- This topic has 3 voices and 20 replies.
-
Posts
-
That is probably a good working definition.I still don't know whether I buy the notion that the state is natural.
What if by 'natural', Aristotle meant it changes? According to him everything in nature changes to a final form. So maybe a good state is one in which it allows its citizens, as well as its government, to change whether for better or worse. He considered tyrannies and absolute monarchies chaotic because neiother of those forms of government could allow for natural change.I think when talking about a utopian state, one needs to look at Plato's views because in Republic isn't he describing the perfect state? Also, as a sidenote, I find it interesting that Plato considered Sparta to be as close as one can get to a perfect state.
Well, it is often said that the best form of government is a benevolent dictatorship and the only problem in that government is the succession of the dictator. As to 'natural' implying change what if our government is approaching or has reached it's final “Natural” form? I maintain that a state, any state, is inherently unnatural because it requires the imposition of structure to society that is not inherent in the human condition. I even think that society itself is unnatural except on the most basic of levels. There is no good reason that people congregate except for mutual benefit; society is not required for the survival of the species.
Well, it is often said that the best form of government is a benevolent dictatorship and the only problem in that government is the succession of the dictator.
That's more like Plato's view of the perfect government. Aristotle argued against this by saying equal law is better and that man should not make laws that benefit the ruling class, but instead should make laws that benefit everyone equally. Society may not be required for the survival of species, but order is required for the survival of society. If life and liberty is natural, which I think it is, then Aritotle's views are more compatible with that.
You realize that if we continue this discussion we will shortly be debating the metaphysics of the Human condition right?
To a point yes, I guess we are ;D I just dont if my cynicism can take your idealism and vice versa. We tend to get fairly heated when we get ourselves going. I am going to Greece in a week and dont want to really start something if I have to take a break and let my debating partner have time to devise devastating arguments while I am enjoying the beaches and ancient ruins of Greece. It just doesnt seem fair to me for some reason. 😀 😀
