Aristotle\'s Philospohy About State Constitutions

ARISTOTLE'S PHILOSPOHY ABOUT STATE CONSTITUTIONS

Introduction to the Argument

Aristotle's Politics provides a mixed basket of conceptual thought. In some respects, (such as defining the role of politics and politicians), Politics presents objectively valid analyses and characterizations. In other respects, (such as in the suggested basis and rationale for defining citizenship and the relative fundamental rights of different classes of people), Politics suffers from reliance on a-priori assumptions that are objectively unjustifiable. Nevertheless, the work accurately outlines a valid distinction between a good polity and a deviant political society; it also accurately describes the ultimate purpose of state constitutions in principle as well as in practical terms, and it suggests a definition of the just objectives of a good society that is objectively valid and beneficial to the greatest number of people.

The Essential Role of Politics, Politicians, and the State

According to Aristotle, political science is the study of governmental authority and concepts of social authority in much the same way that biological science is the study of medicine (Politics IV.1). Likewise, Aristotle suggests that the purpose of political science is to guide the decisions of politicians and legislators (Politics, IV.1), and that the most important essential role of politicians is establishing good laws in their capacity as lawgivers (Politics, IV.1). Aristotle argues that very reason that communal societies and the state exist is because human beings are naturally inclined to prefer communal living and that the fundamental objective of the state is to achieve the "good life" (Politics, IV.1) for the largest number of citizens and the best life possible for all (Politics, III.6 & 9; VII. 2).

In that regard, one of the most valuable elements of Aristotle's approach is the perspective that political science provides a means of evaluating the relative moral merit of different political systems and for evaluating the quality and justness of state constitutions in principle (Politics, IV.1). Finally, Aristotle also articulates the difference between perfect analytical constitutional ideals and the constitutional ideals that are much more likely to develop than those ideals (Politics, IV.11). The most glaring logical (and moral) problem in the text arises in connection with Aristotle's concept of the respective citizenship rights of different classes of people. Specifically, in his condoning the institution of human slavery (Politics, I. 4 - I. 8), and in the obvious assumptions within his definition of "citizenship" rights in connection with his beliefs about the relative authority of female intellect (Politics, I. 13 -- I. 14).

The Concept of State Constitutions

Aristotle argues that the ideal set of values of society as represented in the state constitution are those that are the product of a hybrid between the rule of the few over the many and the rule of many (Politics, I.7). More specifically, Aristotle criticized Oligarchies and strict Democracies as deviant political systems because in his conception, they entailed exclusive rule by the wealthy over the poor or vice-versa, respectively (Politics, III.8 & IV.4). Conversely, Polity provides a just political system whereby a mix of all social classes contributes to the principles of the state constitution (Politics, IV.11).

According to Aristotle, the ideal constitution would be that established and maintained by a society consisting exclusively of morally just individuals (Politics, VII.13). In such an ideal society, all citizens would have an equal opportunity to contribute to state leadership, all citizens would share a similar education, and the state constitution would maximize the good life for all equally (VII. 9 & 11; IV. 13). Recognizing that human societies consist of individuals of many different degrees of moral virtue, Aristotle proposes the second best constitution represents a Polity combining elements of Aristocracy, Democracy, and Oligarchy (Politics, IV.11).