"Man is by nature a political animal." - Aristotle
Does Aristotle's bold claim hold water? Can one divorce politics from anything? Or is everything in life indeed political?
There is some merit to Aristotle's claim that man is by nature a political animal, but it is not an indisputable fact.
From the moment we are born to the end of our lives, we are caught in a complex web of interdependence and relationships. Within each of our relationships - regardless of how intimate - there exists a power dynamic. This power dynamic can be construed as political. For example, as a child we are entirely dependent on our parents. Our parents exercise power and control over us, which is an overt political act. This pattern continues to exist for the duration of our lives, from school to work to starting our own families. Power dynamics perpetually self-replicate and cannot be extricated from these relationships. Power is at the heart of politics, which is why Aristotle's claim has some merit.
But defining the nature of man is a contentious issue. Different political philosophers have varied in their perspectives on human nature. Hobbes argued that in a state of nature man is perpetually insecure and lives in state of war against all. Rousseau argued that in a state of nature human beings are innately good, while Locke argued that human beings are a blank slate and are melded by their external environment. Ultimately, we cannot return to an Archimedean point by which to judge human nature and therefore all attempts to do so are subjective.
So while there is merit to Aristotle's claim, it is impossible to claim with certainty that man is by nature a political animal.
Does Aristotle's bold claim hold water? Can one divorce politics from anything? Or is everything in life indeed political?
There is some merit to Aristotle's claim that man is by nature a political animal, but it is not an indisputable fact.
From the moment we are born to the end of our lives, we are caught in a complex web of interdependence and relationships. Within each of our relationships - regardless of how intimate - there exists a power dynamic. This power dynamic can be construed as political. For example, as a child we are entirely dependent on our parents. Our parents exercise power and control over us, which is an overt political act. This pattern continues to exist for the duration of our lives, from school to work to starting our own families. Power dynamics perpetually self-replicate and cannot be extricated from these relationships. Power is at the heart of politics, which is why Aristotle's claim has some merit.
But defining the nature of man is a contentious issue. Different political philosophers have varied in their perspectives on human nature. Hobbes argued that in a state of nature man is perpetually insecure and lives in state of war against all. Rousseau argued that in a state of nature human beings are innately good, while Locke argued that human beings are a blank slate and are melded by their external environment. Ultimately, we cannot return to an Archimedean point by which to judge human nature and therefore all attempts to do so are subjective.
So while there is merit to Aristotle's claim, it is impossible to claim with certainty that man is by nature a political animal.
No comments:
Post a Comment