When it comes to political philosophy, few names are as prominent as Aristotle.
The ancient Greek philosopher had a lot to say about the ideal state and how it should be organized.
He believed that there were six general ways in which societies could be organized under political rule, and that some were better than others.
In this article, we’ll explore Aristotle’s ideas about the ideal state and what he believed was the best way to govern.
From monarchy to democracy, we’ll take a closer look at each form of government and what Aristotle had to say about them.
So, if you’re interested in political philosophy and want to learn more about Aristotle’s ideas, keep reading!
What Is The Form Of The Ideal State For Aristotle
Aristotle believed that the ideal state was one where the citizens at large administered for the common interest. He called this state a “polity”.
In his view, the best state was one where the middle class was strong. Extreme wealth or poverty could lead to arrogance or slavishness, respectively, and were therefore not ideal conditions for a state.
Aristotle’s ideal state was attainable on earth, unlike Plato’s portrayal of an ideal state that could only be built in heaven. He believed that it was important to consider not only what is ideal but also what is the best attainable in actual practice.
The plan suggested for his ideal or best state was based on the principle of the golden mean. This meant that the state should aim for a balance between extremes and strive for moderation in all things.
Population was the first material that Aristotle considered when constructing his ideal state. The population of the state should be large enough to be self-sufficient and small enough to be manageable.
Aristotle argued that there were six general ways in which societies could be organized under political rule, depending on who ruled and for whom they ruled. The true forms of government were those in which the one, or the few, or the many, governed with a view to the common interest.
Tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy were considered defective and perverted forms of government because they ruled with a view to private interests rather than the common good of all.
Aristotle did not consider oligarchies and democracies as inherently bad. He believed that they were capable of producing livable societies, unlike tyranny, which no free man in his right mind would choose.
However, Aristotle also aimed to demonstrate that there were better ways to govern. These better systems were reliant on a quality of character in leadership that was uncommon.
Introduction To Aristotle’s Political Philosophy
Aristotle’s political philosophy was focused on the idea of creating an ideal state that would lead to the most fulfilled citizens. Unlike Plato, Aristotle believed that this ideal state was attainable on earth and not just in heaven. He argued that the best state was one where the middle class was strong and extreme wealth or poverty were not ideal conditions for a state.
To create this ideal state, Aristotle suggested a plan based on the principle of the golden mean, which aimed for a balance between extremes and moderation in all things. He believed that the population of the state should be large enough to be self-sufficient but small enough to be manageable.
Aristotle also identified six general ways in which societies could be organized under political rule, with true forms of government being those in which the one, few, or many governed with a view to the common interest. He considered tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy as defective and perverted forms of government because they ruled with a view to private interests rather than the common good of all.
Despite acknowledging that oligarchies and democracies were capable of producing livable societies, Aristotle aimed to demonstrate that there were better ways to govern. These better systems relied on a quality of character in leadership that was uncommon. Overall, Aristotle’s political philosophy emphasized the importance of creating an ideal state that prioritized the common good and promoted moderation in all things.
The Six Forms Of Political Rule
Aristotle identified six different forms of political rule that societies could be organized under. These forms of government were categorized based on who ruled and for whom they ruled.
The first form of political rule is monarchy, where one person rules for the common interest. This form of government can be effective if the ruler possesses virtues such as wisdom, courage, and justice.
The second form of political rule is tyranny, where one person rules for private interests rather than the common good. This form of government is considered defective and perverted because it leads to oppression and injustice.
The third form of political rule is aristocracy, where a few people rule for the common interest. This form of government can be effective if the rulers possess virtues and are chosen based on their merit rather than their social status.
The fourth form of political rule is oligarchy, where a few people rule for private interests rather than the common good. This form of government is considered defective and perverted because it leads to inequality and injustice.
The fifth form of political rule is democracy, where many people rule for the common interest. This form of government can be effective if the citizens possess virtues such as wisdom and justice and are capable of making informed decisions.
The sixth form of political rule is ochlocracy or mob rule, where many people rule for private interests rather than the common good. This form of government is considered defective and perverted because it leads to chaos and anarchy.
Monarchy: Aristotle’s Thoughts And Criticisms
Aristotle believed that monarchy was an ideal form of government when it was ruled by a virtuous leader who governed with a view to the common interest. In his view, a good monarchy was better than a democracy or an oligarchy because it was more stable and less prone to corruption.
However, Aristotle also recognized the potential dangers of monarchy. He believed that without adequate checks on a ruler’s power, no form of government would be stable. He argued that power and virtue could not coexist, and that there was always a risk that a monarch would become tyrannical if left unchecked.
According to Aristotle, the transition from monarchy to tyranny was a common pattern in history. When there was an absence of control over the monarch’s power, a good monarchy could easily turn into tyranny. This could happen when the monarch became corrupt or when there was a power vacuum after the monarch’s death.
Aristotle also believed that the rule of law was essential for any stable government, including a monarchy. He argued that a functioning state required that everything be governed by laws, and that without this, those who held the most power could do whatever they wanted and tyrannize everyone else.
Aristocracy: What It Is And Why Aristotle Believed It Was The Best Form Of Government
Aristocracy is a form of government where the political power rests in the hands of a small section of the community. However, Aristotle believed that the character of Aristocracy depends on the method of selection of the people who wield power and the aims they keep in view, and not the smallness of the number.
Aristotle argued that Aristocracy was the best form of government because it was conducted by the best of the community and guided in the exercise of authority and functions by the most virtuous principles. The principle of Aristocracy was virtue, which referred to the moral and intellectual superiority of the ruling class and the virtuous qualities which they disseminated into those over whom they ruled.
According to Greek philosophers, Aristocracy was a form of government par excellence, and it was capable of producing livable societies. Aristotle did not consider Aristocracy as inherently bad, unlike tyranny, which no free man in his right mind would choose.
The methods of selection for Aristocracy were various and have been devised in accordance with certain leading ideas which had pervaded and still pervade society. The idea of the importance of birth in primitive society constituted a class by itself in which outsiders were not admitted, except perhaps by adoption. In modern society, we still defer to the notion that some families are better than others and consequently best fitted to rule.
Another method for selection was merit, where persons of superior intellect and ability were chosen to govern others. This is Aristocracy of intellect. Selection by favor is another method where a king confers high rank on those who serve him best. There may also be an Aristocracy of wealth when the criterion of selection is only the possession of riches.
Polity: The Ideal Mix Of Democracy And Aristocracy
One of the better ways to govern, according to Aristotle, was through a system he called “polity”. This form of government was a combination of democracy and aristocracy, where the middle class had significant power.
Aristotle believed that democracy, in its purest form, could lead to chaos and mob rule. On the other hand, aristocracy could lead to elitism and neglect of the needs of the common people. Therefore, a mix of the two was necessary for a stable and just government.
In a polity, the middle class would hold most of the political power. This was because they were neither too wealthy nor too poor, and therefore had a vested interest in maintaining stability and promoting the common good.
Aristotle believed that a polity was the best form of government because it allowed for representation of all classes and prevented any one group from dominating the others. It also encouraged compromise and cooperation between different groups, leading to greater harmony within the state.
However, Aristotle acknowledged that even a polity was not immune to corruption and decay. He believed that all forms of government were subject to a cycle of change over time, where they would eventually deteriorate and need to be replaced by a different system.
Despite its potential flaws, Aristotle saw polity as the ideal mix of democracy and aristocracy, providing a balance between popular representation and wise governance.
Democracy: Aristotle’s Concerns And Critiques
Aristotle had several concerns and critiques regarding democracy as a form of government. His key objection to democracy was that it undermined the rule of law, which he believed was necessary for a functioning state. In a pure democracy, the will of the majority is sovereign, not the law or the state. This meant that if the people decided someone should be executed, they would be executed regardless of any law against capital punishment.
Aristotle also believed that democracies were vulnerable to demagogues who could manipulate the masses for their own gain. He argued that this was due to the fact that in a democracy, the majority held all the power and could easily be swayed by charismatic leaders who promised them what they wanted to hear.
Furthermore, Aristotle believed that democracy was inherently unstable because it lacked a strong middle class. In his view, extreme wealth or poverty could lead to arrogance or slavishness and were therefore not ideal conditions for a state. This meant that democracies were prone to revolutions and political instability.
Despite these criticisms, Aristotle did not consider democracy as inherently bad. He believed that it was capable of producing livable societies and was preferable to tyranny. However, he also thought that there were better ways to govern that relied on a quality of character in leadership that was uncommon. Ultimately, Aristotle’s ideal state was one where the citizens at large administered for the common interest, regardless of the form of government.
