Talk:Politics (Aristotle)

message: BBC Radio 4's In Our Time is a 45 minute discussion programme with three eminent academics in their field, hosted by Melvyn Bragg. Each edition deals with one subject from one of the following fields: philosophy, science, religion, culture and historical events. it is akin to a seminar. The entire archive going back to 1998 is now available online in perpetuity. 
An edition was broadcast about Aristotle's Politics with Angie Hobbs, Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Warwick; Paul Cartledge, AG Leventis Professor of Greek Culture at the University of Cambridge and Annabel Brett, Senior Lecturer in History at the University of Cambridge. You can listen to the programme on this link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00f8530. Would you be able to include this as an external link?--Herk1955 (talk) 12:57, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Request: BBC Radio 4's In Our Time programme about Aristotle's Politics 

message: Is there a reason the article is entitled "Politics" instead of "The Politics"? 74.12.116.135 (talk) 07:00, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: According to WP:THE, if there is the least bit of ambiguity over whether "the" forms a part of the title of the book, it should be omitted. Thus, Histories (Tacitus), not The Histories (Tacitus). Reeve and Jowett translate it as just Politics, so that rule seems to apply. RJC TalkContribs 13:28, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "The"

message: The discussion on citizenship in Book III does not seem to agree with what Aristotle suggests about the relationship between citizenship and virtue-in fact, I would argue that his impetus for the exploration or elucidation of constitutional government is precisely because the many/the people do not possess the requisite virtue to effectively rule. See his discussion on barring farmers or laborers from citizenship. As an introduction to one of the greatest texts of the Western Canon, this article is great. But some of the specific points need to be referenced in light of continued scholarly work. see: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ancient-political/#ProPol (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on Ancient Political Philosophy, which properly places Aristotle's thought in relation to his predecessor Plato and their epigones in later Graeco-Roman thought).
I just left this on the feedback page as well, but I really don't know how that feature works and if it is monitored by a Wikipediholic of the necessary capacity to fix it. Good luck. 3L3CTRIC 33L (talk) 08:24, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article needs help! 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Politics (Aristotle). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040627222354/http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/a/a8po/ to http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/a/a8po/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130722201525/http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/aristotle/Politics.pdf to http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/aristotle/Politics.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:28, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is no section on the reception of the Politics in later times. While I'm out of my field for its early modern and modern reception, I have recently done some research on its reception  in the late Middle Ages (esp. 13th–14th c.). The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy (1982) has some excellent articles on this topic and German scholars like Jürgen Miethke and Christoph Flüeler have done further research since then. I would like to summarise these articles and add a section on the medieval reception to this article. Maester NoWei (talk) 11:00, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medieval reception 

message: I have made a couple of changes to the lede. Most importantly, I removed this because I believe this is giving undue weight to an unusual 1912 opinion, and it is also not discussed in the body of the article.  Footnote:  Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:35, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  lede