Site Wiki

Knowledge = Power

User Tools

Site Tools


ta-politika

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
ta-politika [2017/02/04 03:27]
stevarino [Classification of constitution]
ta-politika [2018/07/20 12:26] (current)
Line 80: Line 80:
 After studying a number of real and theoretical city-states'​ constitutions,​ Aristotle classified them according to various criteria. On one side stand the true (or good) constitutions,​ which are considered such because they aim for the common good, and on the other side the perverted (or deviant) ones, considered such because they aim for the well being of only a part of the city. The constitutions are then sorted according to the "​number"​ of those who participate to the magistracies:​ one, a few, or many. Aristotle'​s sixfold classification is slightly different from the one found in The Statesman by Plato. The diagram above illustrates Aristotle'​s classification. After studying a number of real and theoretical city-states'​ constitutions,​ Aristotle classified them according to various criteria. On one side stand the true (or good) constitutions,​ which are considered such because they aim for the common good, and on the other side the perverted (or deviant) ones, considered such because they aim for the well being of only a part of the city. The constitutions are then sorted according to the "​number"​ of those who participate to the magistracies:​ one, a few, or many. Aristotle'​s sixfold classification is slightly different from the one found in The Statesman by Plato. The diagram above illustrates Aristotle'​s classification.
  
-====== Composition ​======+===== Composition =====
  
 The literary character of the Politics is subject to some dispute, growing out of the textual difficulties that attended the loss of Aristotle'​s works. Book III ends with a sentence that is repeated almost verbatim at the start of Book VII, while the intervening Books IV–VI seem to have a very different flavor from the rest; Book IV seems to refer several times back to the discussion of the best regime contained in Books VII–VIII.[4] Some editors have therefore inserted Books VII–VIII after Book III. At the same time, however, references to the "​discourses on politics"​ that occur in the Nicomachean Ethics suggest that the treatise as a whole ought to conclude with the discussion of education that occurs in Book VIII of the Politics, although it is not certain that Aristotle is referring to the Politics here.[5] The literary character of the Politics is subject to some dispute, growing out of the textual difficulties that attended the loss of Aristotle'​s works. Book III ends with a sentence that is repeated almost verbatim at the start of Book VII, while the intervening Books IV–VI seem to have a very different flavor from the rest; Book IV seems to refer several times back to the discussion of the best regime contained in Books VII–VIII.[4] Some editors have therefore inserted Books VII–VIII after Book III. At the same time, however, references to the "​discourses on politics"​ that occur in the Nicomachean Ethics suggest that the treatise as a whole ought to conclude with the discussion of education that occurs in Book VIII of the Politics, although it is not certain that Aristotle is referring to the Politics here.[5]
Line 88: Line 88:
 Carnes Lord has argued against the sufficiency of this view, however, noting the numerous cross-references between Jaeger'​s supposedly separate works and questioning the difference in tone that Jaeger saw between them. For example, Book IV explicitly notes the utility of examining actual regimes (Jaeger'​s "​empirical"​ focus) in determining the best regime (Jaeger'​s "​Platonic"​ focus). Instead, Lord suggests that the Politics is indeed a finished treatise, and that Books VII and VIII do belong in between Books III and IV; he attributes their current ordering to a merely mechanical transcription error.[7] Carnes Lord has argued against the sufficiency of this view, however, noting the numerous cross-references between Jaeger'​s supposedly separate works and questioning the difference in tone that Jaeger saw between them. For example, Book IV explicitly notes the utility of examining actual regimes (Jaeger'​s "​empirical"​ focus) in determining the best regime (Jaeger'​s "​Platonic"​ focus). Instead, Lord suggests that the Politics is indeed a finished treatise, and that Books VII and VIII do belong in between Books III and IV; he attributes their current ordering to a merely mechanical transcription error.[7]
  
-Notes+===== Notes ===== 
 ^ Jump up to: a b Ebenstein, Alan (2002). Introduction to Political Thinkers. Boston, MA: Wadsworth. ^ Jump up to: a b Ebenstein, Alan (2002). Introduction to Political Thinkers. Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
 ^ Jump up to: a b Lord, "​Introduction,"​ 27. ^ Jump up to: a b Lord, "​Introduction,"​ 27.
ta-politika.1486178830.txt.gz · Last modified: 2018/07/20 12:25 (external edit)