This book illustrates how Aristotle's ethical concepts such as justice, reciprocity and friendship offer a basis for his political philosophy. In particular, it points out the importance of Aristotle for articulating the concept of a civic relationship and developing a theory of integration, by exploring how he includes a wide variety of people within the deliberative and judicial processes. Comparisons between Aristotle's own thought and present-day 'Aristotelian' political theories, such as communitarianism, civic republicanism and the capabilities approach, are also among (...) the unique approaches offered by the book and are used to illustrate his original vision of politics. They can also, however, offer new insights into the problems of how to read his texts appropriately in their context and why we now need to read them, not only out of an antiquarian interest but also out of our concern for politics. (shrink)

This paper addresses the problem of how to make 'democratic' elements in Aristotle's political philosophy compatible with his aristocratic framework for distributing political authority. To this end, it is argued that in Aristotle's framework, the idea of aristocratic governance is justified, because it contributes most greatly to the achievement of the well-being of people in a city , or the common benefit of a wide range of free individuals , and that Aristotle's argument for the wisdom of the multitude is (...) actually not democratic, but rather aristocratic to the extent that he proposes integrating the multitude into the deliberative and judicial processes by identifying their 'virtuous character' as a group, not by offering an idea that human beings are created equal. The paper also offers a more constructive criticism of Nussbaum's capabilities approach by arguing that Aristotle's aristocratic idea of distributive justice provides more useful insights into the problem of popular participation than Nussbaum's emphasis on people's capacity for choosing their own way of life. (shrink)

This paper addresses the problem of how to make ‘democratic’ elements in Aristotle’s political philosophy compatible with his aristocratic framework for distributing political authority. To this end, it is argued that in Aristotle’s framework, the idea of aristocratic governance is justified, because it contributes most greatly to the achievement of the well-being of people in a city, or the common benefit of a wide range of free individuals, and that Aristotle’s argument for the wisdom of the multitude is actually not (...) democratic, but rather aristocratic to the extent that he proposes integrating the multitude into the deliberative and judicial processes by identifying their ‘virtuous character’ as a group, not by offering an idea that human beings are created equal. The paper also offers a more constructive criticism of Nussbaum’s capabilities approach by arguing that Aristotle’s aristocratic idea of distributive justice provides more useful insights into the problem of popular participation than Nussbaum’s emphasis on people’s capacity for choosing their own way of life. (shrink)

This article maintains that Aristotle develops his political theory as a craft and science in Politics 4–6. The literature, however, has argued that he views political knowledge as a form of practical wisdom or prudence. This article discusses the way that Aristotle proposes political theory as a skill to help deal with unfavorable circumstances. In Greek political thought, craft and science are characterized as skills of cooperating with nature, taking up opportunities, and coping with uncertainty. Aristotle uses this conception when (...) he develops his political theory in Politics 4–6. He understands that political theorists should advise prudent legislators on practical reforms of constitutions and help them address non-ideal situations. Serious efforts to gain causal knowledge are indispensable for statesmanship. This view of statesmanship better illustrates political theory as part of human efforts and cooperation to resolve uncertainty rather than the one that sharply distinguishes among theoretical, practical, and productive sciences. (shrink)

This paper argues that what Aristotle has in mind as the criterion for estimating the value of products in Nicomachean Ethics V.5 is neither the Marxian concept of 'human labour' nor Polanyi's concept of 'status', but the benefit of a recipient, and maintains that Aristotle here does not analyse the mechanism of a market economy, but addresses the problem of how to build reciprocal relationships among citizens through the exchange of goods. Furthermore, unlike Nussbaum's capability approach, which draws attention to (...) the concept of well-being, the paper argues that the concept of reciprocity plays the key role in Aristotle's distributive theory of property in the Politics and lays the foundation for his understanding of political governance as the exchange of governing and being governed in turn. (shrink)