MOZI
It is believed that Mozi was born around the time of Confucius’s death, in Tengzhou, Shandong Province, China, into a family of artisans or possibly slaves. Named Mo Di, he was a woodworker and engineer, and worked at the courts of noble families, rising through the civil service to establish a school for officials and advisors. His philosophical and political views gained him a following and the title Mozi (“Master Mo”). Mohists, as his followers were known, lived according to Mozi’s principles of simplicity and pacifism during the Warring States period, until the Qin dynasty established its Legalist regime. After his death, Mozi’s teachings were collected in The Mozi. Mohism disappeared after the unification of China in 221 BCE, but were rediscovered in the early 20th century.
Key work
5th century BCE The Mozi
See also: Confucius • Plato • Han Fei Tzu • Sun Yat-Sen • Mao Zedong
IN CONTEXT
IDEOLOGY
Rationalism
FOCUS
Philosopher kings
BEFORE
594 BCE The Athenian lawmaker Solon lays down laws that act as the foundation for Greek democracy.
c.450 BCE Greek philosopher Protagoras says that political justice is an imposition of human ideas, not a reflection of natural justice.
AFTER
335–323 BCE Aristotle suggests that polity (constitutional government) is the most practical of the better ways to run a state.
54–51 BCE Cicero writes De republica, advocating a more democratic form of government than suggested by Plato’s Republic.
At the end of the 6th century BCE, a cultural “golden age” began in Greece which was to last for 200 years. Now referred to as the Classical period, it saw the flowering of literature, architecture, science, and above all, philosophy, all of which profoundly influenced the development of Western civilization.
At the very beginning of the Classical period, the people of the city-state of Athens overthrew their tyrannical leader and instituted a form of democracy. Under this system, government officials were chosen by a lottery from among the citizens, and decisions were taken by a democratic assembly. All the citizens could speak and vote at the assembly – they did not elect representatives to do this on their behalf. It should be noted, however, that the “citizens” were a minority of the population; they were free men aged over 30 whose parents were Athenians. Women, slaves, children, younger men, and foreigners or first-generation settlers, were excluded from the democratic process. This political environment quickly made Athens a major cultural centre, attracting some of the foremost thinkers of the time. One of the greatest of these was an Athenian named Socrates, whose philosophical questioning of the generally accepted notions of justice and virtue gained him a following of young disciples. Unfortunately, it also attracted unwanted attention from the authorities, who persuaded the democratic assembly to issue Socrates with a death sentence, on charges of corrupting the young. One of Socrates’ young followers was Plato, who shared his teacher’s inquisitive nature and sceptical attitude. Plato was to become disillusioned with the Athenian system after what he saw as its unfair treatment of his teacher.
"Democracy passes into despotism."
Plato
Plato went on to become as influential a philosopher as Socrates, and towards the end of his career he turned his considerable intellect to the business of politics, most famously in the Republic. Unsurprisingly, given that he had seen Socrates condemned and was himself from a noble family, Plato had little sympathy for democracy. But neither did he find much to commend in any other existing form of government, all of which he believed led the state into “evils”.
The good life
To understand what Plato meant by “evils” in this context, it is important to bear in mind the concept of eudaimonia, the “good life”, which for ancient Greeks was a vital aim. “Living well” was not a question of achieving material wellbeing, honour, or mere pleasure, but rather living according to fundamental virtues such as wisdom, piety, and above all, justice. The purpose of the state, Plato believed, was to promote these virtues so that its citizens could lead this good life. Issues such as protection of property, liberty, and stability were only important in so far as they created conditions that allowed citizens to live well. In his opinion, however, no political system had yet existed that fulfilled this objective – and the defects within them encouraged what he saw as “evils”, or the opposite of these virtues.
The reason for this, Plato maintained, is that rulers, whether in a monarchy, oligarchy (rule of the few), or democracy, tend to rule in their own interests rather than for the good of the state and its people. Plato explains that this is due to a general ignorance of the virtues that constitute the good life, which in turn leads people to desire the wrong things, especially the transitory pleasures of honour and wealth. These prizes come with political power, and the problem is intensified in the political arena. The desire to rule, for what Plato saw as the wrong reasons, leads to conflict among citizens. With everyone seeking increased power, this ultimately undermines the stability and unity of the state. Whoever emerges victorious from the power struggle deprives his opponents of the power to achieve their desires, which leads to injustice – an evil that is exactly contrary to the cornerstone of Plato’s notion of the good life.
In contrast, Plato argued, there is a class of people who understand the meaning of the good life: philosophers. They alone recognize the worth of virtues above the pleasures of honour and money, and they have devoted their lives to the pursuit of the good life. Because of this, they do not lust after fame and fortune, and so have no desire for political power – paradoxically this is what qualifies them as ideal rulers. On face value, Plato’s argument would seem to be simply that “philosophers know best”, and (coming from a philosopher) might appear to contradict his assertion that they have no desire to rule, but behind it he gives a much richer and more subtle reasoning.
Ideal Forms
From Socrates, Plato had learned that virtue is not innate, but dependent on knowledge and wisdom, and in order to lead a virtuous life it is necessary first to understand the essential nature of virtue. Plato developed his mentor’s ideas, showing that while we might recognize individual instances of qualities such as justice, goodness, or beauty, this does not allow us to understand what gives them their essential nature. We might imitate them – acting in a way that we think is just, for example – but this is mere mimicry rather than truly behaving according to those virtues.
"The chief penalty is to be governed by someone worse if a man will not himself hold office and rule."
Plato
In his Theory of Forms, Plato suggested the existence of ideal archetypes of these virtues (and of everything that exists) that consist of the essence of their true nature; this means that what we see as instances of these virtues are only examples of these Forms, and may show only a part of their nature. They are like inadequate reflections or shadows of the real Forms.
These ideal Forms, or Ideas, as Plato called them, exist in a realm outside the world we live in, accessible only via philosophical reasoning and enquiry. It is this that makes philosophers uniquely qualified to define what constitutes the good life, and of leading a truly virtuous life, rather than simply imitating individual examples of virtue. Plato had already demonstrated that to be good, the state has to be ruled by the virtuous, and while others value money or honour above all, only philosophers value knowledge and wisdom, and therefore virtue. It follows then that only the interests of philosophers benefit the state, and therefore “philosophers must become kings”. Plato goes as far as to suggest that they should be compelled to take positions of power, in order to avoid the conflict and injustice inherent in other forms of government.
Socrates chose to drink poison rather than renounce his views. The trial and conviction of Socrates caused Plato to doubt the virtues of the democratic political system of Athens.
Educa
ting kings
Plato recognizes that this is a utopian stance, and goes on to say, “…or those now called kings must genuinely and adequately philosophize”, suggesting the education of a potential ruling class as a more practical proposition. In his later dialogues Statesman and Laws, he describes a model for a state in which this can be achieved, teaching the philosophical skills necessary to understanding the good life, in the same way as any other skills that can be of use to society. However, he points out that not every citizen has the aptitude and intellectual ability to learn these skills. He suggests that where this education is appropriate – for a small, intellectual elite – it should be enforced rather than offered. Those chosen for power because of their “natural talents” should be separated from their families and reared in communes, so that their loyalties are to the state.
Plato’s political writings were influential in the ancient world, in particular in the Roman empire, and echoed the notions of virtue and education in the political philosophy of Chinese scholars such as Confucius and Mozi. It is even possible that they influenced Chanakya in India when he wrote his treatise on training potential rulers. In medieval times, Plato’s influence spread to the Islamic empire, and to Christian Europe, where Augustine incorporated them into the teachings of the Church. Later, Plato’s ideas were overshadowed by those of Aristotle, whose advocacy of democracy chimed better with the political philosophers of the Renaissance.
"Democracy… is full of variety and disorder, dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequals alike."
Plato
Plato’s political notions have been seen as unacceptably authoritarian and elitist by later thinkers, and they fell out of favour with many in the modern world while it struggled to establish democracy. He has been criticized as advocating a totalitarian, or at best paternalistic, system of government run by an elite that claims to know what is best for everyone else. Recently, however, his central notion of a political elite of “philosopher kings” has been reappraised by political thinkers.
Plato used the metaphor of the ship of state to explain why philosophers should be kings. Though he does not seek power, the navigator is the only one who can steer a proper course – much as the philosopher is the only one with the knowledge to rule justly.
Emperor Nero is said to have stood by and done nothing to help while a fire raged in the city of Rome. Plato’s ideal of a philosopher king has been blamed by some for the rise of such tyrants.
PLATO
Born around 427 BCE, Plato was originally called Aristocles, later acquiring the nickname Plato (meaning “broad”) because of his muscular physique. From a noble Athenian family, he was probably expected to follow a career in politics, but instead became a disciple of the philosopher Socrates and was present when his mentor chose to die rather than renounce his views.
Plato travelled widely around the Mediterranean before returning to Athens, where he established a school of philosophy, the Academy, which numbered among its students the young Aristotle. While teaching, he wrote a number of books in the form of dialogues, generally featuring his teacher Socrates, exploring ideas of philosophy and politics. He is believed to have carried on teaching and writing well into his later years, and died at about the age of 80 in 348/347 BCE.
Key works
c.399–387 BCE Crito
c.380–360 BCE Republic
c.355–347 BCE Statesman, Laws
See also: Confucius • Mozi • Aristotle • Chanakya • Cicero • Augustine of Hippo • Al-Farabi
IN CONTEXT
IDEOLOGY
Democracy
FOCUS
Political virtue
BEFORE
431 BCE Athenian statesman Pericles states that democracy provides equal justice for all.
c.380–360 BCE In the Republic, Plato advocates rule by “philosopher kings” who possess wisdom.
AFTER
13th century Thomas Aquinas incorporates Aristotle’s ideas into Christian doctrine.
c.1300 Giles of Rome stresses the importance of the rule of law to living in a civil society.
1651 Thomas Hobbes proposes a social contract to prevent man from living in a “brutish” state of nature.
Ancient Greece was not a unified nation-state as we would recognize one today, but a collection of independent regional states with cities at their centre. Each city-state, or polis, had its own constitutional organization: some, such as Macedon, were ruled by a monarch, while others, most notably Athens, had a form of democracy in which at least some of the citizens could participate in their government.
Aristotle, who was brought up in Macedon and studied in Athens, was well acquainted with the concept of the polis and its various interpretations, and his analytical turn of mind made him well qualified to examine the merits of the city-state. He also spent some time in Ionia classifying animals and plants according to their characteristics. He was later to apply these skills of categorization to ethics and politics, which he saw as both natural and practical sciences. Unlike his mentor, Plato, Aristotle believed that knowledge was acquired through observation rather than intellectual reasoning, and that the science of politics should be based on empirical data, organized in the same way as the taxonomy of the natural world.
Naturally social
Aristotle observed that humans have a natural tendency to form social units: individuals come together to form households, households to form villages, and villages to form cities. Just as some animals – such as bees or cattle – are distinguished by their disposition to live in colonies or herds, humans are by nature social. Just as he might define a wolf by saying it is by nature a pack animal, Aristotle says that “Man is by nature a political animal”. By this, Aristotle means simply that Man is an animal whose nature it is to live socially in a polis; he is not implying a natural tendency towards political activity in the modern sense of the word.
The idea that we have a tendency to live in large civil communities might seem relatively unenlightening today, but it is important to recognize that Aristotle is explicitly stating that the polis is just as much a creation of nature as an ants’ nest. For him, it is inconceivable that humans can live in any other way. This contrasts markedly with ideas of civil society as an artificial construct that has taken us out of an uncivilized “state of nature” – something Aristotle would not have understood. Anyone living outside a polis, he believed, was not human – he must be either superior to men (that is, a god) or inferior to them (that is, a beast).
The good life
This idea of the polis as a natural phenomenon rather than a man-made one underpins Aristotle’s ideas about ethics and the politics of the city-state. From his study of the natural world, he gained a notion that everything that exists has an aim or a purpose, and he decided that for humans, this is to lead a “good life”. Aristotle takes this to mean the pursuit of virtues, such as justice, goodness, and beauty. The purpose of the polis, then, is to enable us to live according to these virtues. The ancient Greeks saw the structure of the state – which enables people to live together and protects the property and liberty of its citizens – as a means to the end of virtue.
"Law is order, and good law is good order."
Aristotle
Aristotle identified various “species” and “sub-species” within the polis. He found that what distinguishes Man from the other animals is his innate powers of reason and the faculty of speech, which give him a unique ability to form social groups and set up communities and partnerships. Within the community of a polis, the citizens develop an organization that ensures the security, economic stability, and justice of the state; not by imposing any form of social contract, but because it is in their nature to do so. For Aristotle, the different ways of organizing the life of the polis exist not so that people can live together (as they do this by their very nature), but so that they can live well. How well they succeed in achieving this goal, he observes, depends on the type of government they
choose.
In ancient Athens, citizens debated political affairs at a stone dais called the Pnyx. To Aristotle, the active participation of citizens in government was essential for a healthy society.
Species of rule
An inveterate classifier of data, Aristotle devised a comprehensive taxonomy of the natural world, and in his later works, especially Politics, he set about applying the same methodical skills to systems of government. While Plato had reasoned theoretically about the ideal form of government, Aristotle chose to examine existing regimes to analyse their strengths and weaknesses. To do this, he asked two simple questions: who rules, and on whose behalf do they rule?
In answer to the first question, Aristotle observes that there are basically three types of rule: by a single person, by a select few, or by many. And in answer to the second question, the rule could be either on behalf of the population as a whole, which he considered true or good government, or in the self-interest of the ruler or ruling class, a defective form of government. In all, he identified six “species” of rule, which came in pairs. Monarchy is rule by an individual on behalf of all; rule by an individual in his own interests, or tyranny, is corrupted monarchy. Rule by aristocracy (which to the Greeks meant rule by the best, rather than rule by hereditary noble families) is rule by a few for the good of all; rule by a self-interested few, or oligarchy, is its corrupted form. Finally, polity is rule by the many for the benefit of all. Aristotle saw democracy as the corrupted form of this last form of rule, as in practice it entails ruling on behalf of the many, rather than every single individual.
The Politics Book Page 4
