ARISTOTLE ON EQUALITY AND JUSTICE

Transcription

1 ARISTOTLE ON EQUALITY AND JUSTICE

2 By the same author JOHN LOCKE: Essays on the Law ofnature REMEMBERING: A Philosophical Problem SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY METAPHYSICS HOBBES AND LOCKE: The Politics of freedom and Obligation

3 ARISTOTLE ON EQUALITY AND JUSTICE His Political Argument W. von Leyden Palgrave Macmillan

4 ISBN ISBN (ebook) DOI / W. von Leyden 1985 Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition All rights reserved. For information, write: St. Martin's Press, Inc., 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY Published in the United Kingdom by The Macmillan Press Ltd. First published in the United States of America in 1985 ISBN Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Leyden, W. von (Wolfgang von), Aristotle on equality and justice. Includes bibliographical references and index. l. Aristotle-Political science. 2. Aristotle-Law. 3. Justice (Philosophy) 4. Equality-Philosophy. 5. Law-Philosophy. I. Title. B49l.J87L '.01' ISBN

5 Contents Preface Vll Proportionate Equality and Social Class 1 (i) Justice and Equality (ii) The Relationship between the Principles of Equality and Equitable Inequality 6 (iii) Justice and Equality in the Exchange of Goods: the Analogy of Builders and Shoemakers 10 (iv) Aristotle's Emphasis on Difference: the Claims of Democracy versus Rule by Experts Two Defmitions of Equality and their Significance for Political Theory 26 (i) The Strict Defmition in the Physics: Kinds and Species 26 (ii) A Wider Defmition in the Metaphysics: Common Terms and Categories 32 3 J ustif1able Inequality and the Different Kinds of Civic Excellence 41 (i) Diversity and Equality in Political Societies: the Middle Class 41 (ii) The Diversity of Contributions to the State and the Question of their Relative Merits 49 (iii) Justice and the Problem ofequalising the Different 57 v

6 4 Revolution and the Law 65 (i) (ii) Revolutionary Justice and its Effect on the Status of Equality and Inequality: Arguments For and Against 65 Law as a Convention and Law as Natural: Facts andnorms 71 (iii) Equality and Conventional Law 75 (iv) The Idea of a Natural Law 84 (v) The Generality of Law and the Concept ofequity 90 (vi) The Rational and Moral Nature of Law: Conservative and Reformative Justice 98 5 Summary and Conclusion 106 Appendix 116 Notes 118 Index 139

7 Preface The issues chosen for examination in this book are central not only to Aristotelian doctrine, but to political philosophy in general and present-day discussion in particular. For instance, there are those who argue for equality pure and simple without regard for the differences between human capacities and functions. Others, however, advocate preferential treatment for a minority irrespective of whether this is in the interest of the common good. Aristotle contends that, because of the absence of relevant resemblances and adequate criteria of comparison, it is difficult to establish true equalities between members of different social classes and individuals of diverse character and abilities. It follows that a more narrowly defmed equality between men in one sphere may go together with a considerable variety of human potential and achievement elsewhere in the body politic. In particular, since equal shares would not always be fair, fair shares need not always be equal. One might then argue that only an unfair discrimination of any sort should be remedied and replaced by equal or at least just treatment, whether through legal means, public pressure or revolutionary action. My choice of subject matter has been determined by a desire to contribute to the discussion of the Aristotelian as well as modern questions of (a) how to render the principle of equality, no less than that of inequality, compatible with the idea of fairness, and (b) how to combine the facts of individual as well as social diversity in civil life with the demands for political justice and cohesion. Aristotle advances many illustrations and arguments, queries and conclusions, bearing on these issues. He reflects whether political rule should be in the hands of a few deserving people or in those of the general body of citizens. Sometimes he assumes that these two aspects of being meritorious and of having common characteristics are of equal importance. He also perceives that a state is composed not only of different elements but of different kinds of elements, and that this is necessarily so both in commercial dealings and in the Vll

8 Vlll Preface contributions of citizens to the public good. For how could equality ever have become an issue if men had truly and clearly been equal, instead of different? This leads him to consider whether there are reliable criteria for grading men and the relative merits of their social functions and achievements. He leaves it unclear, however, whether his principle of proportionate equality, which largely insists on the factor of variety and difference, is to apply within any one area of employment only, or to all professional occupations throughout the whole of society. On the other hand, he stresses that such notions as desert, equality, justice and the public interest depend on interpretation and hence (one might say) on varying moral or political forms of understanding. Certainly, he is in no doubt that equalities assume different significance in different categories of discourse, and therefore also vary in meaning from one social class or 'part' of a state to another. What most of these arguments have in common is an emphasis on a contextual interpretation of political theory and practice. This is a sensitive philosophical issue. The role which Aristotle assigns in the Metaphysics to such common terms as equality and inequality, especially in the context of his doctrine of categories, sets the stage for the introduction of purely formal concepts to his political theory. For 'equality' is a term which can be applied in metaphysical and political thought no less than in other fields of discourse, though it assumes a different meaning in each context. I believe that the ultimately logical arguments about equality in Aristotle's Physics (bringing to mind some of Russell's formulations on this topic) also have a bearing- in fact a much stricter one- on his discussion of equality and difference in the Politics. I have described both these fmdings in Chapter 2. This is followed in Chapter 3 by a detailed exegesis of those passages in the Politics which deal with the factor of difference in ci vii society. Another part of Aristotle's political philosophy concerns the practice and theory of revolution and the rule oflaw, natural as well as conventional. These two areas of outstanding political interest, which I have investigated in Chapter 4, are of additional significance for Aristotle's arguments about a fair equality and the question of discrimination in society. There are also his exposition of the multiple meaning of law, and his insistence on the demands of equity. Again, he advances the possibility of various levels of interpretation in connection with the question of whether tradition or progress should influence the law-making process. Finally, an

9 Preface IX attempt is made to determine whether Aristotle's theory contains the rudiments of a doctrine of natural law. I have found it harder to ascertain whether his views on equality and justice, diversity and law, with all the subtle distinctions he draws, form a well-connected whole - an issue I examine in Chapter 5. However, I agree with Werner Jaeger's general assessment that the new and important feature in Aristotle's Politics is the union of normative thought with the ability to organise the multiplicity of actual political facts. In spite of this general recognition, I must stress that the examination of Aristotle's political doctrine throughout this book is entirely the result of my own interpretation. In the last two sections of Chapter 4 use has been made of passages from my paper on 'Aristotle and the Concept of Law' in Philosophy (1967). Sincere thanks are due to the editor, Renford Bambrough, for permission to reproduce this material, though it appears here in a much revised and considerably expanded form. I am also indebted to Miss Mary Ryle for allowing me to include in this book quotations from a letter to me from Professor Gilbert Ryle. Finally, my thanks are due to the London School of Economics and Political Science which, over the last ftve years, has given me an opportunity of testing this material in postgraduate classes, to the benefit of the author and, I hope, his advanced students. London W. von L.