Abstract

This paper explores the tension between Aristotle’s definition of the citizen and his conception of good and bad political regimes. Aristotle’s definition of the citizen as one with a share in the offices of the city produces the paradoxical result that in a monarchy, only one person, the monarch, is a citizen. The paper argues that this reveals a serious problem for Aristotle’s theory. Seven solutions are offered to repair this problem, though revisions that involve broadening Aristotle’s notion of the citizen fail on multiple grounds. What Aristotle should have put forward is a theory of degrees of citizenship on which one can satisfy the conditions of citizenship to varying degrees depending on one’s participation in the life of one's city.