Create a discussion post like this using an amalgamation of all the other discussions I'm giving you. Make sure it sounds like a human and has my writing personality. Include the in text citations as well as the references and only use the primary source of aristotle politics.

Discussion Prompt 2 - Definition of power 
Jan 13 - Jan 31
Reflect on how Aristotle’s discussions of power and wealth in Books 1 and 2 have influenced modern political thought. Identify at least two modern political theories or systems that show traces of Aristotle’s ideas on the relationship between economic stability and political power. How do they refer to the modern political power?

Provide your response/arguments in well-developed and elaborated paragraphs. Each argument must be supported with specific examples/citations from our readings using the APA format. 

Provide your response/arguments in well-developed and elaborated paragraphs. Each argument must be supported with specific examples/citations from our readings using the APA format.

Discussion
Filter by:
Sort by:

Most Recent Activity
Discussion Prompt 2 - Claire Austin
Contains unread posts
Claire Austin posted Jan 31, 2025 10:50 PM
Claire Austin

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

Modern power and wealth can be easily compared to modern political thought in Aristotle's Politics concepts in chapters I and II. Specifically these concepts can be applied to modern government ideas such as social democracy, as well as some variations of capitalism. 

Capitalism is a form of government in which there is private ownership of production, and overall more government control than in government systems such as democracies (Thomas, 2025). In chapter I Aristotle states that “those who think that the principles of a political, a regal, a family, and a herile government are the same are mistaken,” later followed by “it is necessary to separate the different parts of which it is compounded” referring to a single person versus a government system (Aristotle, 2009). By doing this he was able to portray his stance on the separation between personal, family values, and a private government, or in modern day, capitalism. 

Democracy however, is a form of government in which the government is ruled by the people. (French Revolution | History, Summary, Timeline, Causes, & Facts, 2024). In chapter II Aristotle makes mention of the need for a city to proceed as a family, rather than an individual (Aristotle, 2009). This piece can be interpreted as a comparison of the dynamics of a family to a modern democracy. Modern democracy is controlled by the people voting in who they want to represent them, and creating a hierarchy based on those votes which can directly be related to the traditional family hierarchy of father, mother, then children. He then concludes this comparison by saying that “he is to a city as other parts are to a whole”, which again references the unity in families as well as modern day democracies. 

In conclusion, in chapters I and II, Aristotle makes references that can easily be compared to modern day political power and common systems we see used around the world. 

References

French Revolution | History, Summary, Timeline, Causes, & Facts. (2024, December 25). Britannica. Retrieved January 31, 2025, from https://www.britannica.com/event/French-Revolution/Counterrevolution-regicide-and-the-Reign-of-Terror

Thomas, N. (2025, January 17). Capitalism | Definition, Characteristics, History, & Criticism. Britannica. Retrieved January 31, 2025, from https://www.britannica.com/money/capitalism

Aristotle (1995). Politics (E. Barker, Trans). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 350 BCE) 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2- Definition of power
Contains unread posts
Ansley Armstrong posted Jan 31, 2025 10:33 PM
Ansley Armstrong

Aristotle's idea of power and wealth in Books 1 and 2 can still influence how we feel about government and money in today's society. He says that "the best polity is one in which the middle class is large, for the middle class is least likely to subvert the state" (Aristotle 1992, p. 40). He argues that a stable government depends on a strong middle class. This prevents inequality by reducing the risk of power being completely held by the wealthy or the poor. When a society following these principles exists, it allows for individuals to be free to succeed or fail based on their own efforts and not by relying on government assistance. Aristotle's idea of a large middle class promotes stability in an economy where hard work and entrepreneurship allows for individuals to build their wealth and improve their lives without being dependent on the government assistance. 

Aristotle also expresses that when a handful of people contain too much wealthy, it is bad for society. His solution is not for the government to take the money from the rich and give it to the poor. He says, "The people in the best constitution are those who are neither very rich nor very poor, but in the middle" (Aristotle 1992, p.45). Using this idea, it allows for individuals to fail or succeed based on their own actions rather than the government to intervene with wealth redistribution. The focus should be to create opportunities for individuals to succeed through an economy where their hard work leads to a growth for society as a whole. Ensuring that individuals earn their own wealth, prevents class divisions. As Aristotle suggests, a strong middle class is the key to preserving political stability and prevent the rise of political power. 

References 

Aristotle. (1992). Politics (B. Jowett, Trans.). Dover Publications. (Original work published ca. 350 BCE).

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Nick Tipton Discussion Post 2
Contains unread posts
Nick Tipton posted Jan 31, 2025 10:26 PM
Aristotle’s discussions on power and wealth in Politics books 1 and 2 have a lasting impact on modern politics. Particularly in the development of governments that balance power among several groups. Aristotle argues that a stable political system must have a balance of economic power to prevent the rich having dominance over the poor or vice versa. This can be seen especially in political systems that emphasize mixed government as well as institutional checks and balances to ensure one branch does not have too much power, such as seen in the US. Another modern example of Aristotle’s discussions on power are seen in discussions about free markets, and the interest of the consumer. Aristotle criticizes the accumulation of wealth just for wealth and promotes the idea that wealth should serve the common good. This argument is everywhere today with discussions about wealth redistribution, to taxes for the upper class. Regardless on personal thoughts on this, countries like Germany and Sweden implement this his principles by regulating markets and providing welfare programs to maintain economic stability.

Aristotle. (1995). Politics (E. Barker, Trans.). Oxford University Press. 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2 - Definition of Power - Reeya Parikh
Contains unread posts
Reeya Parikh posted Jan 31, 2025 10:14 PM
Reeya Parikh

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

Aristotle was an ancient Greek philosopher in the 300 BCE century whose ideas are still prevalent today. Aristotle’s discussions of power and wealth in Politics Books 1 and 2 have influenced modern political thought and existing government structures. Throughout these books, he focused on the different levels of power in the individual, household, village, city, and regime levels of society. At the end of the book, he stated the importance of observing the “virtue of the part in relation to the virtue of the whole” (Aristotle, 350/1997, p. 33). Modern government has levels in the city and regime to ensure political and economic stability, as the government cannot exist within chaos in the actions and virtues of its people. A properly functioning government is extremely important “for the whole is necessarily prior to the part” (Aristotle, 350/1997, p. 11). If the government is making decisions that the individuals that make the societal levels (discussed above), there will be unrest and change will be necessary. The ideas and opinions of right and wrong of the people change per group, as Aristotle describes “justice is something political, for right is the arrangement of a political community, and right is discrimination of what is just” (Aristotle, 350/1997, p. 12) Currently, most countries in the world have a democratic government in which they elect those in political power to keep their idea of ‘right’. Aristotle was for the idea of democracy as everyone would have a voice to create a better government and be more likely to agree and stay content, but he warned that it is “Dangerous to elect from those already elected (Aristotle, 350/1997, p. 49). If people are allowed unlimited terms in a government, they have tremendous influence and can cause irreparable damage. This is implemented in many countries worldwide as they have enacted term limits for all possible political powers in the government for this reason. Aristotle also recommended including a mix of aspects of different governments, like “democracy and a tyranny”. This government outlined by Aristotle’s ideas is implemented in modern governments around the globe to help create the ideal government that will keep its people happy and its rule fair.

Another area where Aristotle’s ideas are reflected is the debate over government intervention in the economy. Aristotle believed in private property over shared property, which is the backbone of a capitalist society, which is accredited to Karl Marx (who existed over 2000 years after Aristotle). Aristotle stated, “Moreover, helping and doing favors for friends, strangers, and companions is a thing most pleasant, and it requires private property” (Aristotle, 350/1997, p. 42). This means an individual will feel happier to help others with their private property as it will make it more impactful in their mind. When helping another individual directly, they can observe the direct positive effects, which is harder to observe in the community as a whole with shared property. Aristotle also discussed that “when the care of them is apportioned out, it will not be a cause of complaints but rather will need to greater improvements, as each applies himself to his own” (Aristotle, 350/1997, p. 41). Individuals are also more likely to help solve issues faster if it is their private property because it requires their direct attention, and they cannot continuously complain until someone else, like the government, fixes it for them. Aristotle goes into the details of owning private property, as one can amass a large amount of wealth and belongings and result in them having tremendous influence on the society. He warns of oligarchies ruling the regime as the high class will have complete control of the regime due to their popularity amongst each other (the educated sector of society who are eligible to vote) and their ability to remain in control. He recommended the government (not an oligarchy) have a hand in the economy to ensure prosperity and stability.

Even though Aristotle roamed the Earth over 2,000 years ago, his ideas remain prevalent today. Just in Books 1 and 2 of Politics, his philosophical ideas helped influence the creation of a capitalist society as well as the democratic structures in over half of the countries on Earth, like the United States. 

References:

Aristotle, & Simpson, P. (1997). Politics of Aristotle. University of North Carolina Press. (Original work published 350 BCE).

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2
Contains unread posts
Avery Worobel posted Jan 31, 2025 10:09 PM
Avery Worobel

Professor Czader

SCLA 101 

January 31, 2025

      Throughout books 1 and 2, Aristotle has provided his argument on how he believes wealth and power should be placed within our society. When it relates to a properly functioning society, Aristotle believes that both wealth and power each have their own, specifically important roles. There should be a fine line separating the equal distribution of the two, amongst society. To relay one type of modern political concept that has clear traces of Aristotle’s beliefs, let’s go over the importance of political stability. Political stability is this concept in which all parties of our society prove to be equal in regards to wealth and power. Within this concept, there should be no one specific party that is superior to, or excessively wealthier than the other. This is because Aristotle believes that if there is no political stability, our society will then become unstable to the point where the saying “rich become richer, and poor become poorer” becomes a reality. “The wickedness of human beings is insatiable: at first two obols were a sufficient allowance, but now that this has become the tradition men are always wanting something more, and are never contented until they get to infinity” (Aristotle, 2009, 60) This statement perfectly portrays Aristotle’s thoughts on what happens to humans when there are no guidelines that provide stability within our society. Even in today’s day in age, this problem still proves to be a prevalent issue. For example, in some democracies across the world, they aim to reinforce policies that reduce wealth inequality, for the exact same reason that Aristotle highlights.

      Now to add onto the list of modern political systems that have a clear trace of Aristotle’s touch, let’s introduce the political theory of libertarianism. Libertarianism is this concept that targets the importance of individualism, especially when it comes to personal rights regarding the government. It is the belief in which the government should distribute wealth throughout the economy based on personal effort. As previously stated, we know that Aristotle prefers the idea of wealth being distributed equally amongst our society directly from the government, regardless of exterior factors. Now you may be thinking, how could Libertarianism possibly have traces of Aristotle’s ideas when it seems to portray the polar opposite of what he stands for? Well, there is actually one massive parallel that you can draw between the two beliefs, and it is that both parties' end goal is to avoid the dangers of too much economic power being controlled by such a small group of people. “People pay most attention to what is their own: they are less for what is common; or, at any rate, they care for it only to the extent to which each is individually concerned” (Aristotle, 2009, 42). This idea of Aristotle’s is shown in the modern political system of libertarianism because it puts emphasis on how the general population is more likely to pick what is best for themselves rather than what’s best for the greater good. This proves to be problematic because when you pick a small pool of people out of our massive population, to essentially be our government and provide rules and guidelines for the rest of us (our society), the odds of randomly picking the most selfless people who would 100% always choose the path best for the greater good, instead of the path that best caters to their own personal wants and needs, is an extremely low percentage. This is exactly why Aristotle's beliefs line up perfectly with the modern political concepts of both Libertarianism and Political Stability.

References:

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2
Contains unread posts
Alyssa Chow posted Jan 31, 2025 10:06 PM
Alyssa Chow

SCLA 101

Professor Czader

January 31, 2025

In the first and second books of Politics by Aristotle (1995), he discussed how to best structure a government so that society can function most effectively and enjoyably. Aristotle’s  ideas about private property and limiting the power of rulers influenced both modern-day capitalism and the checks and balances in the United States government. 

First, Aristotle (1995) begins book one by expressing the idea that the leader of a state should not rule as a monarch with complete authority. He says that a good state leader “expresses his authority in conformity with the rules imposed by the art of statesmanship and is one who rules and is ruled in return” (Aristotle, 1995, p. 8). By this, Aristotle means that state leaders should not rule over subjects, but rather comply with the rules set in place by the people. In addition, there should be a system of checks and balances to ensure the ruler does not have too much power. This power may be economic in the form of money, property, or materials, or it could be political in the form of creating legislature or appointing rulers. The government of the United States was created upon this same basic premise: the three-branch system allows for the people to have a say in the government and prevents one branch from having too much power. For example, the House of Representatives has the power to impeach the president. Reversely, the president has the power to veto laws that the legislative branch passes. The United States government, following Aristotle’s ideals, is checked politically by the three branches and the power of the people to vote. The government is also checked economically because due to the market structure in America, the government is not the only entity holding large sums of money; the United States runs on a capitalistic system - another modern-day political ideal that was influenced by Aristotle.

Aristotle’s commentary on property distribution impacted the formation of modern day capitalism. He said the ownership of property “should, in general, be private” (Aristotle, 1995, p. 47) because people “will make more effort, because each man will feel that he is applying himself to what is his own” (Aristotle, 1995, p. 47). In a society revolving around private property, people will take more pride in both acquiring property and tending to it. People are more likely to care about assets that they own rather than those belonging to the state or another entity because in order to acquire it, they have to work for it. It is upon this thought that modern capitalism was founded. While capitalism includes the right to own property, it does not focus solely on the private ownership of land and reflects similar ideals to Aristotle’s. Capitalists believe that the people should own the means of production, thus giving them economic and political power. By owning the means of production - including the ability to own land - private companies can create economic opportunities for themselves. Capitalism, as practiced by many western countries such as the United States of America, allows individuals to use production to increase their wealth and status in society, whether they are creating a company or working up the ranks. Private ownership gives individual company owners the right to make decisions and influence the economy by exercising their right to make choices regarding the prices of products, what to sell, who to sell them to, and the amount to produce. People in capitalistic societies are incentivized to take pride and put effort into their businesses because their quality of life is at stake. In this way, a capitalistic design of society hands the economic and political power to the people. Aristotle’s ideas about private property are reflected in capitalism because ownership of land - much like ownership of capital - provides citizens with power. Land is another form of wealth, and during Aristotle’s time, it was even more so; pre-revolution ages meant that having self sufficiency by harvesting food from land was key to survival. The ability to gain economic power in the form of wealth increases the political power of individuals, which Aristotle’s right to private property and capitalism both permit. In conclusion, Aristotle’s view on private property has influenced modern-day capitalism as they revolve around the notion that private ownership provides people with political and economic power; when the government is not the only entity with large sums of wealth, they are less able to control the people in society - yet another way that the government’s power is checked by that of the people. 

In conclusion, Aristotle’s ideas on private ownership of property and implementing checks to restrict the power of a ruler have influenced modern-day capitalism and the three-branch structure of government in America.

References

Aristotle. (1995). Politics. (E. Barker, Trans.). Oxford World’s Classics. 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2 - Tristan Bedwell
Contains unread posts
Tristan Bedwell posted Jan 31, 2025 10:05 PM
Discussion Prompt 2 – Discussion of Power

Tristan Bedwell

SCLA 101

Professor Czader

January 31, 2025

 

            In Books One and Two of Politics, Aristotle (1998) provides the basis of how societies should be run through his descriptions of household structures and the constitutions that which societies are ruled under. Through these thoughts, Aristotle presents thoughts of power and wealth in different ways, which can be seen in modern-day politics such as capitalism and power sharing.

            In Book One, Aristotle describes how “people seek a different conception of wealth” (p. 27) which is usually much different than the natural definition of wealth. He describes this as the “art of acquisition,” where people seek to make and acquire goods from other households. In modern society, this is the foundation of capitalism, where private sellers give their goods to others in exchange for wealth. This explanation provides not only early thoughts on capitalism but also shows how past societies used these ideas to give themselves economic stability to each other. Despite spreading the wealth though, wealth will still be unevenly spread between households, which leads to there being a division of power related to wealth. This is a modern problem that faces capitalism, where wealth is unable to be distributed throughout society which leads to power being unevenly shared and with people with this overabundance of wealth having a majority of influence on society.

            In Book Two, Aristotle shifts his views from the structure of capitalism to the structure of other political systems. He describes how instead of running a society under one political style, there is merit to running a society as an “intermediate form” that is referred to as a “constitutional government” (p. 55). Along with this, Aristotle describes that “each job is done best by one man” and that “the practice of ruling and being ruled extends to everyone concerned” (p. 79). These ideas both pertain to the thought of power sharing in politics, where jobs within a government are divided among different people of different power levels to make the government flow more smoothly as a whole. This is a more general modern-day political thought, as many forms of governments, including oligarchies, monarchies, and republics, all use power sharing in their governments. As implied in the name, power-sharing shows how in society, power is shared among individuals to maintain overall control over its people and to prevent power from getting into the wrong hands or from power to decrease over time.

Resources

Aristotle, Barker, E., & Stalley, R. F. (1998). Politics. Oxford University Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2 - Definition of power
Contains unread posts
Jenna Ting posted Jan 31, 2025 10:04 PM
Jenna Ting

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

              In Books 1 and 2 of Politics, Aristotle discusses the relationship between power and wealth. Many of his ideas, specifically regarding economic stability and political power, have left a lasting impact on modern political thought.

              Aristotle argues that in societies, many people equate wealth with power, causing individuals to endlessly pursue more. He states, “There is no limit to the end it seeks; and the end it seeks is wealth” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 27). The goal of every person, then, is to become wealthy and powerful, driving them to accumulate as much wealth as possible, with no end in sight. This pursuit can disrupt the balance in society by creating vast divides between the rich and the poor. For example, Aristotle mentions how the accumulation of land by a few families can lead to factional disputes and conflict. Aristotle’s ideas remain very relevant today, as individuals and corporations continually seek more money, power, and influence. For example, large corporations often use their financial power to sway political decisions in their favor, resulting in corruption and inequality. To try to limit this, governments have implemented various regulations, like anti-monopoly laws, to limit the power of large corporations. This helps to restore balance by limiting the effects of unchecked wealth.

              Aristotle also discusses a more inclusive government. He states, “Justice requires the participation of all in office” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 40). During this time, many governments were dominated by a few wealthy families who often focused on only benefiting themselves, neglecting the common good. This leads to inequality and injustice within society. Therefore, Aristotle calls for a more balanced distribution of power, where citizens from various social classes, whether wealthy or poor, can have a role in government. He believes this will benefit all citizens, not just the wealthy. This idea is demonstrated in modern democratic systems, where the government is meant to serve the people, not just a select few. In the United States, for example, political power is spread across many people, with checks and balances in place to ensure that no one person or group can hold too much influence.

              These ideas discussed in Aristotle’s Politics regarding power and wealth continue to greatly influence modern political thought. His warnings about the dangers of concentrated wealth and a government rule by the elite have led to various reforms aimed at creating a more stable and equal society. As a result, Aristotle’s ideas, just like many others, continue to shape economic stability and political power in the modern world.

 

References:

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995).

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion 2 - Brindha Chandran
Contains unread posts
Brindha Chandran posted Jan 31, 2025 9:43 PM
Brindha Chandran

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

Aristotle’s view of collective ownership relates to the modern political idea of nationalism. In his discussion about how constitutions organize the ownership of property, Aristotle remarks that, “to think of a thing as your own makes an inexpressible difference, so far as pleasure is concerned” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 47). Collective ownership of property does not allow people to form strong emotional connections to those they have power over, so the people in power do not truly take care of their property. Aristotle writes, “who will see to the house, when the farmers have property as well as women in common?” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 51). While collective ownership would force many people to take care of others’ property, individual ownership of property forces owners to prioritize the care of their own property over that of others. This also promotes economic stability, since people will only have to focus on their own property. Aristotle’s connection between privately owning property and ensuring that the property is properly taken care of relates to nationalism. Nationalism is a political ideology where the citizens of a nation feel a strong connection to the wellbeing of their own country, thus ensuring that their nation prospers over others. Just as Aristotle writes that private ownership leads people to prioritizing the care of their own property, nationalist individuals feel a strong connection to their country, prioritizing their nation over all others. They also believe that this will lead to long-term economic stability because they will not be as affected by or dependent on other nations. While Aristotle’s ideas in Politics can be seen in the political ideology of nationalism, his work more directly references the political system of a republic.

Republics also draw from Aristotle’s ideas on how to appoint people of power. A republic is a political system where the people give political power to representatives chosen from the citizens, typically through public elections. In Aristotle’s discussion of Sparta’s constitution, he mentions that “the people at large are contented because they have a share in the most important office; and this result, whether it be due to the legislator or to chance, has a beneficial effect on their affairs” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 70). The citizens of a nation tend to be more satisfied with their living conditions when they are able to choose who will rule over them, since the citizens have some power in their leadership. Because the elected officials also want to please the people to maintain their positions, they tend to approve of policies that the majority of the people agree with. The policies that the people want enacted would improve their well-being, thus also improving the economic stability of the nation. Aristotle’s approval of a system in which the citizens elect their ruler can be seen today in the republic system of government, where people vote other capable citizens into positions of power. 


Aristotle (2009). Politics. (E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (1995)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Post 2
Contains unread posts
Vincent Bottoms posted Jan 31, 2025 9:40 PM
Vincent Bottoms

SCLA 101

Professor Czader

January 31, 2025

Aristotle discusses power and wealth many times in books one and two and constantly ties them together. He explains that the balance of wealth between the wealthy and the poor creates a self-sustaining power caste system. The wealth system also depends on the middle class which makes the economy successful due to its prevention of inequality.

Aristotle is right because the idea is still relevant today because wealth continues to influence power. In the U.S., a strong middle class has very much contributed to economic success. Aristotle criticizes the pursuit of excessive wealth in society because it makes society unstable. Aristotle’s ideas about the middle class and economic balance continue to stay important in modern discussions about wealth and power. 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Discussion 2
Contains unread posts
Deven Comstock posted Jan 31, 2025 9:40 PM
Deven Comstock

Professor Czader

SCLA101

January 31, 2025




Aristotle was a great philosopher who gave the world many ideas. Even though his work is from long ago and considered ancient, his teachings laid the foundation for our society today. In fact, you can still spot some of his ideas at work in our government. In his writings, Aristotle argues that “man is by nature a political animal” (Aristotle, 2009, 10). This states that humans need a form of state to function to thrive. The only way to live is with order, as that is the way nature intended for it to be. He goes on to explain that a household is the basic unit of a society. It is the first step as households form together to create a village, and villages combine to form a city or polis, the highest form of community, as Aristotle would put it. He states that “The relation of ruler and ruled is one of the those things which are not only necessary, but also beneficial.” (Aristotle, 2009, 15). He says that humans must come together to function, as there needs to be people to have power and people who serve those in power. For it is the only way to have a high-functioning society. Those who try to be independent are considered barbarians because they don't live their life the way nature intended. A city exists for the benefit of all its citizens. These thoughts can be seen in America’s democratic system. We have a Constitution that organizes our society into systems where there is a clear chain of power. There are governments at each level of state, each of them having power over another the way Aristotle intended. 

Aristotle was also a strong believer in the right to personal property. He said true wealth was in the amount of property a man had, not currency. Furthermore, he argues that private ownership helps breed a functional society. “For that which is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it. Everyone thinks chiefly of his own, hardly at all of the common interest.” (Aristotle, 1920, p. 57) This quote demonstrates Aristotle’s belief that private property incentivizes people to manage their resources more effectively. This belief is shared with liberal ideals that man has the right to their own property. By having the right to your own property rather than a shared resource, you would allocate those resources in a manner that greatly benefits you as you would reap all the rewards. This idea increases economic prosperity as each citizen participates in the free market. This is a key factor in a well-functioning society.




Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2
Contains unread posts
Violet Mantooth posted Jan 31, 2025 9:38 PM
Violet Mantooth

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

 

In his novel Politics, Aristotle (1995) discusses power as something that one has or is controlled by. This is used in reference to master and slave, husband and wife, parent and child, and people in a society. In these situations, different people have different types of power that give them different types of influence, and many of these situations can be influenced by the economic state of the people who are and are not in power.

 

One example of this that Aristotle (1995) brings up is the idea that while community property is not a good choice, as it will lead to social issues and disagreements about who gets what, sharing resources like knowledge and welfare are important to create a better society. He says that “kindness and help become possible only when property is privately owned” (Aristotle, 1995, p.47-8). In this idea, he is saying that people should use the things that they have power over to not only help themselves, but also help others, so that everyone reaches a better state of life and has more power over themselves, but this can only be possible if they do it out of their own free will. This idea is seen in the idea of certain socialist ideologies seen today. Similar to his ideas, socialism aims to create welfare by pooling collective resources without getting rid of private property outright. This can often be achieved with higher taxes that citizens vote for or people giving to charity though money or volunteering their time. Through this, those who have wealth are given the power to choose if they want to help those who have less and choose how they want to help them, rather than working more for an aimless means.

 

Another instance of Aristotle’s ideology in modern day is the idea of people who have accumulation of currency and having one person having too much of the wealth and therefore the societal power. However, Aristotle (1995) argues that those who are abundantly wealthy will “none the less die of starvation” because this power and wealth doesn’t inherently make their life better, and in turn can bring then burdens just like in the fable of King Midas (Aristotle, 1995, p. 27). In the modern day, the people who hold the most amount of wealth hold significantly more than anyone else in the United States and those people have the ability to influence things like business markets, laws, and people’s perceptions of culture. Despite this, there tends to be a pattern of those who are rich, buying more things to try and purchase happiness without being able to achieve such.  

 

Reference:

Aristotle (1995). Politics (E. Barker, Trans). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 350 BCE)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Stefan Lee — Discussion 2
Contains unread posts
Stefan Lee posted Jan 31, 2025 9:37 PMLast edited: Friday, January 31, 2025 9:38 PM EST
Stefan Lee 

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

 January 31st,  2025

Aristotle’s discussions of power and wealth have significantly influenced modern political thought, particularly in social democratic and liberal systems. In Book 1, Aristotle states that “man is by nature a political animal” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 4), suggesting that humans, for the sake of their well-being and fulfillment, are naturally inclined to participate in political life. For Aristotle, political life is essential for individuals to achieve their full potential as well as for the functioning of the state. This idea of human beings as “political animals” ties perfectly with his view on wealth, where he argues that wealth, when controlled by a few hands, can destabilize political order even if wealth is necessary for the state to function. Aristotle mentions that “it was necessary to make an exchange in order to obtain what they required” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 15), pointing out that only with the interdependence of individuals can there be a functioning political system. This idea connects to modern liberal democracies, where laws and policies like progressive taxation are used to prevent the concentration of wealth. However, even with these laws and policies, inequality continues to grow. This can be seen in the article from The Conversation, which highlights how the top 5 states have a “median household net worth of nearly $1.7 million. That’s almost 90 times wealthier than the poorest five places” (Kemeny, 2025). This reflects Aristotle's argument that when wealth is controlled by a few, it can destabilize political order.

In Book 2, Aristotle continues his argument by explaining how manipulating existing laws can deeply erode the foundation of justice. He states that “the easy alteration of existing laws in favor of new and different ones weakens the power of law itself” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 45), suggesting that changing laws to serve specific interests can actually do more harm than good. This idea connects directly to today’s society, where money has significant influence in politics, leading to policies that benefit the wealthy at the expense of the broader public. Aristotle also adds that people might “desire merely the enjoyment that comes with pleasures unaccompanied by pains” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 40), suggesting that humans are blinded by personal pleasure and forget the broader consequences. For example, Elon Musk, a highly influential figure, caused a “$14bn wipeout” in Tesla’s value after tweeting something for his own amusement (Hotten, 2020). This tweet caused significant losses for retail investors, highlighting how individual actions, driven by personal pleasure, can have far-reaching negative consequences for the broader economy. Ultimately, Aristotle’s ideas about the relationship between power, political stability, and wealth continue to resonate today, serving as a guide for what we should and should not do.

Work Cited 

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995)

Hotten, R. (2020, May 1). Elon Musk tweet wipes $14bn off Tesla’s value. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-52504187

Tom Kemeny  Associate Professor. (2025, January 16). Soaring wealth inequality has remade the map of American prosperity. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/soaring-wealth-inequality-has-remade-the-map-of-american-prosperity-228377

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion 2. Nikolai Baranov
Contains unread posts
Nikolai Baranov posted Jan 31, 2025 9:37 PM
Discussion Prompt 2

Nikolai Baranov

Professor Czader 

SCLA 101 

January 31, 2025 

When defining power in the context of interpersonal relationships and society as a whole, Aristotle’s work “The Politics” comes to mind. The book opens with an explanation that the state (polis) is the next step, followed by the village and the household and tied by the common human strive for better living. Aristotle (1916, p. 28) states, “When several villages are united in a single community, perfect and large enough to be nearly or quite self-sufficing, the state comes into existence, originating in the bare needs of life, and continuing in existence for the sake of a good life.” He argues that the purpose of the state goes beyond the will to live together but rather to live well to achieve the “good life.” Aristotle presents the management of the household as the building block of a stable community, linking economic stability with the condition for political well‐being. At the same time, he emphasizes that no human or lesser structure can exist without the state, as he makes a notion that the state predates its participants, who are directly dependent on it. The author explains, “Thus the state is by nature clearly prior to the family. and to the individual, since the whole is of necessity prior to the part; … The proof that the state is a creation of nature and prior to the individual is that the individual, when isolated, is not selfsufficing ; and therefore he is like a part in relation to the whole. But 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: he is no part of a state. A social instinct is implanted in all men by nature, and yet he who first founded the state was the greatest of benefactors.” (Aristotle, 1916, p. 29) As such, Aristotle draws a direct relationship—akin to a symbiotic one—that ties the needs of individuals and the common human drive toward a better future under the beneficial nature of the state. In response, the economic stability of such lesser structures as family and household directly dictates the political power of the state, completing the imaginary loop. Modern liberal democracies emphasize a need for a strong social safety net and an empowered middle class. They portray this idea by saying that the economic stability of their inhabitants is essential for maintaining a successful polity, which in turn draws its political power through societal, cultural, and technological developments and engagement that cannot exist without economic stability.

Next, Aristotle discusses ideas heavily explored in the 20th century by numerous republics and countries involved with communism and socialism. In his evaluation of existing political proposals at the time—especially his critique of radical proposals for complete communal ownership—Aristotle shows that stability depends on recognizing individual self-interest and separating it from the common good. “Again, where there is equality of property, the amount may be either too large or too small, and the possessor may be living either in luxury or penury. Clearly, then, the legislator ought not only to aim at the equalization of properties, but at moderation in their amount. And yet, if he prescribe this moderate amount equally to all, he will be no nearer the mark; for it is not the possessions but the desires of mankind which require to be equalized  and this is impossible, unless a sufficient education is provided by the state.” (Aristotle, 1916, p. 73) By arguing that the incentive to care for one’s own property is important, he supports a system in which the state’s institutions must mediate between the private initiative of its inhabitants and lesser structures (i.e., families and households) and the collective responsibility of the state as a whole. He then further criticizes the idea of equal distribution by highlighting the isolation of the internal welfare with respect to external factors and entities. “There is another objection to them. They are chiefly designed to promote the internal welfare of the state. But the legislator should consider also its relation to neighboring nations, and to all who are outside of it. The government must be organized with a view to military strength; and of this he has said not a word. And so with respect to property: there should not only be enough to supply the internal wants of the state, but also to meet dangers coming from without. The property of the state should not be so large that more powerful neighbors may be tempted by it, while the owners are unable to repel the invaders ; nor yet so small that the state is unable to maintain a war even against states of equal power, and of the same character.” (Aristotle, 1916, p.75)  This early idea anticipates modern mixed constitutions where checks and balances (such as bicameralism or a separation of powers) ensure that political power is neither overly concentrated nor too diffuse. Furthermore, there is a direct implication that these checks are supposed to be dynamic to adapt to any external factors faced by the state as a whole, which is further displayed by the modern republican systems.

Reference: Aristotle. (1916). Politics (B. Jowett, Trans.). Oxford University Press. 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2 - Definition of power
Contains unread posts
Congyu Zhao posted Jan 31, 2025 9:32 PM
Congyu Zhao

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31 2025

In the first and second volumes of Politics, Aristotle made a profound analysis of the relationship between power and wealth, arguing that economic inequality would undermine social stability and have a profound impact on political power. When discussing the relationship between slaves and rulers, Aristotle mentioned that "the relation between ruler and ruled is one of those things which are not only necessary, but also beneficial" (Aristotle, 2009, p. 15). He believed that social stability requires a group of people with common interests and goals who can govern on the basis of fairness and morality. For modern society, Aristotle's theory reflects the potential risks of economic and political imbalance.

Aristotle emphasized that wealth and power should maintain a certain balance, and a large gap between the rich and the poor can easily lead to social instability. He believed that "the rich are born tyrants, and the poor are born tyrants and become rebels" (Aristotle, 2009, pp. 17–19). This view coincides with modern political thought, especially political thought in Marxist theory. Marxism criticizes the social contradictions and class conflicts caused by wealth inequality in the system, and believes that wealth concentration will lead to the corruption of political power and ultimately threaten social stability.

In Marxist theory, Marx pointed out that capitalism, through the exploitation of labor and the concentration of wealth, has created a huge gap between the ruling class and the oppressed class. This inequality is not only economic, but also involves political oppression. Therefore, Marx advocated overthrowing the capitalist system through class struggle and establishing a classless communist society.

In Aristotle's theory, he did not directly abolish property, but warned that extreme wealth inequality would lead to social disharmony. His mixed government theory combines elements of democracy and aristocracy, emphasizing the importance of the middle class in maintaining social stability and political balance. He believes that the middle class is neither easily oppressed by extreme poverty nor easily corrupted by excessive wealth, so they are ideal rulers.

From the perspective of modern political practice, Aristotle's theory on the relationship between wealth and politics is still of practical significance. Issues such as income inequality and corporate influence are still of great significance in today's political theory and social discussions. In the process of seeking social and political stability, countries are still exploring how to balance wealth distribution and political power to prevent extreme wealth disparity from leading to social unrest.

References: Aristotle. (2009). Politics (E. Barker, Trans.; R. F. Stalley, Ed.). Oxford University Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2 - Jack Hulbert
Contains unread posts
Jack Hulbert posted Jan 31, 2025 9:19 PM
Jack Hulbert

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

One of Aristotle’s views on politics that is still seen in many governments is how leaders are chosen.  In ancient Greece the constitutions of Carthage and Sparta were often held in high regard by many people.  Aristotle believed that Carthage was better, especially in how the office of the one hundred and four were chosen in comparison to Sparta’s Ephors.  “The office of the ‘Hundred and Four’ is similar to the Ephoralty, but better in so far as the elections to the office are made on merit, while the Ephoralty is recruited haphazardly” (Aristotle, ca. 350 B.C.E./1995, p. 77).  Aristotle in general believes that for a government system to be good it needs to choose its leaders based on merit.  He believes that choosing based on merit ensures the ability of those elected to lead to do so just and fairly.  This view is still held in many government constitutions to this day.  In most systems of government if a person wants to run for a government position they must meet certain minimum requirements, like how one requirement for the president of the United States is they must be at least 35 years old.  The point of these requirements is to ensure that individuals running have a minimum ability to govern and are less likely to destroy the government through inability.

Aristotle holds a second belief about governing to ensure the stability of a government.  In a system of government Aristotle believes it to be best for decisions to be made “on the basis of written rules in legal form” ( ca. 350 B.C.E./1995, p. 71).  It is his belief that by making decisions based on laws a government will avoid corruption, especially in matters of legal disputes.  A similar belief is held today in modern countries that use jury trials.  While they use juries so that there is a human element to the decision, juries are instructed on the laws applicable to the case to base their judgement on.  This helps to ensure in important cases that the basis of a jury's decision is in the law and not solely on their feelings.  Decisions being made based on law can also be seen in how governments limit their own actions.  In general when a government wants to take an action the power they are using in that case must be granted in a law, not in its belief that it is right.  These rules ensure that a government cannot claim power and that the power it holds is given to it by the citizens.

References

Aristotle. (1995). Politics (E. Baker, Trans., R. F. Stalley, Ed.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published ca. 350)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2
Contains unread posts
Quinn Broadwater posted Jan 31, 2025 9:06 PM
Quinn Broadwater

Professor Czader

SCLA 101 

January 31, 2025

Discussion Prompt 2 - Definition of Power

   Aristotle's ideas about politics, specifically wealth and power have influenced modern political systems and ideologies tremendously. To begin, Aristotle conveys his ideas of a ruling power over a lesser body of citizens. He stands tall on his belief that (Aristotle, 2009, p. 15) “the relation of ruler and ruled is one of those things which are not only unnecessary, but also beneficial”. This general idea of a ruling power vs the ruled can be seen in almost every single modern governing power from democracies to monarchies to oligarchies and dictatorships. Narrowing in now, specifically focusing on democracy in the United States, even more of Aristotle's political ideas and thoughts can be observed. Currently within America, a stark divide can be seen between the democratic and republican parties, with both sides fighting for their respective ideologies and ideas to be put in place. Often one side views the other as evil or misguided, but Aristotle puts forth the idea that (Aristotle, 2009, p. 7) “all men do all their acts with a view to achieving something which is, in their view, a good.” explaining the passion of the respective parties as, in their opinion, their policies will bring the most good. 

   Broadening the lens in which we view politics once more, Aristotle's ideas can be found in another aspect of the American government, which is its capitalist political system. Aristotle throughout book 2 argues for the concept that each man's property is private to himself which is a central idea of capitalism. This would not only give man power over his own sphere of property but also lead them to (Aristotle, 2009, p. 47) “make more effort, because each man will feel that he is applying himself to what is his own.” When looking at this with the lens of commercial property this also creates greater economic conditions as each man will be making a greater effort in his work.

   Adding on, another political theory that shows traces of Aristotle's ideas is the concept of individualism within the political system. Individualism within the political system can be traced back to the idea that individuals are unique and have different natural talents, skills and interests as (Aristotle, 2009, p. 40) “not only is a city composed of a number of people: it is also composed of different kinds of people.” This lends itself to similarities with Aristotle's belief against a totally unified city in which everything is shared by everyone. Allowing individuals power over their own sphere of property and by extension their own skills and talents leads to greater power over their trade and greater productivity for the city as a whole. Greater productivity in aspects such as an individual's trade and profession directly lead to greater economic growth and stability for the individual and the society as well.


References:

 

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995).

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2
Contains unread posts
Braden Polk posted Jan 31, 2025 9:03 PM
Braden Polk

SCLA 101

Professor Czader

January 31, 2025

Aristotle often talks about power, this is evident in the book "Aristotle Politics" by Oxford University when he ties power with social class saying that "Power is often tied to wealth that is stable" and continues by saying that "the state requires balance between the wealthy and the poorer" in book 1. he makes a distinction that social class has a direct distinction to power and argues that the "middle class is actually the most important." he says this because he claims that a state with a strong middle class has high economic success.   

This can be introduced into modern society because the wealthy are known to be the powerful in our economy. His ideals also coincide with modern society by saying the middle class is important, the U.S for example have a strong middle class and are a powerhouse in the world, having a strong middle class can be vital to being called powerful in the economy.  Based on these examples Aristotle's ideas can be seen as revolutionary and can still be seen in fragments in the modern day.

References:

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995).

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Definition of Power - Andrew Holmes
Contains unread posts
Andrew Holmes posted Jan 31, 2025 8:57 PM
Andrew Holmes

Professor Czader

January 31, 2025


            Power and wealth can be seen throughout Book 1 and Book 2 of Aristotle’s Politics, through statements concerning leading with virtue and importance of using wealth for good. This creates the backbone of a successful society. His views on power and wealth also closely link to many of our world’s current political systems we see today. Aristotle’s philosophy of power, specifically in a leadership role, states in Book 1 that, “How can the ruler rule properly, or the subject be properly ruled, unless they are both temperate and just? Anyone who is licentious or cowardly will utterly fail to do his duty.” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 35) His idea emphasizes how political power should be used for the common good and for the leader to rule using knowledge and logic. If such a leader were to rule in a greedy and unprincipled way - defined by the word ‘licentious’ - then the stability of the society being ruled would be at risk to corruption. Thus, one person’s self-interest would take precedence over the well-being of the people. We can see such failures in Marxist belief systems such as Communism in the Soviet Union. Assuming the ones in power remain selfless and concerned with their country and people, a Communist ideal would be very beneficial to provide a livable lifestyle and support for everyone. However, with power comes great responsibility and when that is skewed, we see how abuse of power causes great detriment in a society, such as the one ruled by Stalin in 1929 to 1953. Aristotle expresses the economic downsides of the Marxist belief system when he writes, “...the servants with whom we are most prone to take offence are those who are particularly employed in ordinary everyday services.” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 46) He highlights the challenges of communal ownership and the conflicts that arise when people share unequally distributed resources. In comparison, the Soviet Union was plagued by tyrannical rule and unfair exploitation of the people, causing great detriment to their economic stability and ability to advance as a union. The belief of the need for a balanced government in order to achieve a successful society where rulers act with wisdom, serves as a timeless reminder - even to this day - that political power must be used responsibly to prevent corruption.

In Book 2, Aristotle informs the reader of the benefits in which a mindset of democracy can influence its economic stability. He states, “When everyone has his own separate sphere of interest, there will not be the same ground for quarrels; and they will make more effort, because each man will feel that he is applying himself to what is his own.” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 47) This statement highlights Aristotle’s belief of private ownership and its contribution to economic stability and a united society. When individuals have a personal possession in their work and property, they are more motivated to be productive and take care of their resources, hence reducing conflicts over shared goods. This idea aligns almost completely with democratic and capitalist principles, where personal investment drives one’s economic growth and efficiency as well as the society’s. Aristotle’s ideas on economic stability through private ownership remain relevant in modern political and economic systems. He noted flaws of the Marxist theory, such as communal property and the dangers of unchecked power. Democracy and capitalism, which promote private enterprises, reflect his belief that a well-structured society thrives when individuals are motivated to contribute to their own benefit as well as the common good. Aristotle’s insights prove many aspects of his political philosophy remain as relevant today as it was in ancient Greece.

References

Aristotle. (2013). Politics (C. Lord, Trans.). University of Chicago Press. (Original work published ca. 350 BCE)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Aristotle's discussion of power and wealth in books 1 and 2
Contains unread posts
Tristan Ahern posted Jan 31, 2025 8:56 PM
Tristan Ahern

Professor Czader 

SCLA 101 

January 31, 2025

            Aristotle's discussion, in books one and two, have a resounding impact on modern politics. This can be seen in modern ideals such as classical liberalism and Democratic socialism. Through his discussion of wealth and politics, we can come to the conclusion that there is a strong correlation between economic stability and political authority.

 He puts a strong emphasis on wealth disparity in book one and two. He proposes that there is danger to the polis and the goodness of the city if the difference in wealth from the poor to the affluent. Aristotle believed that for an ideal polis, the polis should have a balanced economic structure. If the disparity becomes too large it will likely lead to a tyrannical rule; however he does say that wealth disparity should exist, just not to an extreme extent. Which goes against the ideals of other renowned philosophers of the time such as plato: “ In Plato’s Republic it is proposed that women, children, and property should be held in common.” (Aristotle, 1998, p.38) Aristotle argues against this in two ways. The first being complete unity destroys ownership in general, so everyone would own both everything and nothing. The other being that too much unification will eventually destroy a polis. If a city becomes completely unified, which is what Socrates viewed as the highest good for a city, then it will cease to be a city all together, but instead regress to a household and eventually an individual. The ideals Aristotle represents here can also be seen in classical liberalism. It takes the same ideas that economic freedom and private property are a necessity for political stability. A nation that doesn’t have political stability will never have any true power. This idea was first proposed by John Locke, who was also an inspiration for the United States constitution, and through his work and own testament was very influenced by Aristotle.

Aristotle argued against large wealth disparities. He believed that an ideal polis would have a strong middle class, because if the middle class is large and strong then they would be able to represent the issues of the poor and understand the issues of the wealthy. This idea is also visible in the way Aristotle describes slavery. He says how if a being has a capacity to belong to another, then by his nature he is a slave. Aristotle also acknowledges this is not always the case, as in situations such as slaves taken by the victors of a war. Aristotle says “But nature, though she intends, does not always succeed in achieving a clear distinction between men born to be masters and men born to be slaves”. (Aristotle, 1998, p.15) This concept is essential for the prevention of oligarchy or demagoguery forming and taking control of the polis. This idea strongly corresponds with democratic socialism, which also wants economic disparity but cautions against the extreme. Democratic socialist believe in redistributing wealth but to a rational extent as seen in places such as Sweden. They do this in order to prevent power, only residing in the wealthy. Which is essentially trying to fix nature’s mistakes. Nothing is infallible, not even nature, and democratic socialist are trying to correct that oversight by redistributing that wealth.

In conclusion, Aristotle’s words from over a millenia ago still shake the foundation of this world and influence and justify many political beliefs and therefore power. Aristotle has clearly had a strong influence on classical liberalism, democratic socialism, and so many others throughout history. We could argue that Aristotle’s words hold more power than any ruler has throughout history. Aristotle’s words will continue to influence ideals for a time to come.

References: 

Aristotle. (1995). Politics, Aristotle. Oxford.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Post 2
Contains unread posts
Pete Curry posted Jan 31, 2025 8:53 PM
Discussion Prompt 2

Peter Curry

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

Aristotle's work regarding wealth and power in Politics Books 1 and 2 have continued to shape modern political ideology, for the most part regarding political governance and economic security. In Book 1, a contrast between wealth for the sake of city and household, and wealth for its sake, is drawn and condemned by him, and labelled unnatural and destructive of political peace. For him, "for the amount of household property which suffices for a good life is not infinite," (2009, p.23). This principle is easy to see even in society today, with a number of governments striving to restrict wealth aggregation in an endeavour to escape economic uncertainty, and therefore political disorder. Over-concentration of wealth can destroy a healthy society in the same way limitless pursuit of money can undermine civic life. Most modern political regimes have taken note of this fact through imposing taxes and regulating economies in a manner in which wealth works for society in general and not for a group of persons in an elite position.

Aristotle, in Book 2, condemns wealth controlling political power, and advises caution with regard to oligarchies. In his view, "the greatest crimes are committed not for the sake of necessities, but for the sake of superfluities" (Politics, p.59), with a strong emphasis that extreme wealth inequality generates corrupt and unstable governments. For Aristotle, wealth inequality forms a root peril for an equitable political configuration, a concern shared with present times with regard to financial elites' role in politics and in shaping policies. Most democracies in modern times attempt to counteract this with political contribution legislation, lobbying legislation, and wealth-redistributive policies. Aristotle's criticism of excessive wealth aggregation continues to resonate in present times with regard to debating financial fairness and financial elites' role in shaping policies.

References:

Aristotle. 2009. Politics.  (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. Original work published 1995.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion 2 - Power - Gabriel Sivertson
Contains unread posts
Gabe Sivertson posted Jan 31, 2025 8:26 PM
Gabriel Sivertson 

Professor Czader 

SCLA 101 

January 31st 2025 

        In Aristotle’s Politics, Aristotle speaks on many kinds of power, from the power of currency and the art of aquisition, to the power of the parent over the child. However, the most interesting form of power to me was the power of the soul on the body. In the section I am referencing, Aristotle claims that “we must consider the man who is in the best statement both of body and soul, and in whom the rule of soul over body is accordingly evident; for with vicious people or those in a vicious condition... the body ruling the soul as the result of their evil and unnatural condition” (Aristotle, 1998, p.16) This statement is indirectly used by many politicians who aim to hide their own failings. In the segment this quote is pulled from, Aristotle speaks on viciousness as the evil and natural way of being while, directly before this stating “We must fix our attention, not on those which are in a corrupt, but on those who are in a natural condition.” (Aristotle, 1998, p.16) This statement implies that real evil is not corruption, but viciousness and the natural ruling of the soul. This relates to modern politics as almost every modern politician does this same thing. It is a well-known fact that many politicians, no matter what party, affiliation, or government, are corrupt. 

        There are many well documented cases of politicians taking bribes and making decisions in their own interest rather than the interest of the people. This has become so ingrained that a lot of the time it is seen as a normal thing to engage in this scummy behavior. The similarity arises when these same politicians make claims of the viciousness of others. Of how a group of people is animalistic and dangerous. It has been done to the Muslims, jews, African Americans, Native Americans, and the list goes on and on. This premise of viciousness being seen as worse than corruption, while in some cases it may be true, is dangerous to a society, as it distracts from a major problem within the government. While, for example, Al Qaeda is bad and dangerous and vicious, that doesn't mean we should ignore blatant corruption within our government. The claim made by Aristotle is regularly used to distract from a real problem by creating another. 

References: 

Aristotle. (1995). Politics, Aristotle. Oxford. 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
2 Views
2
Views
Discussion Prompt 2 - Definition of power
Contains unread posts
Abby Garza posted Jan 31, 2025 8:23 PM
Abigail Garza

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31st, 2025

            Aristotle’s Politics has had a lasting impact on modern political thought. He articulated the idea that economic stability is achieved within a domestic and civil economy, which can be expressed as a welfare state in modern times. He followed the belief that wealth should have a purpose to enhance the well-being of individuals and a community. He also believed that economic practices must serve the common good. Within a community, “riches are a number of instruments in domestic and civil economy; it is therefore evident that the acquisition of certain things according to nature is a part both of domestic and civil economy” (Aristotle, 1895, p. 10). Aristotle conveys that wealth has many purposes in a domestic and civil economy where the acquisition of wealth can be used to serve one’s needs in various ways to live a fulfilling and virtuous life. When one is not greedy with their abundance of wealth and uses it for ethical purposes, economic stability can be achieved as there is a balance between the economic needs of families and their communities. This idea of wealth being used to achieve a good life refers to Aristotle’s philosophy that “every society is established for some good purpose” (Aristotle, 1895, p. 1), and to achieve that good purpose, a society must use their wealth effectively for the greater purpose of its community. This philosophy is still in play today as modern political systems emphasize the importance of policies and laws that promote public good. Most modern governments try to balance wealth to its citizens to keep a vital and thriving economy and community.

            Another modern political system that shows traces to Aristotle’s Politics, is social democracy. Aristotle’s idea that wealth should be used to improve one’s life, the community, and serve the common good associates closely with social democratic principles.  In Politics, Aristotle (1895) conveys the idea that the purpose of a city is to sustain and provide a good life for its citizens so they may “live happily” (p.3). He expresses social democratic ideals to promote balance between the government and its citizens, as well as the wealthy and poor to support a sustainable economy and connected society. When Aristotle refers to Solon and his idea that it is “most necessary to entrust the people with the choice of their magistrates and the power of calling them to account; for without that they must have been slaves and enemies to the other citizens” (Aristotle, 1895, p. 45), it reveals his regard for government accountability, a principle of modern social democracy. Aristotle idealized a mixed constitution which incorporates political and social elements of both democracy and an aristocracy. The idea of balancing economic freedom with state intervention to create equality is something both social democracy and Aristotle express concern about. Modernly, social democracy seeks to foster individual freedom and collective well-being, as Aristotle believed with his mixed constitution. Ultimately, Aristotle’s ideas on the relationship between wealth, economic stability, and political power continue to influence modern political thought and systems, which strive for people to sustain a good life.

Reference

Aristotle. (1895). Politics (W. Ellis, Trans.).

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Aristotle - Modern Political Theory -
Contains unread posts
Duncan Ways posted Jan 31, 2025 8:10 PM
The modern capitalist system shows traces of Aristotle’s ideas, in his book Politics, on the relationship between economic stability and political power. Aristotle calls attention to how people’s attention fluctuates between sharing and owning, saying, “People pay most attention to what is their own: they care less for what is common” (Aristotle, 350 C.E., p.42). Ownership creates an illusion of importance to the owner and those who do not possess said object of ownership can become jealous. This is a fundamental capitalist theory and this quote is reiterated in Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations,” the foundational text of modern capitalist theory, when Smith discusses how people do not give other people things freely but rather in exchange for other goods and services. This is due to the idea that private property is paid more attention to and valued than community property.

Aristotle also has traces in the modern political thought that a person needs the state for protection and community.  Aristotle explained the stateless man as someone who is, “isolated, who is unable to share in the benefits of political association or has no need to share because he is already self-sufficient is no part of the city, and must therefore be either a beast or a god.” (Aristotle, 350 C.E., p.11) Aristotle is trying to make the excellent political point that a person without a state, which provides protection, both economic and physical and community, will struggle both with their own humanity and survival. Considering the fact that humans are innate social creatures, time apart from fellow humans could lead to a loss of human ideals and morals. This loss of morals would in turn lead the human to become a “beast,” as Aristotle described. Also, the person would struggle to survive but if self-sufficiency is reached then the man is the master of his own destiny. He would be in control of himself and things around him in other words a “god.” A stateless person in today's world struggles to survive, which is an active demonstration of Aristotle's theory on the stateless man.







Aristotle. (350 C.E.). Politics. Oxford World’s Classics. (Original work published 350 C.E.)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion 2, Milo Chrudimsky
Contains unread posts
Milo Chrudimsky posted Jan 31, 2025 8:07 PM
Milo Chrudimsky

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

The United States has an issue with communism. They believed it was an ineffective form of government, which is why they have adopted a republic constitution. Through world events such as the red scare, and the cold war for example, we have seen the anti-communist beliefs that have spread through our country. This could be due to Aristotle’s mirrored aversion to the idea. His version of communism is when property is held in common. Aristotle believes “those who do more work and get less of the produce will be bound to raise complaints against those who get a large reward and do little work.” (Aristotle, p.46).  He also believes “it is a difficult business to live together and to share in any form of human activity, but it is specially difficult in such matters” (Aristotle, p.46). Aristotle points out each person has the power to speak out against the unfair distribution of wealth to the physical effort being exerted, which would lead to any communist system being difficult to manage. Aristotle’s ideas could have been an inspiration on John Locke’s social contract, which states people will band together to form a government to protect their natural rights which include life, liberty and property. This definitely had inspiration from Aristotle, who believes sharing property is specially difficult, therefore each individual is entitled to their own property as per their natural rights. When the common man has power to protest over how they are ruled, this can lead to modern political systems such as republics, or democracies in which each person has a say in how they are ruled. 

Aristotle also argues ,“When everyone has his own separate sphere of interest, there will not be the same ground for quarrels; and they will make more effort, because each man will feel that he is applying himself to what is his own.” (Aristotle p. 47). Under communism, there is no power of choice. You do your fair share, and get your fair share of property back. However, a system in which this is not the case encourages economic growth. A modern, capitalist system, in which each person is entitled to their own earnings, leads to harder work as each person has their own sphere of influence, and takes more pride in their work, leading to economic prosperity.

When talking about power in a household, Aristotle believes marital authority is “like that exercised by a statesman over his fellow citizens”, and parental authority is “like that of a king over his subjects” (Aristotle, p.33). Aristotle’s view of the household is largely mirrored by the modern family. One head of the house who generates the household income, and usually has absolute authority over their children.In this case, the power follows the wealth and experience of the family. The children, who generate no income, are like subjects to be ordered around. Whereas the head of the family has money and experience, which grant the right to authority, and the other parental figure has authority over the kids, and less so over the head of the house. In a modern context, the head of the house can be female, which still shows the ideas of Aristotle, just with the head of the family being the wife instead of the husband. This idea also relates to worldwide politics. Those with money have the power, and authority to order those without around. The US with its huge reserves of money, and manpower, can order around entire nations, while a small country without any resources cannot. These ideas may have influenced big stick diplomacy. Those with access to large militaries, which can be funded by large economies, will have more power to influence other countries, as implemented by Theodore Roosevelt, who advocated for “speaking softly with a big stick”.

Aristotle. (2013). Politics (C. Lord, Trans.). University of Chicago Press. (Original work published ca. 350 BCE)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2 - Aditya Mittal
Contains unread posts
Aditya Mittal posted Jan 31, 2025 7:57 PM
Aristotle’s ideas about power and wealth in Politics Books 1 and 2 have significantly influenced modern political thought, especially in theories connecting economic stability to political power. Aristotle emphasized that extreme wealth and poverty could destabilize a society and undermine good governance. This perspective is reflected in liberal democratic thought, where economic equality and a strong middle class are seen as essential for fair political participation. For instance, John Rawls’ theory of justice highlights the need for equitable wealth distribution to ensure equal opportunities, having the same Aristotle’s concerns about the corrupting effects of wealth on politics.

Aristotle’s influence is also evident in Marxist theory. He criticized the pursuit of wealth for its own sake, differentiating between necessary economic activity and greed. Marx expanded on this idea, critiquing capitalism as a system that prioritizes profit over human well-being. While Aristotle didn’t call for abolishing private property, his warning about economic inequality creating social conflict aligns with Marxist critiques of class struggles and concentrated wealth.

Both liberal and Marxist traditions show how Aristotle’s ideas remain relevant. Modern debates on income inequality and corporate influence reflect his belief that a just society requires a balance between economic stability and ethical governance.

Sources - 

Aristotle. (2009). Politics (E. Barker, Trans.; R. F. Stalley, Ed.). Oxford University Press.

Marx, K. (1867). Capital: A critique of political economy (S. Moore & E. Aveling, Trans.). Progress Publishers.

Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Post 2 - Taylor Grino
Contains unread posts
Taylor Grino posted Jan 31, 2025 7:53 PM
Taylor Grino

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2024

           

            Through Books 1 and 2 of Aristotle’s Politics, he delves into multiple lines of thought relating to power and wealth. He also makes his opinions on how the world “should” work and his reasonings for different aspects of society. Many of these ideas have integrated into modern political ideologies. One system that relates to Aristotle is the concept of the workforce. Another is the idea that women have a lower value in society than men.

            On page 15 of Politics, Aristotle states, “The relation between ruler and ruled is one of those things which are not only necessary, but also beneficial.” (p. 15). He also makes a distinction between slaves and slavery, in that slaves choose to be ruled and those in slavery are forced to be ruled. I draw the comparison he makes between master and slave to the modern-day workforce. In this parallel, employees are slaves and bosses are masters. They both have a common goal, but the employees are choosing to work there and be subordinates of their boss. Aristotle also mentions that slaves are the ones who do the physical labor, while masters are able to do the mental work with their intelligence. In the workforce scenario, the boss divides tasks that he cannot complete to his employees so they can do the “grunt work”. This grunt work is the equivalent of physical labor in a company.

            Another comparison I made between Aristotle’s work and modern political systems is that it’s common to see the idea that women have a lower value than men in the household just because they’re a woman. This was even the case in the United States for a long time, seeing as women couldn’t vote until 1920. Aristotle states that every family starts with the union of a man and women due to natural desires. Their goal is to further populate the species, which allows for villages and cities to form. He also states that, “[Nature] makes each separate thing for a separate end; and she does so because the instrument is most perfectly made when it serves a single purpose and not a variety of purposes.” (p. 9). I personally interpreted this that women were made for the single purpose of reproduction and therefore have no other power in society. Based on my readings, Aristotle believes that female and slave are on the same level, but with distinctions since they weren’t made for the same purpose.

 

References

Aristotle, Barker, E., & Stalley, R. F. (2009). Politics. Oxford University Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt
Contains unread posts
Marko Lazarevic posted Jan 31, 2025 7:41 PM
Marko Lazarevic

Professor Czader 

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

Aristotle is considered by many to be one of the most influential philosophers in history. His ideas about a strong government for the benefit of citizens in the society is a model used in many places. One of his main ideas "The art of wealth getting which consists in household management, has a limit; the unlimited acquisition is not its business." (Aristotle, 2009, p.1257). In this quote, he is essentially talking about capitalism. The ability to create wealth from business is unlimited in a capitalism structure. There is a limit however on how much food or shelter a family or individual needs however, and cannot be exceeded. 

"Man by nature is a political animal" ( Aristotle, 2009, p. 9). In this quote, Aristotle touches on the idea of a natural want of power. Politically speaking, there must be some form of government in order to maintain the well beings of the community. Most people want to have some sort of power, which is given in a democracy setting where the citizens have the power to choose who they want in charge for their benefit. This idea has been around for years, and Aristotle has been a key figure in emphasizing this ideology.

Works Cited

 Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. Original work published 350 BCE)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Discussion Prompt 2 - Jacob Gariepy
Contains unread posts
Jacob Gariepy posted Jan 31, 2025 7:20 PM
Jacob Gariepy

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

              In books One and Two of Aristotle’s Politics, Aristotle explores power and wealth through various ideas in politics and philosophy.  In book One, he emphasizes the importance of balancing political power through the polis: the political association. He explores the idea that without a political system for people to align themselves, there can be no balance of power. He explains that the accumulation of too much wealth can impair the balance of political power within a country. He states, “The same is true of the retail form of the art acquisition. There is no limit to the end it seeks, and the end it seeks is a wealth of the sort we have mentioned and the mere acquisition of money. But the art of household management, as distinct from the art of acquisition, has a limit; and the object of that art is not an unlimited amount of wealth” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 27). In this, he compares the need for a political association to the balance of wealth. We see this in modern capitalism: the wealthiest people have the most power and control of economic stability.

              Aristotle elaborates more on how economic stability can be tied to the balance of power in the second book. He explains this through cities being united, “It is clearly impossible that they should have nothing in common: the constitution of a city involves in itself some sort of association, and its members must in the first place share a common locality” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 38). Through this text, Aristotle continues to elaborate on the balance of power as well as the threat to a stable democracy that unbalanced power brings. We see this in modern democracies where power becomes unbalanced. This is the reason that the US democracy has rules set in place so that no party can become greater than the other. Through both books, Aristotle emphasizes the need for a balance of power and wealth to create a successful political association.

References:

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995). 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Discussion 2
Contains unread posts
Danny Garcia posted Jan 31, 2025 6:48 PM
First, let’s define our terms. Power to Aristotle is divided among different kinds of regimes, the “right” ones were kingship, aristocracy and polity. The “deviations” were tyranny, oligarchy and democracy. As Aristotle(1981) states “six forms of constitution were set out, three right(kingship, aristocracy and polity) and three deviations(tyranny, oligarchy and democracy)(pg216). I view this as his form of power in terms of the”state”. Given this fact, I would argue that it is very relevant today, as we still see all of these forms of political power in the world. I would say this means these forms of political power are 6 masks on the same face, as they all entail what Aristotle(1981) says “ it is easy to see that there are several kinds and that the mode of rule is not the same in every case”(pg217). But the thing is, you're still being ruled in all of these models, because there is still a “mode of rule”. So, yes this is still a very relevant model to go off of, we still have all 6 of these models of political power reigning in the world today. And as we see, with political power comes the topic of wealth

Now when Aristotle talks about wealth, Aristotle believes that while wealth can be important for a state, it can also be negative. Aristotle(1981) states, “owing to constant strife and faction between the people and the wealthy, neither side, whichever of the two succeeds in gaining the mastery, ever sets up a constitution that is equally based and acceptable all round”(pg 269). This tells us right here, that no matter which class comes out on top, the playing field will never be equal. This is very relevant in modern day, for example many arguments of capitalist society is that it keeps the rich at the top and the poor at the bottom(so a society where the wealthy win). On the other hand, in a communist world that claims to be for the people, it always ends up with everyone on the bottom(a society where the “people” supposedly come out on top). So in both cases, people lose, and in the case of communist governments, the wealthy as well as the people(who are supposedly supposed to benefit from communist governments) are also on the bottom still. Now Aristotle compares two forms of government as well. As Aristotle(1981) states, “obviously Democracy to the many poor, and oligarchy to few wealthy”(pg270). He suggests here that democracy is an ideal government for the poor and oligarchy to the wealthy. I would argue that it still remains relevant to some extent today, although we have hit tough times in our democracy. But it’s relevant when you look at oligarchies like Russia or Ukraine, where you have a few very wealthy men ruling the common man. Whereas traditionally, in Democracy you have equal chances for all, poor and rich. I mean Napoleon even stated a goal of his regime was to “prevent the poor from eating the rich”. So class struggle has gone on for a long time, and both resent each other. Therefore they constantly will have strife with one another. So yes I conclude that these definitions hold up strongly in the modern political scene.





Sources: Aristotle. (1981). The Politics (T. Saunders, Ed.; T. A. Sinclair, Trans.) [Review of The Politics]. Penguin Classics.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion 2 Definition of Power - Jacob Hack
Contains unread posts
Jacob Hack posted Jan 31, 2025 6:15 PM
Jacob Hack

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

Traces of Aristotle’s defined relationship between economic stability and political power can be observed easily, even in today’s political landscape. Aristotle’s perspective, despite agreeing with it or not, still stands true. First, let's observe the relationship between the "relation of ruler and ruled" (Aristotle 2009 p. 15). He argues that the state is made for the people, and not the other way around. This stems from the idea of a  fair economic wealth among all, due simply to the fact that economic wealth leads to political power. 

Aristotle furthers this point by stating, "It is more expedient for the power of the state to be distributed among its members" (Aristotle 2009 p. 147). Meaning that power, in this case wealth, needs to be placed within the members of the state, rather than being kept by the elites. Another modern political theory that aligns with Aristotle’s ideas on the relationship between economic stability and political power is that of private property. This is a value that America holds closely, as private property is one of our rights. Aristotle claims that this private property is to be used to serve the public good, but it is still a right of the individual itself. 

In summary, we can easily observe Aristotle’s ideas of the relationship, or struggle, in today’s political power and economic wealth. For sake of length, I did not even discuss unfair income, political corruption and elites, and all the such. Despite being written thousands of years ago, this piece of history is one that we must hold on to and keep in our consideration for our future. 

Works Cited

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. Original work published 350 BCE)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2
Contains unread posts
Isabella Pimentel posted Jan 31, 2025 6:09 PM
Definition of Power: Aristotle’s Influence on Modern Political Thought

Isabella Pimentel

College of Liberal Arts, Purdue University

SCLA 101

Professor Justyna Czader

January 31, 2025

 

               Aristotle is very emphatic about two main ideas, the possession of private property and natural processes. Aristotle is repetitive about how important owning private property is to individuals because it allows us to have the power to make our own decisions on what we do with it. This also establishes property owners to take better care of their possessions, maximize the resources they have, and it also provides economic incentives to trade for monetary returns in order to make profit. When Aristotle criticizes shared and common objects he mentions, “What belongs in common to the most people is accorded the least care: they take thought for their own things above all, and less about things common…,” (Lord, 2013, p. 28). Not only does this go to show the prevalence of the lack of care and respect that goes into shared or common items, but it clearly accentuates the value and pride an individual shows toward what is personally theirs. The idea of treatment towards private and public property still exists in the present day. With this we can find traces of private property ideals in John Locke’s beliefs.

John Locke was an English philosopher from the Enlightenment period and is well-known for his ideas over liberalism. He highly regarded the foundational rights for individuals to own private property. More specifically, Locke is persistent in emphasizing that private property builds a foundation for economic and political freedom, on which Aristotle points out as well. Aristotle mentions, “But there is another type of acquisitive art that they particularly call—and justifiably so—the art of getting goods, on account of which there is held to be no limit to wealth and property,” (Lord, 2013, p. 15). Aristotle implies economic and political freedom through our choices on how we handle our personal belongings, whether we decide to keep what we have or invest in or trade to gain profit and wealth. Similarly, Locke addresses this in his, Two Treatises of Government, where he explicitly states, “So he has by nature a power not only to preserve his property, that is, his life, liberty and possessions, against harm from other men, but to judge and punish breaches of the law of nature by others…,” (Locke, 1689/2020, p. 7). Locke not only highlights the importance of individuals having their own possessions, but additionally emphasizes the individuals have the right to protect themselves and their property if someone were to violate this right, which includes judgment and punishment. This eventually leads to governments in the present-day establishing justice systems, such as the federal court system in the U.S., so that these issues and violations can be resolved without bias. We can refer to this court system to be responsible for interpreting the laws written by legislation and applying them to court cases with the purpose protecting individuals’ rights and finding solutions to disputes to ensure that the law is aligned with the Constitution, while rightfully and neutrally assigning a verdict and/or punishment. From this, Aristotle goes on to explain the natural relationships formed within a political community.

               Natural processes and results are highlighted frequently within Aristotle’s discussion of power. He explains in the earlier parts of Book One that human beings have a natural instinct to establish a superior and inferior dynamic where there is a ruling individual and a ruled individual. He initially communicates the power dynamics between a slave and his master describing that, “Thus by nature most things are ruling and ruled. For the free person rules the slave, the male the female, and the man the child…,” (Lord, 2013, p. 22). This features the various superiority complexes that existed then and may persist now, although it is slowly fading away. However, Aristotle throws light on the different types of relationship and how these are the result of natural processes in particular. Men naturally rule over their wife along with the rule over their children and ultimately over their slaves. Additionally, Aristotle points out that, “For the male… is by nature more expert at leading than the female, and the elder and complete than the younger and incomplete,” (Lord, 2013, p. 21). Aristotle places emphasis on not only the gender dynamics seen within the system, but also the various levels that exist within the household, starting with husband at the apex following with the wife, then children, and finally the slaves. The preservation of these levels of social class highly relates to Edmund Burke’s belief to preserve a hierarchy integrated within society.

               Edmund Burke was a British stateman that lived in the 18th century who was infamous for his political theories that highly favored conservatism. Edmund Burke advocated for a natural hierarchy, which included hereditary social classes such as the aristocracy. He also believed that without a structured rank through a hierarchy, corruption would fill the city, and the leadership would become misleading, unnatural, and irresponsible since there would be no way for individuals to examine the intentions of leaders which could result in political leaders overexerting their powers. This imitates Aristotle’s views of a political community in which natural hierarchies were favored in order to succeed as a community. Aristotle conveys his support of natural hierarchies through concerns of justifying slavery as he says, “That some persons are free and others slaves by nature, therefore, and that for these slavery is both advantageous and just, is evident,” (Lord, 2013, p. 9). Aristotle creates a justification based through natural processes that some individuals are born as a free individual while others aren’t and are birthed a slave. He mentions that this is for the greater good of society and should be preserved to maintain that ideal of someone always being a ruler and another being ruled to demonstrate power balance and dynamics. Additionally, Burke mentions preservation of hierarchy his, Reflections on the Revolution in France, that naturally there are ranks in society and they are necessary in order to maintain stability. The following is mentioned:

 This necessity is no exception to the rule, because this necessity is itself also a part of the moral and physical disposition of things to which man must be obedient by consent or force; but if something that is only submission to necessity is made the object of choice, the law is broken, nature is disobeyed, and the rebellious are outlawed, cast out and exiled from this world of reason, order, peace, virtue, and fruitful penitence into the antagonist world of madness, discord, vice, confusion, and unavailing sorrow. (Burke, 1790/2020, p. 54)

               Burke provides emphasis on how essential it is to maintain this hierarchy within communities as they not only provide the necessity to keep a society in order, but it also keeps other ranks and levels in check. He even implies that this is a natural law that cannot be broken by any means and doesn’t allow for any exceptions to be made. Additionally, Burke addresses the consequences of rebelling against natural hierarchies and discusses how this will only lead to chaos and destruction rather than trying to progress as a society. This may sound familiar, as this is prevalent in the structure of the U.S. Government and its Separation of Powers. In the Separation of Powers, there are three established branches, including the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches, which create their own hierarchy within the government itself. With this, each branch is given specific responsibilities and limitations of the authority and power they have. Additionally, this ensures that no single branch can overpower another branch similar to the ideas of Aristotle and Burke in which they imply balancing powers through a ruler and a ruled subject.

               As we can deduce the similarities between Aristotle’s ideas on the relationship between economic stability and political power with those of John Locke and Edmund Burke, it is apparent that private property and natural hierarchies play a big role in not only Locke’s and Edmund’s political philosophy and stances but also has affected the modern political systems. We see how Locke’s ideas on the right to private property, judgement, and punishment has influenced the federal court system we have in the U.S. today. We also see how Burke’s idea of natural hierarchy in society is related to those of Aristotle’s and we have this in the modern day in the form of hierarchy in the U.S. government through the Separation of Powers which is derived from these ideas.

 

References

Aristotle. (2013). Aristotle’s “Politics”: Second edition (C. Lord, Trans.). University of Chicago Press.

Burke, E. (1790/2020). Reflections on the Revolution in France (J. Bennett, Ed.). Early Modern Texts. https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/burke1790.pdf

Locke, J. (1689/2020). Two Treatises of Government (J. Bennett, Ed.). Early Modern Texts. https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/locke1689a.pdf

 

 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
2 Views
2
Views
Madeleine Repanich: Definition of power
Contains unread posts
Madeleine Repanich posted Jan 31, 2025 6:05 PM
Madeleine Repanich

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

Aristotle’s Politics delves into the intricacies of human nature and government that, over time, has maintained an influence on the design of contemporary political systems. Such influences range from the establishment of bureaucratic governments to the ownership of private property. It must be noted, however, that many of Aristotle's values regarding the relationship between economic stability and political power have been retired as we enter a new era with distinct social expectations and roles. That being said, Aristotle’s Politics explores the roles of the household which introduce ideas of modern bureaucracy with fundamental human tendencies, and explores modern capitalist values by exploring ownership of private property and the role of goods in an expansive polis. 

Aristotle begins the first book of Politics exploring the dynamics of the household. Despite explicitly stating that the household must be run differently than a government, he highlights key philosophical and political traits of the human race in the realm of management and identity. Aristotle discusses the household as a metaphor for human nature and interaction; to maintain a house, there must be various tools and users of such tools that work in conjunction to maintain the order and social standing. For instance, Aristotle outlines the bounds of each of the roles of the household, stating, “The slave is wholly lacking the deliberative element; the female has it but lacks authority; the child has it but is incomplete” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 22). Though the notion that slaves and wives work to serve the father is no longer applicable, the fundamental idea that these smaller moving parts that complete one another to create the entire household still exist in all aspects of human life; these are the innate politics of human nature. Such patterns have emerged in larger scales through systematic political control such as through bureaucratic systems that are used in the government today. For instance, consider all the subdivisions of the modern US government that aid in maintaining justice and order. Such bureaucrats embody the roles of the slaves or women to maintain economic stability and keep all the parts of the government functioning. Aristotle ends the first book, stating “one should look at the virtue of the part in relation to the virtue of the whole” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 24), which perfectly encompasses the nature of modern politics; the economic stability, ultimate political power, and operation of the government is maintained by the general public. A system of people cannot be maintained without the actions and virtues of said people.  

Continuing into the more nuanced details of these hierarchies of power and control, Aristotle begins the second book by discussing trade, property, and greed under the context of the economy. Despite his distaste for wealth generated from wealth and only for the sake of wealth, he supports the possession of private property and emphasizes the role of trade in a sense that mirrors modern capitalism. Aristotle explores the idea of self ownership by disagreeing with communist ideals, for instance, when he states, “For it is precisely those who possess things in common and share whom we see most at odds” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 32).  Although not much is said economically on the means of production, Aristotle emphasises this point that (property should be) “private, generally speaking” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 31) which can result in personal ownership of goods which can then maintain the general economy in terms of trading. Similar themes arise when Aristotle begins discussing the judicial system where he comes to the conclusion that “For the nature of desire is without limit” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 41). Perhaps unintentionally, this notion mirrors the argument that capitalism drives innovation and hard work. An insatiable desire for more in a system where property is privately owned drives motivation for profit. Though not stated explicitly, such takes display the modern influence of Aristotle’s Politics on modern economic systems and political power.

References: 

Aristotle. (2013). Politics (C. Lord, Trans.). University of Chicago Press. (Original work published ca. 350 BCE)




0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
2 Views
2
Views
Discussion 2- Casey McLeod
Contains unread posts
Casey McLeod posted Jan 31, 2025 5:50 PM
Discussion 2 Definition of power

Casey McLeod

Department of English, Purdue University

SCLA 101

Dr. Justyna Czader

January 31, 2025

            In Aristotle’s Politics he hints at the topics of power and wealth across books one and two. His thoughts on these subjects have influenced many modern political theories and systems. His ideas on wealth such as hierarchy and class structure as well as ideas on power such as government and the roles of the state have influenced some of these structures we see today. One of the modern theories we see today are class structures. In society we have a low, middle, and upper class where people in the higher classes tend to be wealthier and more powerful than people in lower classes. Aristotle touches on this idea of wealth and class in book 1, stating that “all would acknowledge that the inferior class should be slaves of the superior.” (Aristotle, 2009, p.9). These words sort of hint and influence the class structure we see today, where the upper class is “superior”. Aristotle is saying that the lower classes are slaves of the superior, which is true to some extent. The wealthier people in upper class can influence more decisions and contribute more to society than people in the lower class. People in the lower class aren’t slaves to the upper class, however there is a difference in how much they can do. Aristotle also touches on power and the role of the state.

            In Politics Aristotle talks about the state, discussing how “every state is a community of some kind.” (Aristotle, 2009, p.1). He also talks about how “in most constitutional states the citizens rule and are ruled by turns, for the idea of a constitutional state implies that the nature of citizens are equal, and do not differ at all.” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 19). Aristotle believes in these states the people are equal, and this forms a sort of community. The power is shared among the people causing equality which is what we see today. Aristotle’s idea of power in the states is also what we see in society today. To conclude Aristotle believed in wealth and class, but the upper classes have more superiority over the lower classes. This can be seen in society today as wealthier people have more freedoms than lower class people. He also shares his ideas about power and the state. Saying the state is ruled by turn and citizens are equal. This is also seen today as we elect new governors and representatives to rule the state, but no matter who governs a state the people are still equal. Aristotle’s views on power and wealth can be seen today in many aspects of life not only in the government but in hierarchy as well.

References:

Aristotle. 2009. Politics.  (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. Original work published 1995.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
2 Views
2
Views
Discussion Prompt 2: Amaya Nanda
Contains unread posts
Amaya Nanda posted Jan 31, 2025 5:27 PM
Amaya Nanda

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

          Aristotle’s discussions on power and wealth in Politics Books 1 and 2 have had a lasting impact on modern political thought, particularly in understanding the connection between economic stability and political power. He believed that a strong political structure must be built on a foundation of economic self-sufficiency and ethical governance. His idea that wealth should serve the common good rather than private interests (Aristotle, 1998, p. 1256).

          Another area where Aristotle’s ideas are reflected is in the debate over government intervention in the economy. He believed that excessive accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few could weaken the social fabric and threaten political harmony (Aristotle, 1998, p. 1264). This perspective is visible in modern discussions about corporate regulations and policies designed to ensure that economic power does not translate into unchecked political control. Aristotle’s concerns about oligarchy (Aristotle, 1998, p. 1266) are still relevant as societies strive to balance economic freedom with fair governance.

          In the end, Aristotle’s thoughts on the relationship between wealth and political power remain deeply relevant. His warnings about wealth disparity and its impact on governance can be seen in contemporary efforts to create fairer societies. Whether through economic regulations or social policies, many of today’s political systems still reflect his core belief that a stable government depends on economic fairness and ethical leadership.

 

References

Aristotle. (1998). Politics.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
2 Views
2
Views
Discussion 2 | Samuel Nelson-Archer
Contains unread posts
Braeden Nelson-Archer posted Jan 31, 2025 5:01 PM
Samuel Nelson-Archer

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

               Throughout the first two books of Aristotle’s Politics, it becomes apparent that current governments have adopted many of the ideas found within this book. One of these ideas is the fact that government officials should always be elected by the people. These “people” are the working class and the ones who will be most directly affected by the changes implemented by the governing body. Aristotle states that, “the rulers were all to be elected, the people being the three parts of the city.” (Aristotle, 2013, p.43). We see this process across most of the United States government as the political positions are voted on by the people. Even as you move away from the government controlling the entirety of the United States, and towards the state-wide government, it remains the same. Governors, mayors, and representatives are all voted on by the people and therefore give voice to those who live in the affected area. Not only does the political side of the United States resemble Aristotle’s ideas, but also the economic side. In book 1, there were a lot of ideas revolving around the economy, trading, money, and commerce. Aristotle describes how money came to be. First there was trade, where people exchanged goods for goods based on their necessity. Then trading evolved to involve goods and a different object, typically something with value such as gold or silver. Numbers, and amounts were then assigned to these pieces of currency which eventually led to where the United States and the rest of the world is today. This in the form of coins and bills. Now wealth is stored in a monetary value, not in the goods owned by someone. So, this wealth is now produced “through trafficking in goods,” “since money is the medium and the goal of exchange.” (Aristotle, 2013, p.16). Following this idea, the United States now export a sizeable portion of their produced goods with the sole goal of acquiring, whether that is to be kept or spent on goods from other countries. The reason the United States produces this much to begin with is to first provide for the country and then to be able to sell to other countries, meaning this wealth is due to an abundance, which is another topic Aristotle brings up in book 1. This wealth is not in the goods the United States has, but in the money they own. These and countless other examples are places the reader is able to make connections to the ideas of Aristotle and the modern state of politics and economics.

 

References

Aristotle. (2013). Aristotle’s Politics (C. Lord, Trans). The University of Chicago Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion 2: Alex Mihalcea
Contains unread posts
Alex Mihalcea posted Jan 31, 2025 5:00 PM
Alex Mihalcea

SCLA 101

Dr. Justyna Czader

January 31, 2025

Aristotle’s ideas in The Politics still influence how we think about power and wealth. He believed that wealth distribution affects political control. Classical liberalism supports his view that private property and financial freedom create stable governments, while Marxism misinterprets his warnings about inequality.

Aristotle argued, "What is common to the greatest number gets the least amount of care" (Aristotle, 2009, p. 42), meaning private property ensures responsibility and promotes careful management of resources. Without personal ownership, individuals lack the motivation to maintain and improve what belongs to them. Thinkers like John Locke and Adam Smith built on this idea, emphasizing property rights as key to freedom and economic prosperity. Locke, in particular, argued that property ownership is a natural right, essential for personal security and societal stability. Smith extended this by showing how private property and free markets drive innovation and wealth creation.

Marxism opposes private property, which Aristotle would have rejected. He also warned that complete equality in all manners is not always ideal, stating "The masses become revolutionary when the distribution of property is unequal. Men of education become revolutionary when the distribution of office is equal." (Aristotle, 2009, p. 59). History proves Marxist governments, like the Soviet Union, caused instability by concentrating power in the state, while stripping the rights, and often executing, those in academia who may have opposed their doctrine.

Aristotle’s warnings remain relevant. Governments today try to reduce inequality with taxes and regulations, but too much interference can harm progress. In the end, Aristotle supported a system avoiding both extreme inequality and excessive government control. His ideas still shape debates on fairness and stability.

References

Aristotle. (2009). Politics (E. Barker, Trans.; R. F. Stalley, Ed.). Oxford University Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2 - Definition of power
Contains unread posts
Jessica Rohrbach posted Jan 31, 2025 4:10 PM
Jessica Rohrbach 

Professor Czader 

SCLA 101 

January 31, 2025 

            Two modern political theories or systems that show traces of Aristotle's ideas on the relationship between economic stability and political power are, social democracy, and neoliberalism. Aristotle believed that richness should be dispersed based on how each person performs in their role in the state. This balance helps to maintain fairness. Aristotle stated, “For they claim that from the good should come someone good, just as a human being comes from a human being and a beast from beasts” (p. 10). We see this today when we look at progressive taxation. Progressive taxation is used when people who have a higher income must pay more in taxes because they make more money. However, people who have lower incomes do not pay as much in taxes. This is because they do not get paid as much as the wealthier people. Another example we see today are welfare programs. Food Stamps are a welfare program that are provided to people who qualify for it. Specifically, people who are struggling to afford food either for themselves or for their family. This shows that social democracy is still present and used in our economy to influence political power.

            Aristotle was convinced that having too much power in wealth was a negative thing. When we put too much power in wealth, we are giving all our power to one group of people. That gives them more control over everyone instead of having a balance. Aristotle reveals this to us when he says “Selfishness is justly blamed; but this is not having affection for oneself simply but rather having more affection than one should. (p. 31)” An example today would be how corporations have power over politics. Corporations have power when it comes to decisions on policies. They have lobbyists who can sway opinions therefore influencing people who are in a position of power.

References

Aristotle. (2013). Aristotle’s “Politics”: Second edition (C. Lord, Trans.). University of Chicago Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Discussion Prompt 2 - Alex Todorov
Contains unread posts
Alex Todorov posted Jan 31, 2025 4:03 PM
Alex Todorov

SCLA 101 

Professor Czader

January 31, 2025

Aristotle’s discussion of power and wealth is a standing testament to the longevity of his political discourse as we see examples of Aristotle’s concepts throughout modern political systems. However, many of Aristotle’s ideas have evolved past the point of recognition there are multiple key concepts mentioned in Books One and Two that are prevalent in today's political systems. The ideas of monopolies and the furthermore concepts of capitalism have affected modern-day economic stability and power.

Aristotle in Book One discusses the natural methods of acquiring goods and how should a society structure itself in a way to disperse goods. Aristotle claims the act of creating a good to be sold rather than used immediately for its intended purpose is no longer natural but rather a new concept of business. By extension, this leads to practices of acquiring capital through non-natural methods such as monopolies where the control of goods is leveraged for greater profits. This leads to the idea of using these tactics to increase the power of states, “this knowledge is useful for statesmen too’ for many states are in greater need of business and the income it brings” (R. F. Stalley, 2009, p. 91).  This very idea is now the backbone and common practice of most nations with economic stability and strength coming from the free market of the people. This idea further lends to the political power of our current systems when you take into account the benefits the political systems extract from the success of the economic stability brought on by the concepts of monopolies.

Modern Government 

Aristotle continues his discussion of political systems and the many pitfalls other systems fall into. One key point mentioned was the allocation of resources and whether it should be a communal system or a private system. Ultimately Aristotle comes to the conclusion that “the general principle should be that of private ownership”(R. F. Stalley, 2009, 114). The allocation of resources is a tried and tested discussion with the answer being a mixed bag in modern political systems. However, the general design consists of a mix of both private and communal resources with America in particular having a political system that favors private ownership. Aristotle favored private ownership over communal as he believed it increased individual responsibility and efficacy. 

 

Citations

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995). 




0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Sophia Patrinos | Discussion Prompt 2
Contains unread posts
Sophia Patrinos posted Jan 31, 2025 4:02 PMLast edited: Friday, January 31, 2025 4:03 PM EST
Sophia Patrinos

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025 

Aristotle’s discussion of both power and wealth in Books 1 and 2 have significantly impacted modern political thought and it is conveyed in our history. In Book 1 of Aristotle’s novel, Politics, an idea that we believe to be prevalent today is stated in a way our society would view as correct. Aristotle states “a king ought to be naturally superior to his subjects, and yet of the same stock as they are” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 34). He digs into the idea that people would rather have someone in power who is a member of the public, so they understand how their political decisions impact the nations citizens. However, the person in power must have superior skills and knowledge to be in such an influential and crucial position. Personally, I agree with this idea and a large portion of the world does as well. For example, citizens of the United States would rather elect a president that understands how their actions and decisions impact their nation because the president understands what it is like to be in their shoes. Therefore, the President or person in power wants to be as politically appealing as possible, resulting in their campaign to be extremely pleasing to the audience while also demonstrating that their skills and knowledge make them the perfect candidate to elect. Additionally, In Book 2, Aristotle describes that people believing that they are more deserving of power and wealth because of their education is dangerous. Aristotle describes “a system which gives equal properties to all the citizens has a certain advantage, in that it helps to prevent mutual discord; but the advantage on the whole would be inconsiderable. The educated would be aggrieved by the system, feeling that they deserved something more than the mere equality” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 60). Aristotle explains that people will never be happy even if everyone is treated equally. This is a very large debate today as many people talk about being equal, but they believe they deserve more than someone who is not as knowledgeable or wealthy. Knowledge and wealth are power, so people believe they have more power if their education and money situation is more developed. Humans are inherently selfish a lot of the time though they might not think they are. For example, a wealthy man walking down a busy city street might stop and give a few dollars to a homeless man but then gets upset when federal funding gives the homeless better opportunities. That man may have even voted for a political figure to even get rid of the federal funding.

 Additionally, a modern political theory that shows traces of Aristotle’s ideas is that the rich are encourages to make a difference in politics while the poor and less fortunate are not as encouraged. In Book 2 Aristotle describes this prominent ideology, “indeed in the election of the fourth class only the members of the first and second classes are compelled to vote” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 56) This refers to modern political power because many people who are less fortunate are not compelled to vote because they don’t have the recourses or education to do so. They may not have a polling station near them because of funding while people in more wealthy areas may have one at their public library. Another modern political system would be the education department. In Book 1 it is stated “since a child is immature its goodness is obviously not a matter of its relation to itself, but its relation to its end and to the authority that guides it” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 36). He explains that just because someone is not as rich as the average person does not mean they should be deprived of a fine education. Without an education how is someone supposed to stay involved in their nation’s politics. For example, my mother works at a school in a less fortunate area of Chicago. She sees parents and children who don’t have the same opportunities because their area does not have enough funding to pay for teachers and opportunities that would improve their education. The people who are wealthy and making decisions for these communities don’t see the impact. My mom sees a large difference in those kid’s knowledge of outside events and the knowledge of my siblings and I’s. However, as a nation, we continue to defund the education department which is very unfortunate for parents, children, and teachers. When will we learn? 

References 

Aristotle. (2009) Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Discussion prompt #2-Yehia Bidak
Contains unread posts
Yehia Bidak posted Jan 31, 2025 3:29 PM
Yehia Bidak

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31th, 2025

Aristotle’s discussion of power and wealth in politics has influenced modern political thought, most particularly compared to liberal democracy. Liberal democracy emphasizes a strong middle class for stability. Aristotle warned that extreme wealth disparities lead to disruption. This principle has shaped modern policies that promote social mobility, economic balance, and wealth distribution. “The state exists for the sake of a good life, and not for the sake of life only.” (Aristotle 1252b). Aristotle argues that the state must provide for the people to ensure justice and fairness between the people. James Madison claimed in his Federalist documents about the importance of wealth distribution, he believed that an unequal distribution of power was a threat to a stable democracy, warning that the formation of unequal wealth distribution would make the wealthy people dominate the decision-making. James Madison incorporated these thoughts into constitutional structures to prevent tyranny and social and economic disparities. These thoughts are present in modern-day institutions such as social welfare programs. This shows the importance of Aristotle’s thought that has influenced people to act on the importance of social equality between individuals.

 

Similarly, Marxism builds on Aristotle’s concerns about wealth concentration and its influence over governance. Although the social Marxism theory is a more radical approach as it talks about economic disparity and how it leads to class struggle and political oppression, Both theories recognize that those who control wealth often have more control over the state, therefore they can influence laws, policies and create power structures that only serve their interests. Aristotle’s view on economic equality is essential for a stable and equal society continues to shape debates on wealth distributions to this day in modern political systems. Demonstrating the lasting influence on both capitalism and socialism


Aristotle (1995). Politics (E. Barker, Trans). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 350 BCE)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Rishi Shroff- Discussion Prompt 2 - Definition of power
Contains unread posts
Rishi Shroff posted Jan 31, 2025 3:26 PM
Rishi Shroff

SCLA 101

Dr. Justyna Czader

January 31, 2025

In his book Politics, Aristotle discusses various different ideologies regarding power structures, wealth, and relations. Despite these theories being constructed in 350 BCE, Aristotle’s ideas had an impact on modern political ideologies with laws being created using the same reasoning as Aristotle.  One example of this is the concept of strength in numbers and unity. Aristotle demonstrates this idea by stating “A household is something that attains a greater degree of self-sufficiency than an individual; and a city , in turn, is something which attains self- sufficiency to a greater degree than a household”(Aristotle, 2009,  p. 41). The concept of self sufficiency in larger communities is the main reason that democracy exists as it gives power to the population. Living in a form of state allows for a larger amount of control which leads to self - sufficiency. Democracy allows for unity and less separation between the states making the country feel as a whole which is exactly what Aristotle would desire proving that his ideas connect to modern day political theory. 

Along with the concept of unity, Aristotle’s ideas of fulfillment of duties aligns with the political ideologies of Finland and their criminal code regarding bystanders. Aristotle speaks about how in order to maintain a strong power relationship, the two powers must set aside their emotions and do the right thing in their situation “How can the ruler rule properly, or the subject be properly ruled  unless they are both temperate and just? Anyone who is licentious or cowardly will utterly fail to do his duty.”( Aristotle, 2009 , p. 35). Aristotle defines the idea of one not doing their duty as “cowardly” and a result of not fulfilling justice. This idea of not doing the right thing in a certain situation aligns with the Good Samaritan act in Finland which can punish bystanders with imprisonment for not doing certain actions.

“A person who knows that another is in mortal danger or serious danger to his or her health, and does not give or procure such assistance that in view of his or her options and the nature of the situation can reasonably be expected, shall be sentenced for neglect of rescue to a fine or to imprisonment for at most six months.”(Finland’s Ministry of Justice , 1997, 39/1889). 

An individual who does not do their duty of supporting their fellow citizens is a clear problem that Finland has made the attempt to eradicate and this connects exactly with the idea of Aristotle and his desire for those to do their duty while not in power.  Overall, Aristotle and modern day politics have heavy quantities of overlap between them proving that old ideologies still can inspire change today.

References:

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. Original work published 350 BCE)

Finland’s Ministry of Justice. (1997). 39/1889 English - translations of Finnish acts and decrees - FINLEX ®. Finlex Data Bank. https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1889/en18890039

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Discussion Prompt on the Definition of Power - Braden Schuck
Contains unread posts
Braden Schuck posted Jan 31, 2025 3:26 PM
Braden Schuck

Purdue University West Lafayette

SCLA 101

Professor Czader

January 31, 2025

When reading Aristotle's Politics, we learn many things about his view of the world of politics. He specifically breaks down each individual part of his theory to better portray what he is trying to get across. Many of his political theories can still be found in the modern-day world. For example, one of Aristotle's theories was the "relation of ruler and ruled"(pp. 15) and how it "is one of those things that is not only necessary but also beneficial." (pp. 15). We can see the "relation of ruler and ruled"(pp. 15) almost anywhere you go in the world. In the U.S. we have our president, in the UK they have a Queen and the parliament, and in places like China and North Korea, they have dictators. Even when not looking at the leaders of countries, you can see it in the relationship between a manager and a regular employee in the workplace. The relationship may not always be the best, but as Aristotle says, it is beneficial. Without a person to lead everyone or as Aristotle says, to rule, there will be no order anywhere and everything will dissolve into chaos. These two ideas given to us by Aristotle can be easily used to refer to the modern world of political power as well as many others.

In the modern world of politics, there are many political theories. Some of the most popular political theories are the idea of a democracy and the idea of a monarchy. A democracy is a political theory that says the power should be given to the people to allow them to make political decisions through a system of voting. A monarchy is an idea that a parliament and its queen should be in charge of making all the political decisions. In either system, Aristotle's ideas hold true. Both ideologies involve ruling over a population of people through a system of government. Not only has this been beneficial for many decades, but both ideas have allowed for the growth of massive political powers within the world.

References 

Aristotle, Barker, E., & Stalley, R. F. (1998). Politics. Oxford University Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2
Contains unread posts
Haley Scheu posted Jan 31, 2025 3:16 PM
Definition of Power

            Aristotle discusses the involvement of currency and how it shapes political organization relating to power and wealth. Household management is concerned with the use of property and not the acquisition of it. In the beginning, people would trade based on the value of products. But this encourages ‘usury’ in the sense that one person benefits from the trade at the expense of the opposing individual or organization. This is why currency was created as Aristotle claims, “Currency came into existence merely as a means of exchange; usury tries to make it increase” (Aristotle, 1995, p. 30). But because of the non-mutual benefit Aristotle disapproves of this system because, “…of all modes of acquisition, usury is the most unnatural” (Aristotle, 1995, p. 30). Aristotle’s view of usury is reflected in the way Karl Marx critiques capitalism. Marx believes that capitalism allows the accumulation of wealth at the expense of another party. This is similar to Aristotle’s distaste of usury.

            Aristotle also warns against oligarchy, where power is centered on the decisions made by the wealthy. He argues that economic power belonging to the wealthy should not determine political rule. Aristotle explains that Plato’s laws are, “…compelling the richer citizens to attend the assembly, to vote in elections of officials” (Aristotle, 1995) is oligarchical. The wealthy class is encouraged to be involved in politics while the other classes are allowed to defer from this responsibility. Aristotle says that these elections will result in the elected to align with the views of the wealthy and make decisions according to their preferences. This will not be beneficial for the other classes. In modern day, we see this influence of the wealth in Russia’s government. Russia has a state-controlled economy where the government has close ties to large corporations which allows those few elites to control valuable resources. These same elites are the ones with the ability and power to exert influence over politics and economy of Russia. As a result of this we see that the lower classes are not always happy with the control that the government exerts, which is what Aristotle warned against.

 

References
Aristotle. (1995). Politics. In Aristotle, Politics (pp. 7-83). Oxford University Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Caleb Ordower - Discussion Prompt 2 - Definition of power
Contains unread posts
Caleb Ordower posted Jan 31, 2025 2:57 PM
Caleb Ordower

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025 

           Aristotle’s discussions of power and wealth in Books 1 and 2 of his book “Politics” have had a strong influence on modern political thinking since it was written, particularly when looking at the relationship between economic stability and political power. Two modern political theories that tend to show traces of Aristotle’s ideas are liberal democracy and social democracy

          Liberal democracy is practiced by many Western countries and reflects Aristotle’s views that economic stability is crucial for political stability. In Book 2, Aristotle tends to critique Plato’s ideas of communal property by arguing that private ownership is more conducive to overall social harmony: “For that which is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it. Every one thinks chiefly of his own, hardly at all of the common interest.” (Aristotle, 1920, p. 57) This quote emphasizes Aristotle’s belief that private property incentivizes individuals to care for and manage resources more effectively than they would in communal ownership, which is a concept that tends to be embraced by liberal democracies that emphasize private property rights along with free market economies to promote political freedom. The prominent modern liberal democratic party sees economic prosperity as a key factor that maintains political stability and prevents social unrest, much as Aristotle viewed economic well-being as essential for a well-functioning polis.

          The next form of modern politics that shows traces of Aristotle’s ideas is the Social democratic system, which is prevalent in many European countries, particularly his concept of the “middle constitution,” which is mainly discussed in Book 4 (but introduced in Book 2). With this concept, Aristotle argues, “Thus it is manifest that the best political community is formed by citizens of the middle class, and that those states are likely to be well-administered in which the middle class is large, and stronger if possible than both the other classes.” (Aristotle, 1920, p. 169) this highlights Aristoltes belief in the importance of strong middle class as the base for political stability and strong governance while this specific quotation is from book four the idea touches on much of Aristotle’s political theory that he had introduced earlier. Social democracies aim to create a large middle class through policies like progressive taxation and social welfare. They believe that this leads to greater political stability and a more fair and just society, reflecting Aristotle’s view that extreme inequality leads to political instability.

          When looking at modern political power, these theories draw on little insights in a multitude of different ways, with each set of politics understanding Aristotle's policies in different ways yet agreeing in other ways. For instance, both liberal and social democracies recognize, as Aristotle did, that economic conditions significantly influence political power dynamics in liberal democracies. This manifests as a focus on protecting property rights and fostering economic growth. Yet, when looking at social democracies, they appear as efforts to reduce inequality and expand the middle class. Another theory that both systems pull from is Aristotle’s preference for moderation and his belief that extreme inequality leads to political instability. With this theory. Liberal democracies seek to prevent excessive government intervention in the economy, yet social democracies aim to prevent excessive concentration of wealth.

          Even though Aristotle wrote this book in 4th-century BC many of these ideas still resonate in modern politics and have even shaped the ideologies of different parties showing just how prevalent this book has been throughout the centuries.

Aristotle's Politics (Jowett, B. and Davis, H.W.C., Trans.). (1920). Oxford at the Clarendon Press. https://archive.org/details/aristotlespolit00aris/mode/2up?q=sedition

https://dn790004.ca.archive.org/0/items/aristotlespolit00aris/aristotlespolit00aris.pdf

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Board #2
Contains unread posts
Josh Wasielewski posted Jan 31, 2025 2:51 PM
Josh Wasielewski

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31, 2025

               Modern political systems can be traced back many years. Even though many of these political systems have failed throughout history, modern government can study the past to look for solutions to modern day crises. An example of modern government which has used ideas from Aristotle to revive their struggling economy is Norway. In the 1980’s Norway suffered a major banking crisis which was a devastation but left far more hope than originally foreseen, due to the strong foundation of the Norwegian government and their ability to implement fast acting systems and policies. The creation of the Government Pension Fund Global was inspired by Aristotle and was one of the leading efforts to re-vamp the economy. This example echoes his assertion that imbalances of wealth lead to social unrest and political instability. Aristotle observes, "The citizens must have at least a modicum of wealth; for a state cannot be composed entirely of paupers" (Aristotle, 2009, p. 124).

              Although Aristotle had beliefs which brought unity to societies, he also had profound ideas which involved spreading power throughout. In the United States there is a federal based government which allows each state to have a certain amount of checked power in order for each state to provide maximum representation at more levels of government. This feature of American government is a defining trait of the nation and aligns with Aristotle’s belief in distributing political power to prevent any one group from becoming too powerful. Aristotle argues that "It is more expedient for the power of the state to be distributed among its members" (Aristotle, 2009, p. 147). If the federal government didn’t exist the people in America couldn’t move to another region in order to reside in a territory which favored their political views and lifestyles.

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995).

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
James Muller - Discussion Prompt 2
Contains unread posts
James Muller posted Jan 31, 2025 2:22 PM
James Muller

Professor Czader 

SCLA 101 

1/31/25

In books one and two of Aristotle's Politics he goes into depth on many various ideas surrounding politics and political theory. Aristotle's ideas about these subjects have had a major influence on various people political beliefs, the systems and parties that people align themselves with, and the manner in which people involve themselves with politics. One example of this would be how Aristotle believes that a persons involvement in politics is one of the most important things that a person can do, he mentions when he says “The polis, or political association, is the crown; it completes and fulfils the nature of man: it is thus natural to him, and he is himself naturally a polis-animal” (Aristotle 8.) In this quote he refers to people as political animals and that individuals become better when working with a community in order to support the common good. This idea of claiming man to be a political animal forces the reader to attempt to involve themselves in their own political system in order not only be a part of the community, but also in order to better oneself through the their involvement in politics. The idea of a "political animal" also brings the idea that it is only natural for someone to involve themselves with politics as that is what their nature calls for them to do.

Aristotle's idea not only have called for people to involve themselves with politics though as his ideas have inspired many systems and theories that we can see today or throughout history. One such example of this would be of communitarianism which we can see the various examples of  in this reading. For instance Aristotle heavily advocates for the idea that a mans life has no value outside of the state. Another idea which is an extension of the previous idea presented is Aristotle's idea of and disgust for accumulation and exchange of money. This idea can be difficult to see coming from a capitalistic background however, this idea along with a few others can be seen in other economic ideologies one of which being from Karl Marx. While these two may not share all of the same beliefs both politically and economically as they lived thousands of years apart it is difficult to read this without drawing the correlation and how Karl Marx and others were likely influenced by the ideas presented here.

 Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion 2 - Thomas Solloway
Contains unread posts
Thomas Solloway posted Jan 31, 2025 1:35 PM
Thomas Solloway

Professor Czader

January 31, 2025

Aristotle’s ideas of power and wealth have taken shape in today's political and economic thought processes in many ways. While a portion of his content has been disproved, much of it still holds up to the standards and definitions that are followed currently in the political landscape, showing his influence. Two ideas that have a particular presence in the society of today are the role of the state and the importance of it as well as the need for distinction and diversity among a city for the sake of functionality. These theories were mentioned in several points within the text and are prevalent pieces in the makeup of political culture.

Aristotle makes it clear from the beginning of his book as to the importance of the state in withholding and further pursuing good in the community. He claims that the political community “...will pursue this aim most…” and therefore is of relevance to a given nation (Barker, 1995, p. 73). Stating that the political community has such a positional role in the pursuit of societal betterment emphasizes the heightened value of its presence, much like it does today. Reflecting on the systems put in place now, one can recognize more as to the purpose and power of government and politics in this way which no doubt was influenced by Aristotle’s work. That said, there is another pivotal piece of having a functional nation highlighted in Aristotle’s book which is the need for distinct groups to be unified under one greater community.

Looking at the United States, the amount of distinct and separate groups that coexist under one nation is countless. There is separation by religion, race, culture, and much more but despite the differences all of these groups remain under the same roof. Aristotle wrote of the importance of this sort of unity within the state and that it is made up of not just one type of people but of many. Such a claim suggests that Aristotle saw the relvenece in having a system that is able to accept and remain with a wide variety of people. A nation of this nature would be capable of growth and further prosperity due to it’s ability to accept differing cultures making inclusion a vital component to achieving stability. These ideologies have potent power in the modern political landscape as government shows more of an ittenitave to have inclusivity and acceptance of all sorts of people through the continued quest for happiness and good.

References:

Barker, E. trans. (1995). Aristotle: Politics. Oxford University Press. 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2 - Pranav Jyothi
Contains unread posts
Pranav Jyothi posted Jan 31, 2025 1:08 PM
Discussion Prompt 2 – Definition of Power 

Pranav Jyothi 

Professor Czader 

SCLA 101 

January 31, 2025 

Aristotle’s ideas of politics, power and wealth have been explored throughout books 1 and 2 of Politics. In Book 1 of Aristotle’s Politics, Aristotle raises the issue of justice and its relation to power within the city. He argues that "Justice is a thing belonging to the city" (Aristotle, 2013, p. 5), strictly emphasizing that true justice requires a balanced distribution of power across all the various parts of the community, which include the household and the family. In my opinion, this is a proper and true judgment of power, as justice cannot be exercised without the proper enforcement of authority. Justice only prevails in a society in which power is shared equally and in which each part of the community, including the higher classes, are held responsible for their actions. This prevents any group from becoming too powerful or too weak. Aristotle’s insistence on equalizing power within the city aligns with the broader notion that justice ensures that all citizens have a role in governance. 

In Book 2 of Aristotle’s Politics, Aristotle challenges Plato’s idea of communal property, instead arguing that individual ownership of property is necessary for the practice of generosity, which he considers is a more ethical virtue. This view differed sharply with Plato’s Republic, that property should be shared among citizens to prevent inequality in the community. Additionally, Aristotle criticizes Plato’s governance model, arguing against the concentration of power within one class, which he did not support in book 1 as well. He states, “As it is, should some mischance occur and the multitude of the ruled revolt, there is no medicine that will restore quiet through the laws” (Aristotle, 2013, p. 58). These opinions of Aristotle highlight the dangers of a political system where power is unevenly held by one group or one part of a community, as it can lead to rebellions and revolts. In my opinion, Aristotle’s ideas are especially relevant in modern politics and governing of a state or country, where a fair distribution of power is essential to maintaining stability and preventing the dominance of any one group within society. 

References: 

Aristotle. (2013). Politics (C. Lord, Trans.). University of Chicago Press. (Original work published ca. 350 BCE) 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 2
Contains unread posts
Yash Patel posted Jan 31, 2025 12:52 PMLast edited: Friday, January 31, 2025 12:54 PM EST
Yash Patel

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

January 31st, 2025

Aristotle’s viewpoint of power and wealth in Politics has influenced modern political

thought, specifically in theories regarding economics and governance. He argued that accumulating a lot of wealth distorts the political order which is reflected in today’s society as democratic capitalism. Democratic capitalism seeks to balance free markets with specific regulations to ward off oligarchic dominance. Aristotle states, “The natural form of the art of acquisition is concerned with the method by which property ought to be acquired; and the acquisition of property is not the same thing as the use of it” (p. 27). He’s warning against acquiring a lot of wealth saying it’s an end in itself. This is similar to John Maynard Keynes’ economic philosophy, which says that economies should not focus on acquiring capital but should instead ensure the widespread prosperity through the government (Keynes, 1936). Some policies such as social welfare programs and regulations against monopolies tie back to Aristotle’s view that the structure of the economy has to serve the whole community instead of just benefiting a small elite.

Similarly, Aristotle worried that if wealth was not spread out to society fairly, it could cause problems with the government. This idea, in today’s society, shows up in classical republicanism, especially in James Madison’s writings. Aristotle argues that a strong middle class stabilizes the state, saying “The best political community is formed by citizens of the middle class, and those states are likely to be well-administered in which the middle class is large” (p. 51). Madison shares this concern in The Federalist Papers, saying that if wealth is too unequal, it can lead to dangerous factions fighting for power and endangering democracy (Madison, 1787). The checks and balances system in the U.S Constitution emphasizes the representative government which connects with Aristotle’s argument saying that political power should be distributed to prevent domination by either the wealthy elite or the poor. These ideas still influence today’s debates about the inequalities in wealth, the corporate influence in politics, and fairness in the economy, showing that Aristotle’s viewpoints are still important in modern government.

References

Aristotle (1995). Politics (E. Barker, Trans). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 350 BCE)

Keynes, J. M. (2018). The general theory of employment, interest, and money. Palgrave Macmillan. (Original work published 1936)

Madison, J. (2003). The Federalist Papers. Signet Classics. (Original work published 1787)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views