Born in the year of 384 B.C. Aristotle was seen
as conventional for his time, for he regarded slavery as a natural course of
nature and believed that certain people were born to be slaves due to the fact
that their soul lacked the rational part that should rule in a human
being; However in certain circumstances
it is evident that Aristotle did not believe that all men who were slaves were
meant to be slaves.
In his book Politics, Aristotle begins with the
Theory of The Household, and it is here that the majority of his views upon
slavery are found. With the beginning of
Chapter IV, Aristotle's idea of slavery is clearly defined. "The instruments of the household form
its stock of property : they are animate and inanimate : the slave is an
animate instrument, intended (like all the instruments of the
household) for
action, and not for productions."
This distinction between action and production, is based upon the
understanding that 'production' is a course in which a result is desired beyond
the immediate act of doing. Where as,
the simple act of completing a task is identified as 'action'. Aristotle, who believed that life was action
and not production theorized that slaves were instruments of life and were
therefore needed to form a complete household.
In fact Aristotle went as far as to say that a slave was comparable to a
tame animal, with their only divergence in the fact that a slave
could apprehend
reason. For he concluded that a slave
and animals only use was to supply their owners with bodily help.
At the end of the Theories of the Household,
Aristotle explains how slaves are different from andy other types of people, in
the sence that they are the only class who are born into their occupation and
become property of their masters. In
examining this relationship we find that he thought that while masters were the
masters of the slaves, they still held a life other than that of being master; However, Aristotle believed that not only was
the slave a slave to his master, but the
slave had no other life or purpose than belonging. From this consideration we begin to
understand Aristotle's views on the relationship between Master and Slave.
At the beginning of Chapter V of the Theory of
the Household, the distinct role of master and slave is defined.
There is a principle of rule and
subordin-
action in nature at large : it appears
especially in the realm of animate
creation.
By virtue of that principle, the soul
rules
the body; and by virtue of it the master,
who possesses the
rational faculty of the soul,
rules the slave, who possesses only
bodily
powers and the faculty of understanding
the
directions given by another's reason.
It was Aristotle's views on the human soul that
gave grounds to his arguments for slavery.
It was his beliefs that the soul
was divided into
two parts, being the rational faculty and the
capacity for
obeying. Aristotle postulated that a
freeman was innately born with the rational faculty while "A slave is
entirely without the faculty of deliberation." And with his views he felt as though it was
necessary for there to be a natural ruling order, whereas, the body was ruled
by the soul, and those with the natural rational faculty within their soul
should rule others without. This
relationship, Aristotle found to be an essential element in his idea of master
and slave being two parts forming one common entity.
It was his belief that a man's body was the
representation of his inner self and that it was nature's intentions to
distinguish between those who were born to be freemen and those born to be
slaves. However, we see that Aristotle
have somewhat reservations upon his beliefs that all slaves corresponded to his
mold. With such quotes as "But with
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." we
begin to see that Aristotle was not as conservative as believed. In fact, we start to understand the left-wing
attitudes that Aristotle held. At the
end of Chapter V of the Theories of the Household, Aristotle concludes "The contrary of
nature's intentions,
however, often
happens: there are some slaves who have
the
bodies of freemen-as
there are others who have a freeman's soul."
Aristotle
in his Theories of the Household,
allocates a full section (section 9 chapter VI), to the explanation of
the relationship between a slave and a freeman who are not naturally meant to
be as such. It was Aristotle's view that
although there are slaves who were born to be freemen and freemen who were born
to be slaves, there could be a relationship in such cases where
the two
discerning parties would work in a community of interest and in a relationship
of friendship. "The part and the
whole, like the body and the soul, have an identical interest; and the slave is
a part of the master, in the sence if being a living but separate part."
Aristotle had many slaves himself within his household,
and during the course of his death and through the executing of his will we
find insight into the character of Aristotle.
He died in the year of 322 B.C. and with his death he requested that
four of his slaves be emancipated. Also
he asked that none of his house slaves be sold and that they all be given the
opportunity of being set free at a due age if they so deserved. This act of generosity and goodwill gives
light to the attitudes that Aristotle held.
It is evident that he believed that these slaves had the capacity to be
freemen with the rational faculty within themselves to make conscious, and
reasonable decisions. Many
scholars such as
Professor Jaeger, author of Aristotleles,
theorized that
many of the views that Aristotle held upon the
subject of
slavery were developed through the close relationship that Aristotle had formed
with an ex-slave. This man was
Hermias. A man who had risen from the
ranks of slave to a prince of considerable wealth, as well as father in law to
Aristotle.
On the general analysis of Aristotle we find
that he was a man of great curiosity, wisdom and ideas. Although his views on
slavery seemed to
hold true to the times, he had many variations on the conservative norms and
beliefs. He had believed that slavery
was a just system where both master and slave were beneficial from this
relationship. And with this he thought
that by nature, certain people were born to be slaves, yet with these beliefs
we find many exceptions, where Aristotle allocates areas to describe those who
by chance became slaves but in his opinion were born to be free. And in such incidence where men born free
were not fit to be masters Aristotle explained how it would be easier for the
master to obtain a steward who was more adept at giving instructions to run the
household and leave the master of the house to more prudent issues.
We can only guess as to what made Aristotle
believe that by the human soul one could delineate whether or not a man was
meant to be a slave or a freeman. And
with his arguments we find that it was just as difficult for him to make that
distinction as well. "Though it is
not as easy to see the beauty of the soul as it is to see that of the
body."
No comments:
Post a Comment