BOOK REVIEW: BY : SHEIKH HASHIM JAVAID

ARISTOTLE’S ‘POLITICS’
Translated by BENJAMIN JOWETT
Student I’d : 202202814

“Our purpose is to consider what form of political community

is best of all for those who are most able to realise their ideal
of life”

Introduction:
Aristotle’s politics is a special treatise that takes
as its object the consideration of the city (Polis),
its components, its functioning, and, most of all,
the different possible forms of constitutions it
may have. The treatise was probably given its
title ‘politics’ by Aristotle himself, which literally
means; ‘things concerning the polis’ .He
considers state as the highest form of human
association. But in the practical domain, i.e., the
domain of human actions, Aristotle does not
restrict politics to what we call, and what ancient
Greeks probably also called, ‘politics’, that is, to
the administration of the city , but also subsumes
‘ethics’ as a prerequisite to what we call politics .
He does so for, for him both look forward to
achieving the same goal- good life. Aristotle
defends certain societal structures, such as
slavery, and elucidates the roles of men and
women. Aristotle was the first to analyze,
critically and systematically, the then existing
constitutions and classify them. His classification
of constitutions is still used in understanding
constitutions comparatively. He was one of the
earliest to use the comparative method, a method
that has continued to be relevant even today.
Aristotle criticizes many kinds of governance in
"Politics," including theoretical models put out by
philosophers like Plato and current constitutions
in his day, in a section devoted to comparative
study. He emphasizes the significance of a just
constitution that promotes the interests of the
majority rather than a small group of people.
Aristotle makes comparisons between the
characteristics of citizens and the various forms
of constitutions while classifying and analyzing
them. He examines the benefits of decent people
and their function in a well-run society. Aristotle
ends by outlining his ideal society, highlighting
the value of the middle class and a fair allocation
of power. Aristotle has itself divided his book in
eight parts. Book I and II is about state and
household management, book III and IV is about
kinds of constitutions, book V and VI about
revolutions and book VII and VIII about an ideal
city.

Summary:
.
STATE AND GOOD LIFE
“Every state is a community of some kind, and
every community is established with a view to
some good, for mankind always acts in order to
obtain what they think good. But if all
communities aim at some good, the state which is
the highest of all aims of good in a greater degree
than any other and at the highest good(B1/51)”.
Aristotle asserts that everything in nature exists
with a specific purpose and the purpose of the
individual is same as the state, achieving the good
life. Aristotle’s belief that man can only become
fully human when he is the part of the state , but
he who is unable to live in state or who has no
needs must be either God or beast. Aristotle
identifies three important relations existing in the
household; slave and master, husband and wife
and parents and children. Aristotle defends
slavery by noting that nature generally consists of
ruling and ruled elements. Aristotle restricts his
justification of slavery only to those who are
natural slaves and all others either bought or won
in war, none of those does he have any
justification for slavery. Women, Aristotle says
"nature has distinguished between the female and
the slave" so women are not slaves. However,
they are normally subordinate to men, male is by
nature superior, and the female inferior; and the
one rules, and the other is ruled". Women are
ruled, not as slaves are, for the master's benefit,
but for their own good, just as the rulers of a city
must seek the good of the citizens, not the good
of the rulers. Aristotle further raises the question
whether the slaves have virtue or not? He
argues, ”For the slaves has no deliberative faculty
at all, the women has but it is without authority”.
Aristotle concludes by saying art of acquisition of
wealth is not a natural part of household
management as people confuse good life with
pleasure but the good life is not identical with
pleasure and the unlimited riches could not
provide all the goods that are natural for humans
and necessary for living the good life. These
goods are instead provided by politics and
household management.
 Critique of constitutions.

In politics book II Aristotle states,“Our purpose is

to consider what form of political community is
best of all for those who are most able to realise
their ideal of life. We must therefore examine not
only this but other constitutions, both such as
actually existing in well governed state, and any
theoretical forms which are held in
esteem(B2/80) ”. Aristotle's goal is to demonstrate
the need for a new theory of government, since
neither a perfect theory nor a perfect government
exists. Aristotle begins with an extended criticism
of Plato’s REPUBLIC, which proposes that
among the guardians, there should be no separate
families. His argument for this is that there will
be more unity in the state. Against this Aristotle
says “For that which is common to the greatest
has the least care bestowed upon it. Everyone
thinks chiefly of his own hardly at all of the
common interest; and only when he is himself
concerned as an individual. For besides other
considerations, everybody is more inclined to
neglect something which he expects another to
fulfil; as in families many attendants are often
less useful than a few. Each citizen will have a
thousand sons who will not be his sons
individually, but anybody will be equally the son
of anybody, and will therefore be neglected by all
alike (B2/83)”. In addition to this he also
criticises laws, Phaleas of Chalcedon and
Hippodamus of Miletus. Having dealt with these
theoretical constitutions he turns towards existing
constitution, first he criticises Spartans
constitution on the grounds of undue freedom
given to women which presents many hazards,
the worst of which is a dowry system that hurts
the economy and the military. Aristotle is
dissatisfied also with Crete and Carthage. The
Cretan system is elitist, susceptible to feuds,
While Carthage is superior to both Sparta and
Crete, it rewards the rich too much, which
encourages greediness.

Kinds of constitution
After politics II, which dealt with the theoretical
forms and existing constitutions, Aristotle turns
towards understand the nature of different
constitutions. Aristotle writes; “he who would
inquire into the essence and attributes of various
kinds of governments must first of all determine,
what is a state?” Then he says that to illuminate
what the state is we must first of all know, who a
citizen is?, because state is a composite made up
of many parts. Aristotle criticizes the traditional
definition of citizen, the one born from the two
citizens or one who actually lives in the city.
Rather, Aristotle suggests the citizen is someone
who shares in the administration of justice and
holding of public office. Aristotle points out that
though citizenship is often reserved for those who
are born citizens, this hereditary status becomes
irrelevant during the time of revolution. This
raises the question to whom may citizenship be
justly granted? And what defines a city and at
what point does city lose its identity? Aristotle
suggests that a city is defined by its constitution,
“ since the state is a partnership, and is a
partnership of citizens in a constitution, when the
form of government changes and becomes
different then it may be supposed that the state is
no longer the same(B3/130)”
Aristotle further raises a question whether the
virtue of a good citizen is same of the good man.
Since there are many kinds of constitutions it is
clear that there must be not single one but at least
as many different kinds of virtues. Aristotle
concludes that the virtue of a good person is kind
of ruling and a complete single virtue but the
virtue of a good citizen is both ruling and being
ruled.
Man is by nature a political animal even when
they do not require one another’s help, desire to
live together; not but they are also brought
together by their common interest, thus the chief
end both of individuals and state is same. State
cannot have the ethical destination that nature
assigns to it unless it is governed by a right
constitution. A constitution is right when it works
according to common advantage and a
constitution is deviated when it works for the
benefit of an individual or a group. Aristotle
asserts that there are three main kinds of right
constitutions, according to the number of people
who have the power; and to each of them there
corresponds a deviated form. When one
individual governs for the common advantage,
there is a kingship, the deviation of which is a
tyranny; when the power is in the hands of a
small number of people for common advantage,
there is an aristocracy, the deviation of which is
an oligarchy; when the masses govern rightly,
there is a constitutional government (polity), the
deviation of which is a democracy, a term which,
in Aristotle as well as in Plato, indicates what we
would call a demagogy. Aristotle concludes by
saying that ‘political society exists for the sake of
noble actions not for the sake of living together’.
The city aims not to make the citizens wealthy, or
to satisfy all their desires, but to make them
virtuous in order to make them happy. Then, the
general principle of any legal system is expressed
in the next sentence; “Hence those who contribute
most to a community of this kind have a greater
part from the city than those who are equal or
greater share in it then those who have the same
or a greater freedom of birth but are inferior to
them in political virtue (B3/137)”.

The excellent constitution

“The happy life is the life according to the virtue
lived without impediments and the virtue is the
mean, then the life which is in a mean attainable
by everyone, must be the best (B4/190)”. In the case
of politics, the middle class is the mean between
the rich and the poor. Aristotle states that
“constitutional government” or “polity” is the
best form of government in which power rests
with the strong middle class. Polity is the form of
government in which different organs of
government are controlled by different sections of
the population, in such a way that both rich and
poor have a share of power. Perhaps it is because
power is shared by all categories that it can be
said that all take turns to rule.
Aristotle in book VII of politics attempts to create
an ideal state. He distinguishes between three
kinds of goods, viz. external goods, goods of the
body and goods of the soul. Aristotle gives
preeminence to goods of the soul, since they are
ends in themselves, whereas the other two kinds
of goods are merely means to this end. Happiness
and rational activity are ends in themselves: man
pursues them solely for their own sake. Wealth
and health are merely means to these ends; they
are necessary to happiness not because they
themselves are intrinsically good, but because it
is difficult to achieve happiness without them.
The goal of the state is to create a life of leisure
for its citizens that will allow them to achieve
happiness through rationality. A citizen is thus an
end in himself, while non-citizens, such as slaves,
women, and serfs, are simply means to this end.
Aristotle believes that the population of a city
should be neither too large nor too small.
Similarly, the territory should be large enough to
ensure self-sufficiency and leisure but small
enough to be survivable, for purposes of defense
and facilitation of commerce. Aristotle advocates
living by the sea and building a seaport, though
he warns of the danger of having unwanted aliens
crowd the city. Aristotle adds that the city should
be built with fortifying walls and access to fresh
water. It should also be pleasant and amenable to
a healthy political life. The difference between
this city and other cities is that the principles that
it teaches its citizens are the correct principles for
living the good life. It is here, and nowhere else,
that the excellent man and the good citizen are the
same. Aristotle also asserts the kind of education
each person should receive, He elaborates on the
content of this education, noting that it should
involve the body as well as the mind. Aristotle
includes physical education, reading and writing,
drawing, and music as subjects which the young
potential citizens must learn.

Analysis:
Aristotle's "Politics" stands as a monumental
work that delves into the intricacies of the city-
state (polis), its constituents, and the diverse
forms of constitutions it may embody. Aristotle
broadens the scope of politics to encompass
ethics, recognizing both as integral to realizing a
common goal,the good life. Aristotle's
contribution to political science is undeniable,
earning him the title of the father of political
science. His systematic analysis and classification
of existing constitutions, along with his critical
examination of theoretical models, laid the
foundation for understanding governance. The
comparative method employed by Aristotle
continues to be relevant, demonstrating his
forward-thinking approach in political analysis.
The treatise unfolds in a structured manner, with
Aristotle's scrutiny extending from the household
to the state, from theoretical models to existing
constitutions, and finally to the nature of different
constitutions. The culmination of Aristotle's
"Politics" lies in the exploration of the excellent
constitution “the polity”. Positioned as the mean
between the rich and the poor, the polity
represents a government where power is shared
by the strong middle class. Aristotle's vision of an
ideal state, presented in Book VII, underscores
the primacy of goods of the soul and the pursuit
of rational activity for the citizens' happiness. In
essence, Aristotle's "Politics" transcends its
historical context, remaining a timeless and
foundational text in political philosophy. Its
exploration of the nature of governance, the
virtues of citizens, and the pursuit of the good life
continues to stimulate scholarly discourse and
provides invaluable insights into the complexities
of political organization and ethical living.