Politics: Book 1

Aristotle begins his Politics by talking about the highest community of all i.e., the state or the political community, which aims at the highest good. He goes on to differentiate among the roles of various authoritarian figures like the king, the household manager, the master, for which he feels it is necessary to consider the constituent units of a state.

A community is formed by bringing together beings interdependent for their sustenance and preservation, like the master and the slave, the male and the female. A combination of these two relationships leads to the formation of a family. Many families unite to form a village and many villages unite to form a self-sufficient state which originates in the bare needs of life, and continues to exist for the sake of a good life for its inhabitants. A state is thus a natural creation and its inhabitants, the men, are naturally socio-political animals who cannot exist by themselves. A man who is not part of any state is either beastly or superior to man. 'Men', who are in an advantageous position compared to the animals, having speech and the ability to judge, can aspire for a good life only if they remain within the bounds of law and justice within the state.

Aristotle then goes on to talk about household management with reference to the three types of relationships possible in a household-

• that between master and slave
• marital relationship between male and female
• procreative relationship between father and children.

To manage a household one needs to have the expertise of acquiring necessary property, which can be done with instruments of action, living or non-living. The most effective instrument of action is a slave who is also a possession of his master. Some feel the relationship between a master and a slave to be akin to political rule but in political rule the king rules for the subjects’ good where as the master rules the slave for his own good. Again, some see turning a person forcefully into being a slave as unjust, as nature has created all men to be equal. Aristotle opines that the superior in ‘virtue’ should be the master and not the superior in ‘strength’.

Aristotle believes in the theory of natural and unnatural slaves. Some are born to rule and some (the inferior) are naturally born to be ruled for the better. Those who are unnatural slaves, made by law, are usually the ones defeated in a war and thereby possessed by the victors. This seems unjust to Aristotle especially when the cause of the war is unjustified. The natural relation between a master and a slave is friendly, where as the one imposed by law is torturous.

In Book I, Aristotle also compares the art of household management to the “art of wealth-getting”. This wealth can refer to that supplied by nature, which is to be acquired in keeping with the ways of lives of various animals who try to be self-sufficient. The household manager accumulates this wealth for the proper running of the household. This would comprise the proper use of a thing. Things would be used improperly when they are used as means of exchange. The need for exchange arises in a society between some people who have excess of something and others who are in dearth of that same commodity. Exchange leads to barter system from which grows the practice of import and export among countries. Gradually money comes into use as a result. Use of money further teaches men the art of retail trade and consequently the art of getting wealthy by accumulation of money through profit making. However, as Aristotle feels, coins are useless as they themselves cannot meet the necessities of daily life, as did the earlier means of barter where people exchanged necessary articles. While ‘wealth-getting’ for the household remains in limit, is necessary and honourable, the wealth produced by trade and interest (“money born out of money”) has no limit to it, leads to usury and is unnecessary. One can desire more and more but neither desire has any end nor the means of satisfying it. There is also a third type of ‘wealth-getting’, that through industries which exploit the resources of nature to earn profit.

Aristotle then returns to talk about the last two types of rules-

• royal rule of the father over children, which comprises love and respect for the father, by virtue of his age, and 
• constitutional rule of the husband over his wife who is seen as an unequal and naturally less fit compared to her husband being a female.

Although the latter type of rule is termed as constitutional, the actual rule in a state is over subjects who are free and equal unlike the females. However, the females are different from the slaves in that, that females are ruled for their good. Aristotle seems to accept this subordination of women to men but is unable to justify it.

Aristotle ends Book I by raising the question as to whether the natural ruler and the natural subjects like the slaves, women, children, who are human beings of the subordinate kind, share the same virtues. The answer to this would be in accordance to what Socrates believed; each possesses moral virtue such that each can perform his(her) duty perfectly. Women can also have intellectual virtues, but in a subordinate way.  However, all the virtues should be in keeping with the constitution of the state.

Book I gives way to Book II where Aristotle will examine the theories of a perfect state.
--Koyel Ghosh (PG II)