Aristotle's Philosophy on State Constitutions and Polity

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 — the text presents objectively valid analyses and characterizations. In other respects — such as 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 both principle and 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 the very reason 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 of assessing the quality and justness of state constitutions in principle (Politics IV.1). Aristotle also articulates the difference between perfect analytical constitutional ideals and the constitutional ideals that are far more likely to develop in practice (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 of the institution of human slavery (Politics I.4–I.8), and in the obvious assumptions embedded in his definition of citizenship rights concerning his beliefs about the relative authority of female intellect (Politics I.13–I.14).

Conclusion

In general principle, Aristotle's Politics provides an objectively valid characterization that the primary purpose of the state is to benefit the greatest number of citizens and that the main role of politicians is to establish and maintain just laws. Aristotle recognizes that the ideal constitution would require a society composed exclusively of morally virtuous individuals. Since human societies actually consist of a mix of individuals of varying moral virtue, Aristotle proposes a more realistic outline of a second-best society, or Polity. In macroscopic perspective, Politics provides a set of fundamental principles that accurately define the modern role of government and state leadership. Only in the microscopic sense — such as the precise criteria for determining who qualifies for state citizenship and who does not — does Politics fail logically and morally.