So why read Politics? I have been wondering what have I gained by reading this book. There are ideas in the book that I agree with. I held them before I read the book. There are ideas that I disagree with. What benefit does this book add to my understanding?
I notice these ideas as I thumb through my book and look at my margin notes:
“the best form of government, i.e. that under which the state will be most happy (and happiness, as been already said, cannot exist without virtue), it clearly follows that in the state which is best governed and possesses men who are just absolutely, and not merely relatively to the principles of the constitution….” (Book 7, Chapter 9)
“But if the citizens of a state are to judge and to distribute offices according to merit, then they must know each other’s characters; where they do not possess this knowledge, both the election to offices and the decision of lawsuits will go wrong.” (Book 7, Chapter 7)
“And in democracies of the more extreme type there has arisen a false idea of freedom which is contradictory to the true interests of the state. For two principles are characteristic of democracy, the government of the majority and freedom. Men think that what is just is equal; and that equality is the supremacy of the popular will; and that freedom doing what a man likes. In such democracies every one lives as he pleases, or in the words of Euripides, ‘according to his fancy.’ But this is all wrong; men should not think it is slavery to live according to the rule of the constitution; for it is their salvation.” (Book 5, Chapter 9)
“For men are easily spoilt; not every one can bear prosperity.” (Book 5, Chapter 8)
“In the first place it is evident that if we know the causes which destroy constitutions, we also know the causes which preserve them; for opposites produce opposites, and destruction is the opposite of preservation. In all well-attempered government there is nothing which should be more jealously maintained than the spirit of obedience to law, more especially in small matters; for transgression creeps in unperceived and at last ruins the state, just as the constant recurrence of small expenses in time eats up a fortune.” Book 5, Chapter 8)
“The citizens begin by giving up some part of the constitution, and so with greater ease the government changes something else which is a little more important, until they have undermined the whole fabric of the state.” (Book 7, Chapter 7)
“Revolutions are effected in two ways, by force and by fraud” (Book 5, Chapter 4)
“..general willingness of all classes in the state to maintain the constitution.” (Book 4, Chapter 9)
“But we must remember that good laws, if they are not obeyed, do not constitute good government. Hence there are two parts of good government; one is the actual obedience of the citizens to the laws, and the other part is the goodness of the laws which they obey;…” (Book 4, Chapter 8)
“…the law is supreme…” (Book 4, Chapter 4)
I marked many other things, but these are the ideas that stood out to me as I flipped through the pages. Aristotle is trying to determine what type of political association is best suited for securing happiness (virtue) for its citizens. He takes the time to analyze all the types of governments he knows looking at what happened to them, pointing out the good and the bad.
His arguments are also incomplete. There are more forms of government than he outlined. Many of his foundational ideas about people I find flawed so why continue reading a book that has ideas in it that I don’t agree with?
Taking each government type and looking at opposites, gives a clearer picture of the importance of following the argument to the end. Ideas can sound good, but when they are carried out do they end good? In this particular case, governments established seemed to have some good intentions that the people united with. What were the results of must of them? Collapse. Each had flaws and problems in them that could not be overcome with the foundation they had.
As I reflect on the ideas that stood out to me (listed above) I had to ask why these points stood out to me more than the other points I marked and made notes about. These quotes apply to the current situation I am in. Aristotle has some reminders to us today about governments. His works are hard to get through, and his history is old and sometimes even lost on us but his points still ring true even among his false assumptions.
These last weeks I have been watching a group or two of people that have decided to be their own lynch mob. They don’t want to go to and through the law, they want to destroy the law and all that it stands for…the state. It is painful to watch, it hurts may heart. My reason begs for something different. I feel like I am Sparks in The Ox-Bow Incident. Awkward, not knowing what to do but knowing what is happening is wrong.
I notice these ideas as I thumb through my book and look at my margin notes:
“the best form of government, i.e. that under which the state will be most happy (and happiness, as been already said, cannot exist without virtue), it clearly follows that in the state which is best governed and possesses men who are just absolutely, and not merely relatively to the principles of the constitution….” (Book 7, Chapter 9)
“But if the citizens of a state are to judge and to distribute offices according to merit, then they must know each other’s characters; where they do not possess this knowledge, both the election to offices and the decision of lawsuits will go wrong.” (Book 7, Chapter 7)
“And in democracies of the more extreme type there has arisen a false idea of freedom which is contradictory to the true interests of the state. For two principles are characteristic of democracy, the government of the majority and freedom. Men think that what is just is equal; and that equality is the supremacy of the popular will; and that freedom doing what a man likes. In such democracies every one lives as he pleases, or in the words of Euripides, ‘according to his fancy.’ But this is all wrong; men should not think it is slavery to live according to the rule of the constitution; for it is their salvation.” (Book 5, Chapter 9)
“For men are easily spoilt; not every one can bear prosperity.” (Book 5, Chapter 8)
“In the first place it is evident that if we know the causes which destroy constitutions, we also know the causes which preserve them; for opposites produce opposites, and destruction is the opposite of preservation. In all well-attempered government there is nothing which should be more jealously maintained than the spirit of obedience to law, more especially in small matters; for transgression creeps in unperceived and at last ruins the state, just as the constant recurrence of small expenses in time eats up a fortune.” Book 5, Chapter 8)
“The citizens begin by giving up some part of the constitution, and so with greater ease the government changes something else which is a little more important, until they have undermined the whole fabric of the state.” (Book 7, Chapter 7)
“Revolutions are effected in two ways, by force and by fraud” (Book 5, Chapter 4)
“..general willingness of all classes in the state to maintain the constitution.” (Book 4, Chapter 9)
“But we must remember that good laws, if they are not obeyed, do not constitute good government. Hence there are two parts of good government; one is the actual obedience of the citizens to the laws, and the other part is the goodness of the laws which they obey;…” (Book 4, Chapter 8)
“…the law is supreme…” (Book 4, Chapter 4)
I marked many other things, but these are the ideas that stood out to me as I flipped through the pages. Aristotle is trying to determine what type of political association is best suited for securing happiness (virtue) for its citizens. He takes the time to analyze all the types of governments he knows looking at what happened to them, pointing out the good and the bad.
His arguments are also incomplete. There are more forms of government than he outlined. Many of his foundational ideas about people I find flawed so why continue reading a book that has ideas in it that I don’t agree with?
Taking each government type and looking at opposites, gives a clearer picture of the importance of following the argument to the end. Ideas can sound good, but when they are carried out do they end good? In this particular case, governments established seemed to have some good intentions that the people united with. What were the results of must of them? Collapse. Each had flaws and problems in them that could not be overcome with the foundation they had.
As I reflect on the ideas that stood out to me (listed above) I had to ask why these points stood out to me more than the other points I marked and made notes about. These quotes apply to the current situation I am in. Aristotle has some reminders to us today about governments. His works are hard to get through, and his history is old and sometimes even lost on us but his points still ring true even among his false assumptions.
These last weeks I have been watching a group or two of people that have decided to be their own lynch mob. They don’t want to go to and through the law, they want to destroy the law and all that it stands for…the state. It is painful to watch, it hurts may heart. My reason begs for something different. I feel like I am Sparks in The Ox-Bow Incident. Awkward, not knowing what to do but knowing what is happening is wrong.
RSS Feed