The Regime of Hippodamus of Miletus Part 1

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Video Explanation

The Regime of Phaleas of Chalcedon

Chapter 7

Introduction to Chapter 7

In this chapter, Aristotle critiques the regime proposed by Phaleas of Chalcedon, who focuses on the equalization of property to prevent factional conflict. Aristotle discusses the limitations of Phaleas’ ideas, particularly their focus on economic equality and lack of consideration for education, military strength, and the broader aspects of political life. He also contrasts Phaleas' proposals with those of other ancient legislators and presents his own views on the causes of injustice and factional strife.

Overview of Phaleas of Chalcedon’s Regime (1266b)
- Phaleas proposes a regime that prioritizes the equalization of property among citizens. This plan, according to Phaleas, would eliminate factional conflict, which he sees as primarily driven by inequalities in wealth.
- Economic Equality as Central to Phaleas’ Regime
  - Phaleas argues that equal property distribution among citizens will reduce social conflict.
  - He believes such equality is easy to implement in newly founded cities but acknowledges that it is more challenging in established ones.
  - Solution for Existing Cities: The wealthy should give dowries but not receive them, while the poor should receive dowries without giving them, to gradually balance property distribution.
Aristotle’s Critique of Phaleas’ Property Equalization (1266b-1267a)
- Plato’s Limit on Property in the Laws
  - Aristotle contrasts Phaleas’ idea with Plato’s Laws, where Plato limits property to no more than five times the size of the smallest plot.
  - Aristotle suggests that merely equalizing property is insufficient without addressing population control.
- Importance of Population Control
  - Aristotle warns that if population growth is not regulated, property equalization will be undone.
  - Without proper regulation, wealthy citizens might become poor, leading to political instability and factional conflict.
- Historical Precedents
  - Aristotle cites Solon’s reforms in Athens and other ancient laws that limited land ownership or restricted the sale of land.
  - In places like Leucas, the removal of such laws led to overly democratic regimes, as property assessments were no longer used to determine eligibility for public office.
The Necessity of Moderation in Property (1267a)
- The Importance of Moderation
  - Property should not be too large (which encourages luxury) or too small (which results in poverty).
  - A legislator must aim for a mean, ensuring that citizens have a moderate amount of property.
- The Role of Desire in Social Conflict
  - Even with equal property, factional conflict persists if citizens’ desires are not moderated.
  - Phaleas’ regime overlooks the need to curb excessive desires through education, which Aristotle sees as essential for maintaining social harmony.
The Role of Education in Phaleas’ Regime (1267a)
- Education and Equality
  - Phaleas recognizes the importance of education and believes that equality in both property and education will prevent factionalism.
  - However, Aristotle argues that simply having the same education is insufficient. Citizens may still pursue wealth and honor to an excessive degree if they are not properly educated in moderation.
- Injustice Beyond Necessity
  - Aristotle expands on Phaleas’ view of factional conflict by stating that humans do not commit injustice only for necessities. They also do so out of desire for pleasure and material gain.
  - Three Causes of Injustice: Necessities, pleasures, and excessive desires. Education must address all of these, not just the necessity of satisfying basic needs.
Remedies for Social Injustice (1267a-b)
- Remedies for Necessities
  - For necessities, citizens should have a minimum of property and perform work that fulfills their basic needs.
- Moderation as a Remedy for Pleasure and Desire
  - For those seeking pleasure and satisfaction beyond necessity, education in moderation is essential.
  - Those who seek enjoyment through personal excess should be directed toward philosophical pursuits to curb such desires.
- The Greatest Injustices Arise from Excess
  - Aristotle emphasizes that the greatest injustices arise not from need, but from excess.
  - No one becomes a tyrant out of necessity (like wanting shelter from the cold), but rather from an excessive desire for wealth, power, or pleasure.
Military Strength and External Relations (1267b)
- Military Preparedness
  - A well-organized regime must consider military strength and defense, not just the internal affairs of the city.
  - Property should be sufficient to support not only political life but also defense against foreign threats.
- Balance in Property for Defense
  - The city should have enough resources to defend itself but not so much that it becomes a target for stronger neighbors.
  - Aristotle uses the example of Euboulus and Autophradates to illustrate the importance of calculating the costs of war and resources in military planning.
The Limitations of Property Equality (1267b)
- Factional Conflict and the Refined Class
  - Equalizing property might reduce conflict among the lower classes, but it can provoke resentment from the more refined citizens who feel they deserve more due to their merit or status.
  - The refined may cause factional conflict if they perceive equality as unjust.
- Human Desire is Insatiable
  - Aristotle argues that human desire is inherently unlimited. Even if property is equalized, people will always demand more.
  - He illustrates this with the example of citizens who once found a small two-obol allowance adequate, but now demand more, showing how human desires escalate without limit.
- The Need for Respectable Leaders
  - Instead of focusing solely on property, Aristotle argues that regimes should aim to cultivate respectable leaders who do not seek to aggrandize themselves.
  - The mean citizens should be kept inferior but not treated unjustly, ensuring that social balance is maintained.
The Inadequacy of Equalizing Only Land (1267b)
- Equalizing Land but Ignoring Other Forms of Wealth
  - Phaleas’ regime focuses only on equalizing land, ignoring other forms of wealth such as slaves, livestock, and movable property.
  - Aristotle argues that this approach is incomplete, as wealth extends beyond land ownership.
- Alternative Solutions
  - There are three potential approaches to wealth: equalizing all forms of property, creating a moderate distribution, or leaving them untouched. Phaleas has chosen an inadequate solution by focusing only on land.
The Smallness of Phaleas’ City (1267b)
- Public Slaves in Phaleas’ City
  - Aristotle notes that Phaleas envisions a small city where all artisans are public slaves.
  - However, in larger cities, public slaves should only be used for common tasks (as in Epidamnus or Athens). Phaleas' regime would be insufficient for a larger, more complex city.
Conclusion: Evaluation of Phaleas’ Regime (1267b)
- Aristotle concludes his critique by summarizing the strengths and weaknesses of Phaleas’ proposed regime. While Phaleas offers some valuable insights, particularly regarding property equalization, his regime lacks consideration of critical factors such as military strength, external relations, and the insatiable nature of human desire. Aristotle’s critique emphasizes the need for moderation, education, and a comprehensive approach to governance that accounts for both internal harmony and external security.

Video Explanation

The Regime of Plato's Laws

Chapter 6

Introduction to Chapter 6

Aristotle begins his analysis of Plato’s second work on political theory, the Laws. While Plato’s Republic offers a more idealistic vision of the state, the Laws shifts toward practical application. In this chapter, Aristotle provides a critical examination of both works, contrasting the idealized regime of the Republic with the more attainable model in the Laws, while also highlighting key weaknesses in both.

The Republic and Laws Compared (1264b-1265a)
- Aristotle first establishes the connection between the Republic and the Laws. He notes that although the Laws is intended to be a more practical guide for cities, it still closely resembles the Republic in many aspects.
- Socrates' Basic Framework in the Republic (1264b)
  - Division of Society: Socrates divides society into three classes:
    - Farmers and artisans (lower class)
    - Military (guardians)
    - The deliberative and authoritative class (rulers)
  - Lack of Discussion: Socrates does not discuss whether the lower classes (farmers/artisans) participate in governance or warfare. He merely assigns women the same education and military participation as men.
- Similarities Between the Laws and Republic (1265a)
  - The Laws, though more attainable, still shares most characteristics with the Republic, except for communal ownership of women and property.
  - Key Similarities:
    - Education remains the same in both works.
    - The guardian class avoids necessary work and has communal meals.
    - In the Laws, communal meals include women, and the military force is expanded to 5,000 (as opposed to 1,000 in the Republic).
Critique of Practicality (1265a)
- Aristotle criticizes the practicality of these regimes. He highlights that maintaining a standing military and governing class in idleness, as proposed by both works, would require enormous resources.
- Territory and Resources
  - To support such a large population in idleness, a city would need territory as vast as Babylon.
  - Laws must consider the size of the land and population, including neighboring territories if the city is to engage in warfare beyond its borders.
- Need for External Defense
  - Aristotle critiques the assumption that the city’s defense strategy is purely defensive, arguing that it should be formidable outside its own territory as well.
Economic Concerns (1265a-b)
- Aristotle moves to a critique of Plato’s economic ideas, particularly regarding property and wealth distribution.
- Ambiguity in Defining Wealth
  - Plato defines wealth in terms of moderation, but Aristotle critiques this as vague and unhelpful. Moderation in wealth could still lead to a miserable life.
  - Aristotle proposes defining wealth as "moderation and liberality," arguing that these qualities prevent both excessive luxury and severe hardship.
- Issues of Equalized Property (1265b)
  - Aristotle notes that while property is equalized in Plato’s model, population growth is left unrestricted.
  - This lack of population control would inevitably lead to surplus citizens who, without property, would suffer from poverty, leading to factional conflict and crime.
- Historical Reference
  - Aristotle references the ancient legislator Pheidon of Corinth, who believed in keeping the number of citizens equal to avoid such problems. However, in Plato’s Laws, no such restrictions are proposed.
Rulers and the Ruled (1265b-1266a)
- Aristotle critiques Plato’s failure to adequately differentiate between the rulers and the ruled in the Laws.
- Ruler-Citizen Distinction
  - Plato asserts that rulers and the ruled should differ, but offers little practical guidance on how this distinction would manifest.
- Property and Land Ownership
  - While Plato allows for wealth to increase fivefold, Aristotle questions why this should not apply to land ownership. He also critiques Plato’s proposal of separating housing into two distinct sites, arguing that it complicates household management.
Mixed Regime and Oligarchic Tendencies (1266a)
- Plato’s regime in the Laws is intended to be a blend of democracy and oligarchy, avoiding extremes of both forms. However, Aristotle finds this model problematic.
- A Mixed Regime
  - Plato’s model is often praised for blending oligarchy and democracy. Aristotle notes that some regard the Spartan regime as an ideal mixed regime, incorporating elements of monarchy, oligarchy, and democracy.
  - In the Spartan regime, for example:
    - Kingship represents monarchy.
    - The rule of the elders represents oligarchy.
    - The oversight by elected officials (the overseers) is democratic.
- Critique of the Laws as Oligarchic (1266a)
  - Aristotle critiques the Laws for inclining too heavily toward oligarchy.
  - The election of officials is skewed in favor of the wealthy, as the well-off are compelled to participate in elections and political tasks, while the lower classes are excused from such duties.
Election of Officials (1266a-b)
- Aristotle analyzes the system of electing officials in Plato’s Laws, pointing out potential flaws and oligarchic biases.
- Election Procedure
  - Plato’s system involves selecting officials by lot from previously elected candidates, which Aristotle critiques as oligarchic and prone to manipulation.
  - The wealthier citizens have a disproportionate influence, as they are required to elect officials, while poorer citizens may abstain, leading to unequal representation.
- Risks of the Election Process
  - Aristotle warns that even a small group of wealthy citizens could coordinate elections to suit their interests, undermining the fairness of the system.
Conclusion: General Critique of the Laws (1266b)
- Aristotle concludes by highlighting the inconsistencies and impracticalities in Plato’s Laws. He argues that the regime is neither a true mixture of democracy and oligarchy nor as functional as it appears. The election process and distribution of property favor the wealthy, leaning toward oligarchy, and the unrealistic expectations regarding military size, land, and resource management further weaken the model.

Final Thoughts

In Chapter 6 of Politics Book II, Aristotle offers a comprehensive critique of Plato’s Laws. He acknowledges Plato’s sophisticated arguments but remains skeptical about their practicality. The chapter serves as an important comparison between Plato’s idealism and Aristotle’s pragmatism in political theory. Aristotle's detailed examination underscores his belief that laws and regimes must be grounded in reality, taking into account the complexities of human nature, resource management, and social organization.

Video Explanation

Common Property & Communism

Chapter 4

Difficulties of Common Ownership of Family Members (1262a)
- Practical Issues: Common ownership of women and children creates several problems:
  - Outrages, involuntary homicides, voluntary homicides, assaults, and verbal abuse are more likely to occur in a community where individuals do not know who their relatives are.
  - Such crimes are considered more grievous when committed against family members than outsiders.
  - Only those who know their relatives can perform the lawful expiations (rituals for making amends), meaning that these remedies are not available in a community where kinship is unknown.
Inconsistencies in Plato’s Proposal
- Contradiction: In Plato’s Republic, sons are made common, but love and certain improper behaviors between relatives (e.g., a father and son) are not explicitly forbidden.
- Odd Reasoning: It seems contradictory that sexual intercourse is eliminated simply because the pleasure is too strong, without regard to the kinship between the individuals involved. This implies no distinction is made between improper relations within a family and those outside it.
Common Women and Children for Farmers vs. Guardians
- Less Affection for Farmers: Aristotle argues it would be more logical for the farmers to have common women and children rather than the guardians:
  - Less affection would develop among those who share children and women, which would be beneficial for the ruled class (farmers), as they would be less likely to resist authority or plot against their rulers.
- Opposite of Intended Effect: The arrangement of shared children and women has the opposite effect of what laws should achieve, as it would not create unity or harmony in the city.
Socrates' Argument on Affection and Unity
- Affection is Important: Aristotle emphasizes that affection is the most important factor for promoting unity in a city, preventing factional conflict.
- Socrates’ aim of making the city one is rooted in the belief that affection fosters unity.
- Aristophanes' Idea of Love: Aristotle references Aristophanes’ discourse on love, which speaks of lovers desiring to become one out of affection.
Dilution of Affection in Common Ownership
- Dilution of Relationships: In a system where kinship is diluted by common ownership of children and women, affection becomes weak:
- Fathers and sons do not view each other as “mine,” which diminishes their bond.
- The familial ties and affection are diluted like water added to wine, making them imperceptible.
- This weakens the emotional connection between fathers and sons, brothers, and other family members.
Key Factors of Affection and Ownership
- Two Key Factors of Affection: Aristotle identifies two primary factors that foster affection and care:
- What is one's own: The sense of personal ownership over something or someone.
- What is dear: The emotional attachment to something or someone.
- Neither of these factors can exist in a society with common ownership of women and children, thus undermining the affection necessary for unity and harmony.
Uncertainty Regarding the Transfer of Children
- Confusion in the Transfer of Children: Aristotle points out the logistical confusion in Plato's system regarding the transfer of children between farmers, artisans, and guardians:
- The transfer process would inevitably reveal to some individuals who their real parents or children are, making the goal of anonymity impossible.
- Those responsible for transferring and assigning children would necessarily know who belongs to whom, undermining the anonymity of kinship.
Increased Risk of Crime and Disorder
- Crime and Disorder: As a result of this system, certain crimes, such as assaults, love affairs, and murders, would become more likely:
- Without a sense of kinship, there is no inhibition against committing these acts because individuals no longer view each other as fathers, mothers, brothers, or children.
- The lack of familial bonds removes a natural restraint against harmful actions.
Conclusion on Common Ownership of Women and Children
- Summary: Aristotle concludes that the proposal for common ownership of women and children is deeply flawed and would not achieve the desired unity or harmony.
- Transition: The discussion on this topic ends, and Aristotle suggests moving on to other aspects of political theory.

Video Explanation

Key Themes in Chapter 4:

Practical and Ethical Issues of Common Ownership: Aristotle highlights the practical difficulties and ethical concerns with Plato’s idea of common ownership of women and children, particularly in terms of crime, responsibility, and familial relationships.
Affection and Kinship: Affection, which is fostered by personal ownership and familial bonds, is essential for the unity of a city. Common ownership undermines these bonds, leading to a weakening of social cohesion.
Dilution of Relationships: Aristotle uses the metaphor of adding water to wine to describe how common ownership dilutes the meaningful relationships that hold a community together.
Logistical and Social Challenges: Aristotle raises concerns about the logistics of transferring children between different classes, as well as the risk of increased crime due to the absence of strong family bonds.
Inconsistencies in Plato's Proposal: He points out inconsistencies in Plato’s reasoning, especially in regard to sexual relationships and the weakening of familial care in a system of common ownership.

The outcome of the Regime

Chapter 3

Critique of Socrates' Idea of Unity Through Common Ownership (1261b)
- Socrates' Argument: Socrates suggests that the city will become a complete unity if all citizens say "mine" and "not mine" at the same time, implying a shared sense of ownership over children, women, and property.
- Aristotle's Counterargument:
  - This argument is not convincing because “all” has a double sense:
  - If "all" means "each individual," then citizens would each refer to the same child as their own son, and the same woman as their own wife.
  - However, in Socrates’ system, citizens would collectively refer to children and wives as belonging to everyone, not individually.
- Conclusion: This ambiguity in the meaning of “all” undermines Socrates' idea of a unified city through common ownership.

Video Explanation

Key Takeaways in Chapter 3:

Critique of Common Ownership: Aristotle challenges Plato’s proposal of common ownership of women and children, arguing that it does not foster unity but instead leads to neglect and lack of care for common goods and offspring.
Ambiguity of “All” and Ownership: The concept of shared ownership among all citizens is shown to be flawed due to the ambiguity in the word “all.” Common ownership does not result in true unity or harmony, as individuals are less likely to take personal responsibility for collective goods.
Neglect of Shared Responsibility: When property, children, or other elements of life are held in common, they receive less care because people assume others will take responsibility. Aristotle uses both household management and common children as examples of how shared ownership leads to neglect.
Recognition of Kinship: Aristotle argues that even in systems where children are held in common, kinship ties would still be recognized through physical resemblance, making the goal of complete detachment from familial ties impossible.
Natural Inclinations: Aristotle reinforces the idea that natural similarities between parents and children make common ownership impractical, as people would inevitably recognize their relatives and care more for their own.

The Problem of Unity

Chapter 2

Critique of Common Women and Children (1261a)
- Aristotle critiques the proposal in Plato’s Republic of having women and children held in common:
  - He argues that there are many difficulties with this arrangement.
  - The reason Socrates gives for such legislation does not follow from his own arguments and logic.
Socrates' Premise of Unity in the City
- Socrates claims that the city should aim to be as unified as possible, becoming a single entity.
- However, Aristotle argues that this goal is impossible and undesirable:
  - As the city becomes more unified, it would cease to be a city and instead become a household or even a single person.
  - The city, by its nature, is an aggregation of different parts and people.
Difference Between City and Household
- The city is made up of diverse elements, while a household or individual is more unified.
- As unity increases, the city loses its essence:
  - A household is more unified than a city, and an individual is more unified than a household.
  - Therefore, making a city excessively unified would destroy its nature as a city.
Diversity and Differences in the City
- A city is not only made up of a large number of people but also of people who differ in kind.
  - A city is different from an alliance or nation:
  - An alliance exists for mutual assistance and may be composed of similar people.
  - A city, on the other hand, arises from differences among its members.
  - Example: A nation like the Arcadians, who live scattered in villages, differs from a unified city.
Reciprocal Equality in Cities
- Aristotle asserts that reciprocal equality preserves cities, echoing his earlier discussions from the Ethics:
  - Even among free and equal citizens, all cannot rule at the same time.
  - Citizens take turns in ruling, maintaining balance by sharing power over time.
Rotation of Power
- In a well-functioning political community, citizens rotate through different roles of authority:
  - This is similar to shoemakers and carpenters exchanging places rather than always performing the same tasks.
  - Rotation allows everyone to share in both ruling and being ruled.
Permanence of Rule
- While rotation of power is necessary where citizens are equal, Aristotle believes it is better when the same people rule if possible:
  - In cases where this is not feasible due to equality among citizens, power-sharing arrangements, such as ruling in turns, imitate the ideal scenario.
Excessive Unity Destroys the City
- Aristotle reiterates that making a city excessively unified is harmful:
  - A city’s good is what preserves it, and excessive unity destroys the city.
  - The self-sufficiency of a city lies in its ability to encompass a multitude of people, forming a community.
Self-Sufficiency and Unity
- Aristotle concludes that a household is more self-sufficient than an individual, and a city is more self-sufficient than a household:
  - Self-sufficiency increases with the number of people in a community.
  - Therefore, a less unified city is more desirable because it is more self-sufficient and capable of sustaining itself.

Key Themes in Chapter 2:

Criticism of Plato’s Republic: Aristotle critiques the proposal for common women and children in Plato’s Republic, arguing that such arrangements do not follow logically from Socrates' arguments and would lead to the destruction of the city's nature.
Unity vs. Diversity in the City: The city, by its nature, must be made up of diverse elements, and excessive unity threatens to turn it into something less than a city, like a household or individual.
Importance of Reciprocal Equality: Cities thrive on reciprocal equality, where citizens share power by taking turns in ruling, maintaining a balance of authority.
Rotation of Power: Aristotle argues for the rotation of leadership roles in political communities where citizens are equal, as a way to ensure fairness and maintain the city’s structure.
Self-Sufficiency and Moderation of Unity: A city’s self-sufficiency is enhanced by its diversity, and Aristotle concludes that a less unified city is more desirable than one that is excessively unified, because it can better sustain itself.

The Regime of Plato's Republic

Chapter 1

Purpose of the Inquiry (1260b)
- Aristotle’s goal is to study the best political community, one that is superior for those who can live in the ideal way:
  - The community that allows people to live as closely as possible to the life one would pray for (the good life).
- To understand this ideal, Aristotle will investigate other regimes:
  - Both those that are currently in use in cities that are said to be well managed.
  - And those regimes proposed by thinkers as being in a fine condition (theoretical regimes).
- The purpose is to identify what is correct and useful in these regimes, and to see if seeking something beyond them is warranted.
Justification for Investigating Other Regimes
- Aristotle argues that investigating new regimes is not just the work of sophists (who merely argue for argument's sake).
- This inquiry is necessary because the existing regimes may not be in the best condition:
  - The goal is to find ways to improve the conditions of political communities beyond what currently exists.
The Natural Beginning of the Inquiry
- Aristotle begins by considering whether citizens in a community should share everything or nothing or some things but not others:
  - This is a fundamental question in understanding how a political community should be structured.
The Necessity of Sharing in a Community
- Total isolation (sharing in nothing) is impossible in a political community:
  - A regime is a type of community, and communities must share something in common.
  - At the very least, citizens must share a location, since a single city occupies a single place, and citizens live together in that place.
What Should Be Shared in a Political Community?
- Aristotle considers the question of whether citizens should share everything (as in Plato’s Republic) or only some things:
  - In Plato’s Republic, Socrates argues for the common ownership of women, children, and property.
  - Aristotle poses the question: Is it better for the city to be organized as it currently exists (with individual ownership), or should it follow the model where everything is held in common?

Key Themes in Chapter 1:

Search for the Best Regime: Aristotle sets the stage for an investigation into the best possible political community, aiming to discover the superior regime that allows citizens to live the most desirable and virtuous life.
Comparison with Other Regimes: Aristotle emphasizes the importance of studying both existing regimes and theoretical models to identify what works well and what does not, especially in light of ideal or proposed political systems.
Sharing in a Community: The question of how much citizens should share—whether they should share everything or only some things—becomes a central issue in determining the structure of a political community.
Plato’s Republic: Aristotle raises the issue of common ownership proposed in Plato’s Republic, particularly the sharing of women, children, and property, which he will critically examine in further chapters.

Video Explanation

Reason and Order

Chapter 1

BOOK II

The Best Regime in Theory and Practice

Chapter 1 Reason and Order (1260b27)
Chapter 2 The Regime of Plato's Republic
- Common Wives and Children
Chapter 3 The Problem of Unity
Chapter 4 The outcome of the Regime
Chapter 5 Common Property & Communism
Chapter 6 The Regime of Plato's Laws
Chapter 7 The Regime of Phaleas of Chalcedon
Chapter 8 The Regime of Hippodamus of Miletus
Chapter 9 The Spartan Regime
Chapter 10 The Cretan Regime
Chapter 11 Carthaginian Regime
Chapter 12 Other Framers of Regime & Laws

Overall Concern of the Household

Chapter 13

1. Priority of Household Management in Relation to Virtue

Household management is concerned with the well-being and virtue of human beings, prioritizing free persons over inanimate property and slaves.

2. Question of Slave Virtue

Aristotle questions whether slaves possess virtues beyond mere instrumental capabilities, such as moderation, courage, and justice, and how these might differ from those of free persons.

3. Virtue in Women and Children

The question extends to whether women and children possess virtues comparable to men, and the implications for their roles within the household.

4. Rulers and Ruled: Same or Different Virtues?

Aristotle explores the necessity of virtue in both rulers and the ruled, asserting that differences in virtue reflect their different roles rather than a mere hierarchy of virtue.

5. Necessity of Virtue in Both Ruler and Ruled

Both rulers and the ruled require virtue for effective governance and societal function, but the virtues required differ based on their distinct roles.

6. Natural Hierarchy in the Soul

The soul's natural hierarchy, with rational parts ruling over irrational, parallels the political rule, illustrating the natural order within both individual and societal structures.

7. Different Forms of Rule in the Household

Household management encompasses various forms of rule: over slaves, between genders, and between generations, each governed by different aspects of virtue.

8. Virtue in Relation to Function

Virtue is necessary for all members of the household but varies according to one's role, particularly highlighting the complete virtue required of rulers compared to the more limited virtue of the ruled.

9. Differences in Virtue Between Men and Women

Aristotle posits that the virtues required of men and women differ, challenging views like those of Socrates who argued for their similarity.

10. Specific Virtues Based on Role

Virtue must be tailored to the roles individuals play within the household and society, advocating for a nuanced understanding that respects functional distinctions.

11. Virtue of Silence for Women

Silence is highlighted as a virtue particularly ornamenting women, reflecting differentiated expectations of virtue based on gender roles.

12. Slave Virtue

The virtues necessary for slaves are minimal and oriented towards their functional efficiency and avoidance of vices like licentiousness and cowardice.

13. Artisans and Virtue

Artisans, while necessary for society, possess a different form of "slavery" to their crafts, which does not integrate them into the household's moral life as slaves are.

14. The Role of the Master in Instilling Virtue

The master's responsibility extends beyond mere command to fostering virtue in slaves, essential for their proper function within the household.

15. Transition to Discussions on the Family and City

The discussion transitions to how the virtues developed within the household impact the broader political structure of the city, emphasizing the importance of educating women and children for societal excellence.

16. Importance of Education for Women and Children

The education of women and children is crucial for the well-being of the city, highlighting their integral role in the political and moral life of the community.

Key Themes in Chapter 13:

The cultivation of virtue is central to household management, with distinctions in the virtues appropriate to different roles within the household and society.
Education and the proper development of virtue in all members of the household are vital for the health and excellence of the city.

Husband and Wife, Father and Child

Chapter 12

1. Three Parts of Household Management

Aristotle identifies three parts of household management: mastery over slaves, paternal rule over children, and marital rule over the wife. He notes that the latter two involve free persons, unlike slaves.

2. Different Types of Rule over Wife and Children

The husband's rule over the wife is political, implying a form of partnership where the husband holds authority. The father's rule over children is kingly, based on affection and seniority.

3. Political Rule Over the Wife

Political rule in the household mirrors the alternation of power seen in political offices, with the husband perpetually in the superior role, reflecting what Aristotle views as the natural order.

4. Kingly Rule Over Children

The father's rule is likened to a king's rule, marked by affection and natural authority stemming from age and wisdom, akin to the divine authority of Zeus over his offspring as depicted by Homer.

Key Themes in Chapter 12:

Household Management: Outlines the three distinct forms of rule within a household—mastery, paternal, and marital—each governed by different principles and purposes.
Political and Kingly Rule: Discusses the husband's political rule over the wife and the father's kingly rule over children, emphasizing natural hierarchies and the dynamics of authority.
Natural Hierarchies: Reinforces the concept of natural superiority, asserting that men are naturally predisposed to lead over women, and elders over the younger.
Distinctions of Ruler and Ruled: Even in relationships of fundamental equality, distinctions are maintained through forms of address, appearance, and privileges to uphold authority.

The Practice of Business

Chapter 11

1. Introduction to Goods-Getting and Utility

Aristotle discusses the practical aspects of goods-getting, focusing on the importance of experience and knowledge of regional agricultural conditions and animal rearing.

2. Areas of Expertise in Goods-Getting

Expertise in managing various types of livestock and crops is crucial, as is knowledge in specialized areas like beekeeping and animal husbandry.

3. The Parts of Goods-Getting in its Proper Sense

Goods-getting involves natural forms such as agriculture and animal husbandry, as well as commercial activities like trade, which includes provisioning ships, transporting, and marketing goods.

4. Three Parts of Commerce

Commerce is divided into trade, moneylending, and wage labor, with distinctions between skilled and unskilled labor.

5. Intermediate Goods-Getting

This form of goods-getting includes activities like mining and lumbering, which extract valuable but not directly consumable resources.

6. Evaluating Different Forms of Goods-Getting

Goods-getting activities are assessed based on their risk, physical demands, and moral implications, with some forms being considered more noble or artful than others.

7. References to Existing Works on Goods-Getting

Aristotle cites works by other authors on farming and similar subjects, suggesting that these resources can provide valuable insights into effective goods-getting strategies.

8. The Story of Thales of Miletus

The story of Thales demonstrates how philosophical knowledge can be applied to make substantial profits, illustrating the potential wealth philosophers could achieve if they chose to pursue it.

9. Monopoly as a Universal Strategy

The strategy used by Thales to create a monopoly is highlighted as a powerful method to control supply and demand for significant profit.

10. The Example of the Iron Merchant in Sicily

Aristotle recounts a case where a merchant successfully monopolized the iron supply in Sicily, demonstrating the profitability of such strategies but also their potential to attract negative attention from authorities.

11. Political Application of Goods-Getting Knowledge

Knowledge of goods-getting is not only useful for individuals but also essential for political rulers, particularly in managing city finances and generating necessary revenues.

Key Themes in Chapter 11:

Practical Experience in Goods-Getting: Emphasizes the need for practical experience in managing resources effectively.
Distinctions in Commerce: Outlines the various components of commerce, highlighting the differences in skill and risk involved.
Monopoly and Profit: Discusses how monopolies can be used strategically to maximize profits, both by individuals and cities.
Evaluation of Labor: Analyzes goods-getting activities by their demand on physical labor and their ethical implications.
Political Relevance: Stresses the importance of goods-getting knowledge for political leadership and financial management of cities.

Business as Part of Household

Chapter 10

1. The Role of Goods-Getting in Household and Political Management

Aristotle discusses the art of goods-getting as it relates to household and political management, emphasizing that these roles manage resources provided by nature rather than creating them.

2. Parallel to the Art of Weaving

Just as a weaver uses wool without producing it, the household manager or political ruler utilizes natural resources effectively without generating them.

3. Why Goods-Getting Belongs to Household Management but Not Medicine

While both health and wealth are necessary for households, their management falls under different expertise: health under a doctor and goods under a household manager.

4. Goods-Getting in Household Management vs. Subordinate Arts

The household manager ensures the availability and proper use of resources, similar to how a doctor manages health but does not provide all health-related services directly.

5. Two Types of Goods-Getting: Natural and Unnatural

Natural goods-getting involves managing essential resources like crops and animals, while unnatural goods-getting through commerce focuses on profit from the exchange and trade of goods.

6. Criticism of Usury

Usury, the charging of interest on loans, is criticized as the most unnatural form of goods-getting, likened to producing money from money, akin to offspring being born from parents.

Key Themes in Chapter 10:

Use vs. Creation of Resources: The household manager and political ruler are tasked with using, not creating, resources, akin to the weaver who transforms provided wool.
Goods-Getting vs. Other Arts: Goods-getting is integral to household management in utilizing resources, whereas other arts, like medicine, involve direct service provision.
Natural vs. Unnatural Goods-Getting: Natural goods-getting is necessary and beneficial, focusing on essential resources for sustenance; in contrast, commerce, especially usury, is seen as unnatural and exploitative.
Criticism of Usury: Usury is condemned for its unnatural practice of generating profit from money itself, diverging from money's intended role as a medium of exchange.

The Two Kinds of Business

Chapter 9

1. Introduction to Two Types of Goods-Getting Arts

There are two distinct forms of goods-getting: one natural, essential for household management and sustenance; the other unnatural, focused on commerce and unlimited wealth acquisition.

2. The Dual Use of Possessions

Every possession can be used properly (e.g., shoes for wearing) or improperly (e.g., exchanging shoes for money).

3. Origins of Trade and Exchange

Trading originated from the need to balance possessions, moving from household exchanges to broader community barter systems.

4. Development of Commerce and Money

With increasing trade, especially with foreigners, money was introduced to facilitate exchanges that barter could not efficiently handle.

5. Evolution of Goods-Getting through Commerce

Commerce evolved from simple trade to an art form focused on profit maximization, closely linked to the development and use of money.

6. Ambiguity of Money and Wealth

While money is often equated with wealth, it is actually conventional and arbitrary, with no inherent value beyond societal agreement.

7. Re-Evaluating Wealth

Aristotle calls for a distinction between natural wealth, tied to the necessities of life, and unnatural wealth, associated with the limitless pursuit of money.

8. Unlimited Desire for Wealth in Commerce

The pursuit of wealth in commerce is seen as having no limits, akin to medicine’s pursuit of health, yet it often focuses merely on financial gain rather than true well-being.

9. The Problem of Unlimited Wealth Accumulation

This mistaken belief in the limitless acquisition of wealth leads to lifestyles focused more on having than on well-being, often to the detriment of living well.

10. The Misapplication of Skills and Arts to Money-Making

Various arts, such as medicine and the military, are often misused for profit, undermining their true purposes.

11. Conclusion: Distinction Between Necessary and Unnecessary Goods-Getting

Aristotle concludes that necessary goods-getting is natural and limited, part of household management, whereas unnecessary goods-getting, driven by commerce, is unlimited and unnatural.

Key Themes in Chapter 9:

Natural vs. Unnatural Wealth: Aristotle differentiates between wealth that is necessary and naturally limited, and wealth that is pursued through commerce, which is unnatural and unlimited.
Dual Use of Objects: Objects have both natural uses (proper) and unnatural uses (commercial), highlighting different approaches to possessions.
Development of Money: The transition from barter to money marked a significant development in commerce, influencing the art of maximizing profit.
Critique of Wealth Accumulation: Aristotle criticizes the pursuit of wealth for its own sake, advocating for a focus on living well rather than merely accumulating resources.
Misapplication of Arts: The distortion of various arts for monetary gain reflects a broader societal misunderstanding of their fundamental purposes.

Mastery as Rule and as Science

Chapter 7

1. Distinction Between Mastery and Political Rule

Different Forms of Rule: Aristotle clarifies that mastery and political rule are fundamentally different. Mastery pertains to the rule over slaves, while political rule involves governance over free and equal citizens.
Household Management and Monarchy: Household management is likened to a monarchy where one person rules, contrasted with political rule which is a shared governance over free citizens.

2. Nature of Master and Slave

Master and Slave by Nature: The master is naturally suited to rule, and the slave is naturally suited to be ruled. Aristotle also refers to the practical sciences of mastery and slavery.
Science of Slavery: This includes practical training, such as in Syracuse where slave boys were taught serving tasks.

3. Science of Mastery

Science of Using Slaves: Focuses on how to effectively command and use slaves, differing from how to acquire them.
Command vs. Labor: Mastery involves directing the slaves' tasks without engaging in the tasks directly.

4. Delegation of Mastery and Focus on Higher Pursuits

Delegation of Tasks: Wealthy individuals may appoint stewards to manage slaves, allowing them to focus on pursuits like politics or philosophy.
Expertise in Acquiring Slaves: The ability to acquire slaves justly is seen as akin to warfare or hunting.

5. Conclusion on Slave and Master Relationship

Summary of Mastery: Mastery involves proper use and command of slaves, with a distinct science for the acquisition of slaves, likened to just conquest or warfare.

Key Takeaways

Mastery and political rule are distinct, with the former governing slaves and the latter governing free and equal individuals.
Household management resembles a monarchy, in contrast to the shared governance of political rule.

Property

Chapter 8

1. Introduction: The Relationship Between Possessions and the Art of Getting Goods

Possessions as a Part of Household Management: Aristotle considers the role of possessions, including slaves, within household management and questions if the art of getting goods is the same as or subordinate to it.
Comparison to Other Arts: The art of getting goods is compared to the provision of instruments and materials in other arts, like the relationship between making shuttles and weaving.

2. Distinction Between Household Management and the Art of Getting Goods

Household Management vs. Acquisition: Aristotle differentiates these concepts, arguing that acquiring goods supplies resources, while household management uses those resources.

3. The Role of Sustenance in Human Life

Sustenance and Ways of Life: Sustenance is essential for life, influencing various human and animal lifestyles based on dietary needs and ways of acquiring food.

4. The Various Ways of Life Related to Sustenance

Human Ways of Life: Aristotle outlines different lifestyles, such as nomads, hunters, and farmers, and how these are adapted based on the methods of acquiring sustenance.

5. Nature’s Provision for Sustenance

Natural Provision of Resources: Nature provides all necessary sustenance for animals and humans, with each species having resources suited to its needs.

6. Nature’s Purposeful Design for Human Benefit

Purposefulness of Nature: Aristotle argues that nature designs everything with a purpose, specifically for the benefit of humans, including the roles of animals and plants.

7. Acquisition as Part of Household Management

Natural Acquisition and Household Management: A natural form of acquisition that is part of household management focuses on acquiring goods necessary for sustaining the household.

8. The Limit of Wealth and Genuine Wealth

The Limits of Wealth: Aristotle contends that wealth, like any tool, has a natural boundary, contrary to the notion that it is limitless.

Key Takeaways

Household management and the art of acquiring goods are distinct, with the latter supplying resources for the former.
Different ways of life are defined by how humans acquire sustenance, each adapted to specific environmental and societal needs.
Acquisition through war and hunting is a natural extension of the art of acquiring goods, especially in cases where the conquered are naturally suited to be ruled.
Wealth has natural limits, and genuine wealth is defined by its usefulness in sustaining life and facilitating the good life within the limits of household management and political life.

Slave and Master by Law

Chapter 6

1. Double Meaning of Slavery: Natural vs. Conventional Slavery

Two Types of Slavery: Aristotle distinguishes between natural slavery (some individuals are slaves by nature) and conventional slavery (enslavement by law or convention, often from war).
Conventional Slavery (War): This form is based on the premise that those conquered in war are owned by the conquerors, a controversial view as it suggests might makes right.

2. Debate on the Justice of War-Conquest Slavery

Challenge to the Justice of Conquest Slavery: Many, including philosophers and legal scholars, argue against the justice of enslaving others solely based on force and power.
Virtue and Force: The debate centers on whether power is connected to virtue, influencing the perception of justice in the rule of the superior.

3. Justice in Slavery from War

War-Conquest Slavery as a Form of Justice: Some view this form of slavery as just under the law, yet question its absolute justice due to the possibility of enslaving well-born individuals in unjust wars.

4. Distinction Between Slaves and Barbarians

Barbarians as Natural Slaves: Some defenders of conquest slavery use the concept of 'barbarians' to justify natural slavery, associating it with innate inferiority.

5. The Role of Virtue and Nature in Determining Freedom and Slavery

Virtue as the Basis for Freedom or Slavery: The notion that virtue or vice determines one's status as free or slave, although nature does not always guarantee virtuous offspring from virtuous parents.

6. Validity of the Dispute and the Natural Slave

Dispute Over Natural vs. Conventional Slavery: The debate has merit as not all are suited for slavery or freedom; however, for some, being slaves is both just and advantageous.

7. Mastery and the Natural Order of Rule

Natural Mastery: It is natural and beneficial for some individuals to be ruled, similar to the soul ruling the body or intellect guiding passions.

8. Friendship and Justice in Master-Slave Relationships

Advantage and Friendship in Natural Slavery: A form of friendship can exist in natural slavery where the relationship is mutually beneficial, unlike those enslaved by force or convention.

Key Takeaways

Slavery has two meanings: natural and conventional, with debates concerning the justice of each, particularly concerning enslavement from war.
The role of virtue and nature in determining freedom or slavery highlights a complex interplay of ethics and social structure.
Natural slavery is argued to be just and beneficial for those suited to it, whereas conventional slavery, especially from war, is seen as more problematic and unjust.

Slave and Master by Nature

Chapter 5

1. The Nature and Justice of Slavery

Question of Natural Slavery: Aristotle questions whether slavery is natural and just, or contrary to nature, and if some individuals are naturally suited for slavery.
Ruling and Being Ruled: He asserts that ruling and being ruled are necessary and advantageous, with some born to rule and others to be ruled.

2. Universal Presence of Ruling and Being Ruled

Rule in All Forms of Life: Rule exists between a ruling and a ruled element, whether animate or inanimate, such as the harmony in music.
Soul and Body: In living beings, the soul naturally rules over the body, establishing a natural hierarchy.

3. Investigating Natural Conditions

Aristotle suggests studying rulership in ideal conditions where the body and soul are in natural order, unlike depraved conditions where the body may rule over the soul.

4. Mastery and Political Rule in the Animal World

Mastery vs. Political Rule: Differentiates between the soul's rule over the body (mastery) and the intellect's rule over desire (political or kingly rule), demonstrating natural hierarchical relationships.

5. Rulership Between Humans and Animals

Humans Ruling Over Animals: Tame animals benefit from being ruled by humans, paralleling his views on human relationships.
Male and Female Relationship: Aristotle views the relationship between male and female as naturally hierarchical.

6. The Natural Slave

Defining the Natural Slave: Describes natural slaves as individuals suited only for bodily tasks, lacking the capacity to fully possess reason.

7. Physical and Mental Differences Between Free Persons and Slaves

Natural Differences in Body and Soul: Ideally, slaves and free persons should show distinct physical and mental traits suitable for their roles, though this isn't always clear in practice.

8. Hypothetical Superiority and Visible Distinctions

If physical distinctions were as clear as those between gods and mortals, the superiority of free persons and the natural status of slaves would be undisputed.

9. Conclusion: Slavery as Natural and Just for Some

Slavery is Natural and Just for Some: Aristotle concludes that slavery is natural and just for those who are naturally slaves, as it allows them to fulfill their function under rational governance.

Key Takeaways

Ruling and being ruled are inherent in all forms of life and are beneficial.
The natural order prescribes a hierarchy within the soul, human relationships, and between humans and animals.
Slavery is justified for those naturally suited to subordination, allowing them to function optimally under those capable of rational thought.

Video Explanation

Slavery

Chapter 4

1. The Relationship Between Property and Household Management

Property as a Part of the Household: Aristotle explains that property is an essential part of the household, and the art of acquiring property is crucial to household management.
Necessity of Property for Living Well: To live well, one must possess the necessary resources. Proper instruments are required for every specialized art, including household management.

2. Distinction Between Animate and Inanimate Instruments

Inanimate vs. Animate Instruments: Aristotle draws a distinction between inanimate instruments (e.g., a rudder) and animate instruments (e.g., a lookout in navigation).
Role of Subordinates as Animate Instruments: In any art or task, the subordinate functions as an animate instrument to assist the master, with a slave falling into this category.
Property as a Whole: Aristotle defines property as a collection of instruments necessary for life, considering the slave as an animate form of property.

3. Instruments in Action and Production

Instruments of Production vs. Instruments of Action: Aristotle differentiates between instruments that create something external (productive instruments) and those used for their benefit alone (instruments of action).
The Slave as an Instrument of Action: Since life focuses on action, not production, a slave primarily aids in living and acting rather than producing goods.

4. The Slave as an Instrument and Property

Possession and Part: Aristotle views a possession as a part of something else, implying that a part is not independent but wholly belongs to another entity. A slave is considered a part of the master’s household.
Relationship Between Master and Slave: The master owns the slave but is not owned by the slave, highlighting the lack of autonomy and complete subsumption of the slave into the household as property.

5. Nature and Capacity of the Slave

Natural Slavery: Aristotle sees the slave's nature as one who does not belong to himself but to someone else.
A Human as Property: Though a human, a slave functions as an instrument of action, separate from the owner.
The Slave’s Role in the Household: The slave acts as an extension of the master, assisting in fulfilling the master's daily needs for action.

Key Takeaways

Property is crucial for household management and living well.
Slaves are categorized as animate instruments within the household.
The slave primarily serves as an instrument of action, aiding the master in daily activities.
The slave is a possession belonging entirely to the master, both as part of the household and as a subordinate in action.
Slavery is depicted as natural in the sense that some humans are inherently suited to be instruments of action for others.

Video Explanation

Household Management and Its Parts

Chapter 3

1. The Relationship Between the City and the Household

City Composed of Households: Aristotle begins by noting that every city is constituted from households, making household management essential to understanding the city’s structure.
Parts of the Household: The household consists of both slaves and free persons, including:
- Master and slave
- Husband and wife
- Father and children
Aristotle investigates these relationships to understand what each role is and how they should function.

2. Three Forms of Rule Within the Household

Mastery (Master-Slave Relationship): Aristotle identifies the mastery that a master exercises over the slave.
Marital Rule (Husband-Wife Relationship): He recognizes the union between man and woman, although he notes that this form of rule has no precise term.
Procreative Rule (Father-Children Relationship): The rule of a father over his children, like marital rule, has not been assigned a specific term. Aristotle considers them distinct forms of governance within the household.

3. The Controversy Over Household Management and the Acquisition of Goods

Debate on Household Management: There is debate on whether the management of the household (oikonomia) is the same as or a major part of household management.
Acquiring Goods: The art of acquiring goods is often seen as a crucial part of managing the household, but Aristotle questions whether this should be considered part of household management or a separate activity.

4. The Debate Over Mastery (Master-Slave Relationship)

Controversial Views on Mastery: Aristotle delves into the debate on whether mastery is a natural or unnatural institution.
Mastery as a Science: Some argue that mastery, like household management, political rule, and kingly rule, is a form of governance that can be studied and understood rationally.
Mastery as Unjust and Against Nature: Others contend that mastery is against nature, arguing that the division between slave and free person is a matter of law, not nature, and is an arbitrary, forceful division.

5. Summary and Questions Raised

Reevaluation of Traditional Views: Aristotle suggests that traditional conceptions of mastery, household management, and political rule might need revision and further investigation.
Underlying Question: Is mastery just or unjust? Aristotle questions whether slavery and mastery are natural phenomena or merely social constructs imposed by law and force.

Key Takeaways

The city, as the highest political entity, is composed of households, making the understanding of household management crucial.
Aristotle breaks down the household into three fundamental relationships—master-slave, husband-wife, and father-children—each governed by its own form of rule.
A major debate concerns whether the art of acquiring goods is part of household management or a distinct activity.
The issue of mastery and slavery is contentious, with views differing on its nature and justice.
Aristotle sets the stage for further exploration of these issues by questioning traditional assumptions about household management and the nature of rulership.