Quite often in the course of the history of political science, philosophy, and legal sciences, Aristotle's doctrine of state and law is considered as an example of ancient thought. An essay on this topic is written by almost every student of a higher educational institution. Of course, if he is a lawyer, political scientist or historian of philosophy. In this article, we will try to briefly characterize the teachings of the most famous thinker of the ancient era, and also show how it differs from the theories of his no less famous opponent Plato.
Foundation of the State
The entire philosophical system of Aristotle was influenced by controversy. He argued long and hard with Plato and the latter's doctrine of "eidos". In his work "Politics", the famous philosopher opposes not only the cosmogonic and ontological theories of his opponent, but also his ideas about society. Aristotle's doctrine of the state is based on the concepts of natural need. From the point of view of the famousphilosopher, man is created for public life, he is a "political animal". He is driven not only by physiological, but also by social instincts. Therefore, people create societies, because only there they can communicate with their own kind, as well as regulate their lives with the help of laws and rules. Therefore, the state is a natural stage in the development of society.
Aristotle's doctrine of the ideal state
The philosopher considers several types of public associations of people. The most basic is family. Then the circle of communication expands to a village or settlement (“choirs”), that is, it already extends not only to blood relations, but also to people living in a certain territory. But there comes a time when a person is not satisfied. He wants more goods and security. In addition, a division of labor is necessary, because it is more profitable for people to produce and exchange (sell) something than to do everything they need themselves. Only a policy can provide such a level of well-being. Aristotle's doctrine of the state puts this stage of development of society at the highest level. This is the most perfect kind of society that can provide not only economic benefits, but also "eudaimonia" - the happiness of citizens who practice virtues.
Aristotle's policy
Of course, city-states under that name existed before the great philosopher. But they were small associations, torn apart by internal contradictions and entering into conflict with each other.friend in endless wars. Therefore, Aristotle's doctrine of the state assumes the presence in the policy of one ruler and a constitution recognized by all, guaranteeing the integrity of the territory. Its citizens are free and as far as possible equal among themselves. They are intelligent, rational, and in control of their actions. They have the right to vote. They are the backbone of society. At the same time, for Aristotle, such a state is higher than individuals and their families. It is the whole, and everything else in relation to it is only parts. It should not be too large to be comfortable to manage. And the good of the community of citizens is good for the state. Therefore, politics becomes the highest science in comparison with the rest.
Criticism of Plato
Issues related to the state and law are described by Aristotle in more than one work. He spoke on these topics many times. But what is the difference between the teachings of Plato and Aristotle about the state? Briefly, these differences can be described as follows: different ideas about unity. The state, from the point of view of Aristotle, of course, is an integrity, but at the same time it consists of many members. They all have different interests. A state soldered together by the unity that Plato describes is impossible. If this is put into practice, then it will become an unprecedented tyranny. The state communism preached by Plato must abolish the family and other institutions to which man is attached. Thus, he demotivates the citizen, taking away the source of joy, and also deprives society of moral factors and necessary personal relationships.
Property
But Aristotle criticizes Plato not only for the desire for totalitarian unity. The commune promoted by the latter is based on public property. But after all, this does not at all eliminate the source of all wars and conflicts, as Plato believes. On the contrary, it only moves to another level, and its consequences become more destructive. The doctrine of Plato and Aristotle about the state differs most on this point. Selfishness is the driving force of a person, and by satisfying it within certain limits, people benefit society as well. Aristotle thought so. Common property is unnatural. It's the same as a draw. In the presence of this kind of institution, people will not work, but only try to enjoy the fruits of the labors of others. An economy based on this form of ownership encourages laziness and is extremely difficult to manage.
About forms of government
Aristotle also analyzed different types of government and constitutions of many peoples. As an evaluation criterion, the philosopher takes the number (or groups) of people involved in management. Aristotle's doctrine of the state distinguishes between three types of reasonable types of government and the same number of bad ones. The first include the monarchy, aristocracy and polity. Tyranny, democracy and oligarchy belong to the bad species. Each of these types can develop into its opposite, depending on political circumstances. Besides,many factors affect the quality of power, and the most important is the personality of its bearer.
Bad and good types of power: characteristics
Aristotle's doctrine of the state is briefly expressed in his theory of forms of government. The philosopher carefully considers them, trying to understand how they arise and what means should be used to avoid the negative consequences of bad power. Tyranny is the most imperfect form of government. If there is only one sovereign, a monarchy is preferable. But it can degenerate, and the ruler can usurp all power. In addition, this type of government is very dependent on the personal qualities of the monarch. Under an oligarchy, power is concentrated in the hands of a certain group of people, while the rest are “pushed away” from it. This often leads to discontent and upheavals. The best form of this type of government is the aristocracy, since noble people are represented in this class. But they can degenerate over time. Democracy is the best of the worst forms of government, and it has many drawbacks. In particular, this is the absolutization of equality and endless disputes and agreements, which reduces the effectiveness of power. Politia is the ideal type of government modeled by Aristotle. In it, power belongs to the "middle class" and is based on private property.
About laws
In his writings, the famous Greek philosopher also considers the issue of jurisprudence and its origin. Aristotle's doctrine of the state and law makes us understand what the basis and necessity of laws are. First of all, they are free from human passions, sympathies and prejudices. They are created by a mind in a state of balance. Therefore, if the policy has the rule of law, and not human relations, it will become an ideal state. Without the rule of law, society will lose shape and lose stability. They are also needed to make people act virtuously. After all, a person by nature is an egoist and is always inclined to do what is beneficial to him. The law corrects his behavior, possessing coercive force. The philosopher was a supporter of the prohibition theory of laws, saying that everything that is not set out in the constitution is not legitimate.
About justice
This is one of the most important concepts in the teachings of Aristotle. Laws should be the embodiment of justice in practice. They are the regulators of relations between the citizens of the policy, and also form a vertical of power and subordination. After all, the common good of the inhabitants of the state is a synonym for justice. In order for it to be achieved, it is necessary to combine natural law (generally recognized, often unwritten, known and understood by everyone) and normative (human institutions, formalized by law or through contracts). Any just law must respect the customs that have developed among a given people. Therefore, the legislator must always create such regulations that would correspond to traditions. Law and laws do not always coincide with each other. There is also a difference between practice and ideal. There are unfairlaws, but they, too, must be followed until they change. This makes it possible to improve the law.
"Ethics" and the doctrine of the state of Aristotle
First of all, these aspects of the philosopher's legal theory are based on the concept of justice. It may vary depending on what exactly we take as a basis. If our goal is the common good, then we should take into account the contribution of everyone and, starting from this, distribute duties, power, we alth, honors, and so on. If we put equality at the forefront, then we must provide benefits to everyone, regardless of his personal activities. But the most important thing is to avoid extremes, especially a wide gap between we alth and poverty. After all, this, too, can be a source of upheaval and upheaval. In addition, some political views of the philosopher are set forth in the work "Ethics". There he describes what the life of a free citizen should be like. The latter is obliged not only to know what virtue is, but to be driven by it, to live in accordance with it. The ruler also has his own ethical obligations. He cannot wait for the conditions necessary to create an ideal state to come. He must act practically and create the constitutions necessary for this period, proceeding from how best to manage people in a particular situation, and improving the laws according to the circumstances.
Slavery and addiction
However, if we take a closer look at the philosopher's theories, we will see that Aristotle's teaching aboutsociety and the state excludes many people from the realm of the common good. First of all, they are slaves. For Aristotle, these are just talking tools that do not have reason to the extent that free citizens have it. This state of affairs is natural. People are not equal among themselves, there are those who are by nature slaves, and there are masters. In addition, the philosopher wonders, if this institution is abolished, who will provide learned people with leisure for their lofty reflections? Who will clean the house, look after the household, set the table? All this will not be done on its own. Therefore slavery is necessary. From the category of "free citizens" Aristotle also excluded farmers and people working in the field of crafts and trade. From the point of view of the philosopher, all these are “low occupations”, distracting from politics and not giving the opportunity to have leisure.
