Aristotle “He who is unable to live in society, or who has no need because he is sufficient for himself, must be either a beast or a god.”

Aristotle The Father of Political Thought All humanity was political by nature. A “constitution” was how humans were organized politically That constitutions could be judged good or bad by evaluating if politics took care of “parts” or “wholes” 384– 322 bce

Humans are naturally political Because man is a social beast by nature, his lives in a community, and to live in a community you need rules. This need for rules creates politics, either good or bad.

Aristotle’s view of wholeness If YOU’RE not whole then YOU’RE not fully alive. You do not want to see the “members” of the body separated. SOCIETY needs to be “whole” to be fully alive as well. If you think you can stand alone outside of society, then you are as ridiculous as a “huge foot” all by itself. If you understand the parts, then you can recreate the whole. DNA Cloning A column of a temple A hand If you see the parts, then you can see the “constitution” of the whole

Aristotle’s view of wholeness Aristotle measured goodness with wholeness. Government is never perfect, but it can be good if it concerned with the “whole” of society. If government doesn’t care about the “whole” society, if it’s there only to benefit a “part” of society, then that government is perverted. Good government is concerned with the good of the “whole”

Making the “whole” through the “parts” a.k.a. Citizens vs. Subjects If you are a citizen, you are engaged in the political process. All citizens are equal, but they are not all the same. They need to do their part to contribute to the whole. If you’re not responsible enough to be a citizen and do your part to contribute, than you are a subject and will be lorded over.

Aristotle on parts The parts (citizens), when are put together, will build a life that maintains the spirit of the whole community. How would you define the “American Spirit?” How about the “Spirit of the Chinese?” How about “Iraqi Spirit?” Could our Constitution work for the Chinese or the Iraqi? Why or why not?

The Spirit of the whole is its Constitution It’s important to note that Aristotle’s definition of “constitution” is different from ours today. To Aristotle, a constitution is how a community works . . . NOT a document that is the rule of law. He wanted to study constitutions/communities . . . He wanted to see the “whole” very badly but couldn’t. So he studied the parts/citizens to define the the spirit/constitution of the whole community. Later . . . Cicero in writing Scipio’s Dream will see the whole.

Is a constitution good or bad? Is a government set up with the common interests of the “whole”, or merely only the ruling “part” that has the power? “Right” constitutions were directed to the common interest of the whole. “Perverted” constitutions were directed at the selfish interest of the ruling body. Citizens are parts, government is the body, and the animating spirit is the soul of the people.

Aristotle on constitutions To Aristotle, there were only three natural ways to rule. Rule by the one Rule by the few Rule by the many But, if there were “right” and perverted” constitutions then these three ways to rule are doubled for the good and bad.

Aristotle on constitutions “Perverted” Constitutions Considers only selfish interests of those ruling. Tyrant--a perversion of Kingship. Oligarchy--a perversion of Aristocracy Democracy--a perversion of Constitutional Government, which is the rule. No one ruling the poor, uneducated masses . . . MOB RULE! “Right” Constitutions Considers the common interests of the whole. Kingship--the rule by one. Aristocracy--the rule by a few. Constitutional Government--the military ruling as the mass (in Aristotle’s time).

So given Aristotle’s views . . . Does our constitution match the animating spirit of the American people? Describe what our “animating spirit” would look like. Could our constitution fit everyone in the world? Would our constitution fit the spirit of the Iraqi people? Considering the spirit of the Iraqi people, what you think their constitution might look like?

Aristotle still has universal influence! The founder of constitutional thinking. Saw the world in parts of wholes. Believed you could recreate a whole by merely observing a part. Believed all wholes had constitutions. To this day, no country considers creating a constitution without referring to his views! 384– 322 bce

Think like an Aristotelian . . . Get out a pen and paper Is our government run by one, a few, or the many? Does it focus on the well being of the “whole” or only the ruling “parts”? In other words, are we good or perverted? Give three examples that would substantiate your opinion.