Their focus on the city-state as the only viable political form limited the applicability of their ideals to other types of civil societies.
They recognized the flaws in existing city-states but believed in the fundamental soundness of the city-state as an ethical foundation.
Plato and Aristotle’s emphasis on citizenship as a privilege led to a class-based perspective on political participation.
Criticism and indifference towards the city-state existed even in their time, hinting at the need for alternative societal forms.
The ethical presumption underlying their work was that a good life involves participation in the life of the state.
They prioritized citizenship as ethically crucial, viewing it as a sharing of the common life and a summit of human goods.
The rise of ethical theories advocating withdrawal from politics marked the decline of the city-state’s prominence.
Plato and Aristotle acknowledged but were skeptical of the ethics of withdrawal, associating it with a degraded or god-like state.
Aristotle’s argument for the chief good being citizen’s activity reflects a rejection of the ideal of individual self-sufficiency outside the city-state.

THE FAILURE OF THE CITYSTATE

Plato and Aristotle’s political philosophy assumed that the city-state was morally self-sufficient, but it overlooked the practical reality of foreign affairs’ impact on the city-state’s internal dynamics.
The improvement of the city-state within its existing form relied on the assumption that rulers could freely choose wise policies to correct internal defects.
Plato and Aristotle’s acceptance of the city-state as a moral institution limited their political horizon to it, neglecting the significant role of foreign affairs.
They failed to fully grasp the importance of foreign relations, such as the career of Alexander the Great, in shaping the fate of the city-state.
The Greek city-state faced a political dilemma early in its history, unable to achieve self-sufficiency without isolation or to maintain cultural vitality without forming alliances that compromised independence.
The prevalence of alliances between cities led to federations but failed to create stable and permanent states.
Greek particularism and conflicts among city-states hindered efforts to unite against external threats, leading to foreign powers like Persia and later Rome exerting influence over Greece.
Foreign and domestic affairs were intertwined in the city-states, with class interests affecting policies and responses to foreign powers like Macedonia.
The rise of Macedonian power highlighted the inadequacies of the city-state model in governing larger territories and addressing broader economic and cultural challenges.
The assumption of Greek political superiority over barbarians was challenged by the economic and cultural ties between Greek cities and the Asiatic hinterland.
Alexander the Great’s policy of merging Greek and oriental subjects marked a departure from Aristotle’s teachings and underscored the limitations of the city-state’s political presumptions.

WITHDRAWAL OR PROTEST

The spread of a negative attitude towards the values of the city-state was not accidental, but rather a response to the limitations and failures of the city-state system.
Various philosophical schools emerged with differing attitudes towards the city-state:
- Epicureans and Skeptics adopted a defeatist and disillusioned attitude, emphasizing withdrawal from public life and focusing on private happiness.
- Cynics took a more forthright negation of the city-state and its values, often protesting against the existing social order.
These schools diverged from Plato and Aristotle’s teachings, presenting new perspectives and raising questions about first principles.
Despite lacking the genius of Plato and Aristotle, these schools were significant for introducing different points of view and paving the way for the restatement of political principles in changing circumstances.
The failure of the city-state led to a major moral disaster for affected classes, prompting the creation of ideals centered on personal character and private happiness.
The decline of the city-state’s importance gave rise to private societies for religious and social purposes, compensating for unsatisfied social interests.
Socrates’ teachings became mythologized, with various philosophical schools claiming to derive their ideals directly from him.
The philosophical problem returned to questions about the meaning of nature and its relation to popular morals, particularly as doubts arose about the city-state’s role in civilized life.
Two main forms of political philosophy emerged:
- Epicurean and Skeptic schools emphasized withdrawal and personal happiness, rejecting the significance of the city-state.
- Cynic School took a more radical approach, openly negating the city-state’s values and protesting against societal norms.

THE EPICUREANS

Epicureanism aimed to achieve individual self-sufficiency by advocating the pursuit of pleasure, specifically the avoidance of pain, worry, and anxiety.
The positive aspect of Epicurean happiness included congenial friendships and withdrawal from public life to focus on personal happiness.
Epicureanism was rooted in thorough materialism, rejecting religious anxieties and superstitions, emphasizing self-interest and individual happiness.
The philosophy criticized superstitions like divination and astrology, contrasting with Stoicism’s inclination to find truth in popular beliefs.
Nature in Epicureanism referred to physics for the world and self-interest for humans, with no intrinsic moral virtues except happiness.
Justice, according to Epicureanism, was a convention formed for mutual benefit, based on expediency and aimed at obtaining security.
Laws and governments were seen as contracts for mutual security, and morality was considered identical with expedience.
Justice and morality varied with circumstances and time, based on what was expedient for facilitating mutual intercourse.
Epicureans generally favored monarchy as the strongest and most secure form of government, aligned with the propertied classes’ interest in security.
Epicurean social philosophy explained human institutions’ origin and development through purely materialist principles, without divine intervention.
Civilization, arts, sciences, and social institutions were attributed to natural human powers and adaptation to the environment.
Epicureanism’s political philosophy resonated with Hobbesian ideas in modern times, emphasizing materialism, self-interest, and the state’s role in providing security.
Despite criticisms of Epicureanism, it provided peace and consolation on an individual level but did not contribute significantly to political progress or influence human affairs.

THE CYNICS

The Cynics offered a philosophy of escape, contrasting sharply with Epicureanism, by protesting against the city-state and social hierarchies.
They renounced societal goods and conventions, advocating a life of poverty, rejecting distinctions based on wealth, citizenship, nationality, and social status.
Cynicism attracted foreigners, exiles, and those disillusioned with societal norms, promoting contempt for conventionalities and embracing a rudeness that shocked social decorum.
Their philosophy emphasized self-sufficiency, valuing only what was within one’s power like moral character while disregarding property, marriage, family, citizenship, and social reputation.
The Cynics critiqued social discriminations prevalent in ancient society, advocating for equality but in a nihilistic manner devoid of social doctrine for amelioration.
Their political theory was utopian, leaning towards idealized communism or anarchy with the disappearance of property, marriage, and government.
The Cynics believed the good life and true society were only for the wise, emancipating themselves from societal laws and conventions, viewing all institutions as artificial and unnecessary.
Their concept of worldwide citizenship as “cosmopolitan” prefigured Stoicism’s positive version but emphasized negativism: primivism, abolition of civic ties, and restrictions except those from moral duty.
The Cynic School was a precursor to Stoicism and highlighted discontent with city-state institutions, attracting those burdened by societal norms and offering a philosophy of return to nature in a nihilistic sense.