Aristotle\'s Theory of Citizenship PDF

Preview

Summary

Aristotle's Theory of Citizenship...

Description

Aristotle's Theory of Citizenship Aristotle's Theory of Citizenship is the central premise of his political philosophy. Aristotle disengages politics in this arena with two critical concepts: the state is a community and it is the highest of all communities, 'it incorporates all the others, strives for good in a larger degree than any other, and strives for the highest good.' To a Greek of the classical period, the first argument came naturally: his polis was a city state with a modest land and population. Aristotle was the first to properly define the state as a community, laying the groundwork for the organic conception of the state, one of the two basic categories into which all political conceptions of the state fall. Aristotle held a conservative view of citizenship. According to Aristotle, a state is defined as a collective body of citizens. Residence was not to be used to determine citizenship, as resident immigrants and slaves shared a common residence with citizens but were not citizens. He defines a citizen as a person who possesses the authority to participate in a state's deliberative or judicial government. Aristotle was unfamiliar with representative government because the Greek city-state was ruled directly by its citizens. A citizen may also exercise constitutional rights through the application of public law.

According to him, a citizen was someone who shared authority in the polis, and, unlike Plato, he made no distinction between "an active ruling group and a politically passive community". Aristotle stipulated that children and the elderly could not be citizens, as the former were immature and the latter were infirm. He did not view women as citizens, claiming that they lacked the deliberative faculty and leisure necessary to comprehend how politics worked. A decent citizen would be intelligent and capable of ruling and being dominated. Aristotle defined a good citizen as someone who can live in accordance with the constitution and has enough leisure time to devote to

civic obligations and responsibilities. A good citizen possesses virtue or moral goodness that enables a selfless and cooperative civic life to be lived. According to William Ebenstein, "Aristotle's idea of citizenship is that of the economically independent gentleman who has enough experience, education and leisure to devote him to active citizenship, for citizen must not lead the life of mechanics or tradesmen, for such life is hostile to virtue. Thus, he regarded citizenship as a bond forged by the intimacy of participation in public matters.

Additionally, Aristotle defined sate as a natural community, an entity that possesses all of the characteristics of a living being. In two ways, Aristotle views the state as natural. To begin, he clearly outlines the history of social institutions from the family to the village to the city state; historically, the state is the natural and last step of human relations development. Aristotle, on the other hand, considers the state to be actual in a logical and philosophical sense: "The state is by nature clearly prior to the family and the individual, since the whole is of necessity prior to the part". According to Aristotle, the state is not simply a community; it is the highest community pursuing the highest good. The family is the earliest association, the lowest in the social development hierarchy and the lowest in terms of values, because it is founded by nature to meet men's daily needs. The village is the second sort of association; it is genetically more complex than the family and is concerned with something more than the provision of daily necessities. The third and most valuable in terms of value and purpose is political society: whereas the family and village exist primarily for the preservation of life and companionship's comforts, the state exists for the sake of a good life, not just for the sake of life, and political society exists for the sake of principled action, not just for the sake of companionship. The state is widely recognised as the highest form of association, not just in terms

of social and institutional worth, but also in terms of man's inherent nature.

Aristotle, on the other hand, presents his basic theory of citizenship in Politics III. He distinguishes citizens from other residents, including resident foreigners, slaves, and even children, the elderly, and ordinary employees. According to him, a citizen is someone who has the right to hold 'deliberative or judicial office.' Citizens had the right to serve on juries, the assembly, the council, and other bodies, as was the case in Athens, where citizens were actively involved in governance. However, women, slaves, and foreigners were not granted full citizenship. According to Aristotle, the city-state was composed of multiple such residents. He viewed the constitution as a vehicle for organising the city-numerous state's offices. The constitution defines the governing body as either the people in a democratic system or a select few in an oligarchy.

The enormous duties embedded in citizenship are not imposed on a natural state of human existence, but rather are completely consistent with nature. Citizenship is synonymous with the maximum realisation of human potential in terms of the 'good life.' As is true throughout Aristotle's Politics, citizenship is defined by active engagement. The citizen is neither a state resident nor a member of a politically favoured class. Aristotle makes a clear distinction between the state's 'components' and its "necessary circumstances." Only those who actively participate in or have the means and leisure to participate in the state's government are considered to be its constituents or integral parts. All of the others are only required elements that create a material environment conducive to the functioning of engaged citizens who are not burdened with menial jobs. Theoretical studies reveal that "Aristotle's idea of a

citizen is broadly different from the modern conception because it is not representative but primary government that he has in view. His citizen is not content to have a say in the choosing of his rulers; every citizen is actually to rule in turn, and not merely in the sense of being a member of the executive, but in the sense, a more important one for Aristotle, of helping to make the laws of his state, for the executive is assigned the comparatively small function supplementing the laws when they are inadequate owing to their generality. It is owing to this lofty conception of a citizen's duties that he so closely narrows the citizen body." This is why Aristotle denies citizenship to the mechanic class.

To begin, it is quite evident that Aristotle's definition of the citizen would be obsolete today. He was unable to envision the possibility of representative government. In the current system, citizenship requires only the ability to vote for the representatives of the people who actually rule in egalitarianism. The common benefit of establishing a city-state is the acquisition of a noble existence. Additionally, Aristotle asserts that an individual can exercise dominion over another in a variety of ways, depending on his own nature and that of the subject. The master-slave relationship exemplifies dictatorial authority, as slaves are incapable of functioning in the absence of a natural master to train or command them. It is a system of government that exists only to benefit the master and is incidental to the slaves who are born without the ability to govern themselves. Paternal or marital rule, on the other hand, believes that the male possesses superior leadership abilities to the female. Similarly, children lack the capacity for rational thought and cannot function without adult guidance. Aristotle was adamant that paternal or marital dominance was important for the welfare of women and children, a view that many later thinkers have questioned. However, Aristotle was partially correct in arguing that rules that benefited both ruler and subject were just, whereas rules that benefited just the ruler

were unjust and unfit for a society of free individuals. According to this argument, a single ruler's situation is just if it is a kingship and unjust if it is a tyranny. Similarly, aristocracy is just in the situation of a few rulers, whereas oligarchy is wrong in every scenario. In the situation of multiple rulers, polity is proper, whereas Aristotle regarded democracy to be abnormal. According to Aristotle, the city-state is not a profit-maximizing enterprise. It is also not an organisation dedicated to promote equality and liberty. Indeed, the city-state strives for a pleasant life. As a result, he believed that aristocracy was the best alternative for allocating political rights to those who could effectively exercise them in the community's advantage. His ideal constitution would consist entirely of moral citizens.

Similarly, Aristotle divides knowledge into three categories: practical, theoretical, and productive. Whereas theoretical knowledge is directed toward action, productive knowledge is directed toward meeting daily needs. Practical knowledge is concerned with how to live and behave. By utilising practical knowledge, it is possible to live a good life. Both ethics and politics are considered practical sciences because they are concerned with the moral actors that are human people. While ethics is concerned with how individuals behave, politics is concerned with how communities behave. However, Aristotle believed that ethics and politics are inextricably linked. According to him, abstract knowledge of ethics and politics is meaningless because practical knowledge is only effective when applied. Both should be performed in order to acquire or become goodness. Aristotle states in his works that it is inappropriate for a young man to study politics due to his lack of experience. Additionally, he correctly asserts that adolescents behave out of emotion rather than reason. Without reason, acting on practical knowledge is impossible; hence, young pupils are unprepared to study politics. Only a small percentage of the population in Athens possessed the practical life experiences and mental discipline necessary to benefit from

a study of politics, which is why only a very small percentage of the population was granted citizenship or political participation.

Political and moral knowledge, on the other hand, cannot be as precise or certain as mathematics. For instance, there can never be a truly precise and set definition of 'justice.' However, many geometrical or mathematical concepts, such as a point or an angle, can be precisely specified. These definitions will remain unchanged as well. This is probably why Aristotle avoids establishing prescriptive criteria for making ethical and political judgments. Rather than that, he expects readers of his books to develop into individuals who understand the proper course of action or the proper technique in which to act in a certain situation. Ethics and politics are inextricably linked by their ultimate goal. Human people, too, have a purpose to accomplish. Aristotle believes that the ultimate goal is 'happiness.' Happiness, on the other hand, cannot be attained without leading a virtue-filled life. A person who chooses to do something because it feels right will lead a fruitful life. An individual can be happy and have a high level of moral standards only if he is put in a well-constructed political society. A well-constructed political society will support and promote positive behaviours, prohibit negative ones, and educate citizens about what is right and wrong. This is the point at which the connection between ethics and politics becomes apparent. According to Aristotle, politics is a partnership of citizens pursuing a common goal. The city-responsibility state's is to assist its residents in achieving good. Each individual will strive to accomplish his or her own personal goal or purpose, which is happiness. This way, collectively, all individuals will acquire happiness or goodness.

Aristotle confronts us with the reality that we, as individuals, must find out the best way to conduct our lives in community. Human beings, unlike animals, use their ability to reason and

communicate to solve this problem. They use this ability to construct laws that aid in the administration of justice and support survival. Individuals living in groups and all pursuing virtuous lifestyles together constitute a city. Without this city and justice, human beings would be no better than beasts. The most critical aspect of a city is not its pursuit of security or prosperity and riches, but of virtue and happiness. According to Aristotle, “the politician and lawgiver is wholly occupied with the city-state, and the constitution is a certain way of organizing those who inhabit the city-state”. Politics III contains his general theory of constitutions. He begins by defining the term "citizen." Because the city-state is by definition a collective entity composed of a large number of citizens. Citizenship distinguishes citizens from other occupants, such as resident aliens and slaves; even youngsters and the elderly are not considered unqualified citizens. After additional study, he defines a citizen as a person who is entitled to participate in deliberative or judicial functions. Citizens in Athens, for example, had the right to attend assemblies, councils, and other bodies, as well as serve on juries. In comparison to a current representative democracy, the Athenian system involved citizens more directly in governance. While full citizenship was typically restricted in Greek city-states (women, slaves, foreigners, and others were barred), citizens were more deeply enfranchised than in current representative democracies due to their greater involvement in governance. Aristotle's notion of the citizen reflects this (without qualification). Additionally, he defines the city-state (in the broadest sense) as a collection of such citizens capable of self-sufficiency.

However, Aristotle defined the constitution as the governing body, which can take various forms: in a democracy, it is the people; in an oligarchy, it is a select few. Aristotle addresses two issues before attempting to discern and evaluate various constitutions. To begin, how does a city-state form? He refers to

the argument advanced in Politics that human beings are by nature political animals that desire to coexist....