Aristotle (384 – 322 BCE)

Unlike Plato, Aristotle was not an Athenian by birth, he was born in

Stagira and he was a pupil of Plato. Aristotle was born in 384 BCE near
the Macedonian borders. His father was Court physician to the king of
Macedonia. He later became tutor to a young Macedonian Prince-
Alexander the Great.
At the Academy, Aristotle distinguished himself as
plato’s most brilliant student. In later years, however, Aristotle begin to
break from his intellectual Master. Some Scholars speculate that this was
the reason Aristotle eventually left the academy after Plato died in 347
BC. It is also possible, again on speculation, that Aristotle left because he
was rejected by plato’s most devoted disciples who wished to defy the
master. In the Mature Works of Aristotle, he freely criticizes both Plato
and Socrates.
Where plato’s emphasis is upon the ideal state, Aristotle is interested
primarily in the best possible form of government. For this reason,
Aristotle’s vision is more practical and worldlier than plato’s. Aristotle’s
relationship to Plato was similar to JS Mill’s relationship to Bentham as
both Aristotle and mill abandoned major portions of the teachings of their
master- Plato and Bentham respectively. From Plato comes political
idealism and from Aristotle comes political realism.
The difference between Plato and Aristotle is the
difference between philosophy and Science. Plato was the father of
Political philosophy, Aristotle is the father of Political Science. Plato is a
philosopher and the later is a scientist. Plato portrays an unrealizable
Utopia – the ideal state where as Aristotle’s concern was with the best
possible state. Whatever the reason for his departure, Aristotle embarked
Upon A period of travel after leaving the academy and also tutored
Alexander the Great. He returned to Athens in 335 BC and established his
own School, the lyceum.
Aristotle could not agree with Socrates that once life should be sacrificed
to philosophical principles because he did not believe that life could be
frozen into a set of philosophical abstractions. According to Aristotle,
political philosophy should provide people with general guides and rules
of action, but more than this it should not attempt. Political science is not
a precise theoretical Science as plateau had assumed. It is a practical
science that deals with practical people who do not and should not produce
their lives to pure logic.
Given this attitude towards life and politics, it is not surprising that we
find Aristotle’s political analysis much more practical than plato's.
Aristotle was a worldly philosopher who loved politics, the most worldly
of occupations, as much as plateau despised it. Aristotle looked
continuously for ways to improve the politics without expecting
perfection. But Aristotle’s attitude towards Political Theory is not to be
explained on the basis of his temperament alone. He objective to Plato
separation of form from matter. Form, Aristotle argues, is immanent in
matter, not separated from it. In Aristotle’s biological works, species is
the form or actuality that sheets the development of living things. That is
why the fertilized egg of any living creature will produce only that given
species or form that is immanent within it.
Aristotle is known as father of Political Science as
well as comparative government and politics. He has studied 158
constitutions. He was influenced by Plato, but he had disagreements with
Plato. He was also influenced by his father who was physician. He applied
the method of biology (classification) in political studies. His most
famous book is politics. Plato’s Republic is Encyclopedic in content.
Where has Aristotle’s politics deals solely with politics and government.
The country whose political culture comes nearest to Aristotle is Britain.
Aristotle can be considered as conservative. Conservatives referred to
preserve customs and traditions.
Perspective of Aristotle as a thinker- unlike Plato, who believes that
ruling class required specific knowledge. Aristotle believes that ruling
class requires common sense. According to him, it is more important to
be worldly wise rather than wise in the world of ideas. Aristotle does not
reject the world of matter. According to Aristotle, the world of Ideas is
not independent of matter rather ideas are inherent in matter. We cannot
out rightly reject the knowledge of this world which we gain through the
use of sensory organs.
Aristotle believes in middle path. According to him,
Golden mean is the golden rule. It means the life of moderation is the best
life. According to him, for good life we require both knowledge as well
as property but in moderation. If Aristotle is for modulation, Plato is for
perfection. If Plato is idealist, Aristotle is practical. If Plato thinks about
the best, Aristotle talks about the best practicable. Aristotle is
functionalist. Functionalists are those who understands the functional
utility of any institution and so they would not abolish it. Aristotle belongs
to the school of teleology. Teleology means destiny. According to
teleology, nature has specific design for every one and every person
moves towards its natural destination.

His methodology: Aristotle’s methodology was different from Plato.

While Plato adopted the philosophical method in his approach to politics,
Aristotle followed the scientific and analytical methodology. Plato’s style
is almost poetic where as that of Aristotle, prose like. Barker comments
that Aristotle’s methodology is scientific, his work is systematic, his
writings are analytical.
• Inductive: like Plato, Aristotle does conceive ‘a good life’ (his
deductive thinking) but he builds, ‘good’ and ‘honourable life’ on
the inductive approach about the state as a union of families and
villages which came into existence for satisfying the material needs
of man. Is inductive style compelling him to classify States as he
 observes them but he never loses sight of the best state that he
imagines.
• Aristotle criticized Plato state as an artificial creation, built
successively in three stages with producers coming first and
thereafter followed by the auxiliaries and the rulers. As an architect,
Plato built the state. Aristotle, on the contrary, regarded the state as
a natural organization, the result of growth and evolution.

Comparison between Plato and Aristotle:

▪ Plato is Utopian where as Aristotle is practical.
▪ Plato believes in perfection whereas Aristotle believes in
moderation.
▪ Plato is radical where as Aristotle is conservative.
▪ Plato is extremist where as Aristotle believes in Golden mean.

Aristotle’s theory of state

Aristotle regarded the state as a natural organization, the result of growth
and evolution. For Aristotle, as with Plato, the state (polis) is all important.
Both Plato and Aristotle regard the state as a means for the attainment of
complete life. The state with Aristotle and Plato, began for the satisfaction
of basic wants, but as it developed, it became essential for good life.
The characteristic features of Aristotle’s theory of state are:
1. The state is a natural organization and not an artificial one. Unlike
plato’s ideal state, Aristotle’s state is not structured or
manufactured. It is gradually growing out of villages, villages
growing out of families, and the families out of man’s nature, his
social instincts. The state has grown like a tree.
2. The state is prior to the individual. According to Aristotle, the state
is by nature clearly prior to the family and the individual. The state
is a creation of nature, and prior to the individual, as when man is
isolated he is not self sufficient.
 3. The state is an association of associations. The Other associations
are not as large as is the state. The state has general and common
purposes and has larger concerns as compared to any other
associations.
4. The state is like a human organism. The state has its own parts that
is the individuals. Apart from the state, the individuals have no
importance, and separated from the body, the parts have no life of
their own. The interest of the individuals is inherent in the interest
of the state.
5. State is a self-sufficing institution while the village and the family
is not. The self-sufficient state is higher than the families and the
villages.
6. The state is unity in diversity. For Aristotle, the state is not a
uniformity, but it is one that brings all the diversities together.

Man is By Nature a political animal

Above statement tells the importance of state for men and why Men
should be obliged towards the state. In above statement, Aristotle shows
the limitation of the sophist view of the state. Sophists gave primacy to
individual over the state. For sophists, state is artificial and it is a product
of contract.
Aristotle belongs to the tradition of Socrates and Plato.
According to Socrates tradition, state is natural and prior to man. Aristotle
established that a state is natural by suggesting the origin of a state lies in
the natural needs of man. According to Aristotle, God has not made man
self-sufficient. Man cannot fulfill even his basic needs on his own and
hence, man creates family. Family can fulfill some of the needs but not
all. So, man creates villages. Village can fulfill some of the needs but not
all. Hence, man creates state. Only state is such institution which can
fulfill all the requirement of man. Hence, state is highest of all
associations.
This shows that origin of state is the needs of man and it is the Destiny of
man to live in the state. Chronologically, man is prior to state but logically
state is prior to man. According to him, a person who can live without
state possess super human qualities of beast / God. State comes into
existence for the sake of life and continues for the sake of good life.
Whether man is By Nature a political animal is a matter of
debate. Hobbes has challenged the Aristotelian view of man. According
to Hobbes, man is neither social nor political by Nature. Man is social and
political only out of necessity. For Hobbes, state is not natural rather the
product of contract.

The authority of Statesman is different from the authority of Master.

In this statement, Aristotle have challenged the plato’s view of the state.

What is plato's view of the state? Plato does not make a difference
between personal and political. Plato treats state as a big family. Plato
considers Philosopher King as a head of the family in the similar way
father is the head of the family. He expects all people to obey the dictates
of philosopher King just like a dictate of father in family. Plato demand
excessive sacrifice from people. Plato focus is so much on unity and
believes that Unity will come through uniformity.
According to Aristotle, state is not a family. It is family
of families. The authority of a Statesman has to be different from the
authority of the father. State should try to seek unity not through
uniformity but through unity in diversity. Aristotle proposes, ‘Polity’ as
the best practicable form of Government where citizens representing
different interest and family is come together to deliberate and formulate
laws. The laws made by the State should take care of multiple interest,
should try to achieve balance among competing interest and the principles
of family cannot be applied in case of state. Thus, Aristotle was the first
person to segregate personal from political.
Unlike the private domain of the household, the state is a public Arena in
which people come together to make decisions affecting the whole
community for good or Evil. This requires debate, hands free speech. That
is why speech is the preeminent political virtue for Aristotle. Politics
could not exist without it, although a primitive form of social organization
good. Aristotle distinguishes between animals and human beings
precisely on this crucial point. The words of one person must count as
much as those of another, otherwise there would be no equality of speech
and know genuine debate. Thus, Aristotle insist that the ruler shape of the
state is distinctly different from management of the household.
The state must be ruled constitutionally, which means that the whole
citizenry must in some way participate in an equality of rulership, where
as the inequality of the household demands the rule of one person. This is
why Aristotle believes that only in the state, only in the public arena of
political action, can people acquire virtue by attaining genuine human
happiness and fulfillment. And that is why he believes that, among all the
kinds of communities, the state alone aims at the highest good.

Aristotle’s theory of citizenship

What is citizenship? It is a legal status of a person with respect to state.

He recognise the principle of birth and blood. However, Aristotle’s basis
of citizenship is not limited to just these two criteria. Aristotle excludes
women, children, old people and slaves from the definition of the citizens.
Why? For any total citizenship is not just a formal status. He focusses on
the substantiative aspect of citizenship.
What is the substantive idea behind citizenship? According to
Aristotle, citizenship is a duty or responsibility. It is duty to participate in
the affairs of the states.
Which affairs?
1. Legislative functions - the functions of law making
2. Judicial functions – the functions of law interpretation
Hence, he excludes those groups which are not capable of performing
these roles. Unfortunately, Aristotle believed that slavery and male
Supremacy are natural. That is why he justified the exclusion of slaves
and women from the political Arena. And since this Arena alone allowed
for reasoned action, it was a logical step to conclude that slaves and
women, like children, are not fully rational.
According to Aristotle, a family consists of husband, wife,
children, slaves and property. It involves Three Types of relationships that
of the master and slave, between the husband and wife and parental
(between the father and the child).
▪ Women: The husband rules the wife (Aristotle regards women
inferior to men, and incomplete male). With his Belief in patriarchy,
Aristotle wanted to keep women within the four walls of the house,
good only for household work and reproduction and nurture of the
species.
▪ Old people: because of their health conditions, they may not be able
to play the required role.
▪ Children: because of immaturity.
▪ Slaves: They lack reason, which is important to make laws.

Thus, only natural born adult male possessing property qualifies to be a

citizen.

The population of Greek city States was divided into citizens, slaves,
women and foreign resident. Aristotle held the view that man is a political
animal and he could reach the full potential of his life and personality only
by participation in the affairs of the polis. Hence, the question was who
could participate and who could not. For Aristotle, a citizen was a man
who enjoys the right of sharing in deliberative of judicial office. Before
discussing who is a citizen, Aristotle clarifies what citizenship is not. He
said that mere residence in the polis does not make a person a citizen-
aliens and slaves reside along with citizens in the same city.
According to Aristotle, this can be different in different
governments such as monarchy, oligarchy or democracy. But nowhere
this power is given to slaves, women and foreign residents. Aristotle also
excluded manual and menial workers from the pale of citizenship. He had
solid reasons for this. According to him, participation in the deliberative
and judicial functions of the state demands a high degree of moral and
intellectual excellence, which termed as ‘virtue’. This is not found in all
the inhabitants of the state.
The slaves are not citizens because they do not have
deliberative faculty. Women are not citizen because they do not possess
virtues worth of citizens. The resident aliens cannot be citizen because
they are the citizens of other city state. The mechanics and laborers are
not citizens because they lead an ignorable life. Citizens are all who share
in the Civic life of ruling and being ruled in turn. They must possess the
knowledge and the capacity requisite for ruling as well as for being rude.
Aristotle believed in the dictum that he who has never learnt to obey
cannot be a good commander. The good citizen ought to be capable of
both. Aristotle says that the citizen should know both how to rule and how
to obey.
Criticism of Aristotle’s theory of citizenship: the theory of citizenship
given by Aristotle is too narrow and cannot be supported in the present
age of democracy. However, Aristotle’s theory of citizenship was
practically followed in all Western countries till 19 th century. Only in 20th
century, property qualification was removed and working class as well as
women were allowed to vote. Though his theory cannot be accepted yet,
we cannot overlook the substantive dimension of citizenship as given by
Aristotle. Aristotle is a source of inspiration for many contemporary
Scholars like Hannah Ardent who also talks about active citizenship.
Aristotle’s theory of slavery:
Aristotle is of the view that slavery is natural and useful. Slavery was in
practice in ancient Greece. Aristotle has justified slavery. Aristotle’s
justification is about natural slaves rather than legal slaves.
Who were legal slaves? Prisoners of War were slaves by law.
Who are slaves by nature? To know who slaves By Nature are we need
to know, who are Masters by nature.
What are the qualities of Masters?
• Reason
• Courage
Even courage is very important because if person lacks courage he will
not take the decisions because of the fear of decision going wrong.
Hence, those who lack reason and courage are slave by nature. There
are some persons who are always dependent on others to take decisions
for them. Such persons are not even masters of themselves.
Aristotle suggest that nature has created two types of persons-
1. Those who are physically strong
2. Those who are mentally strong
Those who are physically strong should involve themselves in the
task of production and those who are mentally strong should involve
themselves in the affairs of the state.
Aristotle strongly believe and justified the Institution of slavery. He
opined slaves as the possession of the family and considered slaves as the
property of the master or the family. He stated that slavery is natural and
beneficial to both the masters as well as the slaves. He was of the belief
that the slaves have no reasoning power despite the ability to understand
and follow their intellect. Therefore, according to Aristotle, natural slaves
are those who understand reason but possess no reasoning ability.
The logic given by him was that those who were not
Virtuous was leaves and that it was possible to determine who is Virtuous
and who is not. He further stated that as there are inequalities with
reference to their capability and capacities, all those who had higher
capacities were called Masters and the rest are slaves. He also
categorically stated that slave belong to the master and not vice versa.

Aristotle justified the Institution of slavery on the following grounds:

• Natural: slavery is a natural phenomenon. The superior would rule
over the inferior just as the soul rules over the body and reason over
appetite. In other words, people with superior reasoning powers
would rule over those inferior in reasoning. The masters are stated
to be physically and mentally strong then the sleeves. So, this setup
naturally makes the former The Master, And the latter the slave.
• Necessary: slaves are considered necessary because they provide
leisure that was most essential for the Welfare of the state. Aristotle
stated that slavery benefited the slaves as well. Because by being a
Slave, he would be able to share the virtues of the master and elevate
himself.
• Expediency: Aristotle was of the opinion that slaves have sustain
the Greek social and economic system, and they helped Greece
against social disorder and chaos. He stated that slavery is a social
necessity. It was complementary to the slaves as well as the masters
and that it aids in perfection.

Utility of slavery :
1. Useful for master: master will have leisure time to develop his
virtues. Hence, master should treat slave properly.
2. Useful for economic system: since slave is physically strong, he can
work for a longer duration.
 3. Good for the state: because master will get time to participate in the
affairs of the state.
4. Good for slave: it is a necessity for a Slave because he does not have
reason. He will require someone else to guide him. In the company
of a good master, slave can develop virtue. If slave develops virtue
of reason and courage, master should set him free.

Aristotle approves slavery only under certain conditions, as follows:

➢ Only those who were mentally deficient and virtuously not superior
should be enslaved. Aristotle, however, never agreed to the
enslavement of prisoners of War because victory in the war does not
necessarily mean intellectual superiority of the victor or the mental
deficiency of the vanquished. He was against the idea of slavery by
force.
➢ Aristotle insisted that Masters must treat their slaves properly, and
strongly propagated that cruel Masters must be subjected to legal
punishments.
➢ He advocated the Liberation of only those slaves whose conduct was
good and who developed capacity for reasoning and virtue.
➢ Slavery was essential for the all-round development but the master
has no right to misuse his Power. Slaves are only assistance but not
subordinates.
Criticism of Aristotle’s theory of slavery:
Aristotle has been criticized for justifying slavery in the age of human
rights. He cannot justify the institution like slavery howsoever useful it is.
Immanuel Kant held that each man is an end in itself. No one ought to
treat the others as means to an end.
• Classification of individuals on the basis of capacities is wrong and
Aristotle never provided any logical method to be adopted to
classify individuals.
• He rejected historical origin of slavery and justified it on
philosophical rationalization.
 • His views on slavery reflect his conservatism and primitive outlook
towards life.
• His theory is highly prejudicial and contradictory to the human
dignity and necessities of life. It is pre judicial, in the sense it
presupposed that Greeks were fit to rule the world and they could
not be enslaved even if they were defeated by the barbarians.

Aristotle’s theory of property:

Aristotle was critique of plato’s view on property. Aristotle did not
support the idea of communism of property. He has drawn his views on
property while he was criticizing plato’s views on property.
What is property according to Aristotle? That property is legitimate
which is the product of One's labour. The property which is earned by
force or fraud is not legitimate. He even criticized the Institution of money
lending. According to Aristotle, property is of two types:
1. Animate – Slaves
2. Inanimate – lifeless

Whatsoever be the kind of property, it is healthy if it helps person in

leading good and healthy life. He did not favor the disproportionate
amount of property, he asserted to acquire sufficient wealth to lead a
good life. His views on property are very important, he justified for
Holding Private property and also stressed that Endless amount of
wealth is bad for the society. But his views on property are not up to
date. No one can deny that his views on private property are on the
basis of complete philosophy and logic. The justification given by him
in this regard was 2000 years back and still it holds good even today.
Plato stated that property is not good for the unity of state and restricted
property from the guardian class. Whereas Aristotle reflects as property is
necessary for the normal functions of household and social growth. He
explains the possession of property as follows:
▪ The Institution of property is good for the individual and for the
society. It gives individual encouragement to work and donate to the
social growth.
▪ Having property is basis of self respect, pleasure and self love. It can
be used for the improvement of the society.
▪ The qualities like generosity, liberality, hospitality and
righteousness can be encouraged by the property, which plays an
important role in the human personality.
▪ Owning of the private property supports in the improvement of
virtues such as skills of Management and vigilance and would be
useful in the management of state affairs.
▪ The owning of private property creates the sense of Civic duty, and
he will take interest in the state affairs. Money raised from taxes can
be used correctly for the benefit of community. He would make sure
for the protection of his own property, and the people who do not
have property would spend much money of the state.
▪ It is the natural character of man to have property, any effort to
abolish the property shall result in disharmony.
Aristotle suggest very good explanation about the owning of property, he
also exerted the holding and using property which determines the healthy
or unhealthy results of the property. There are four methods to hold and
use of the private property like:
1. Individual ownership and individual use – for Aristotle, it is the
most dangerous situation.
2. Common ownership and common use – Aristotle does not support
common ownership and common use. According to him, everyone’s
property is no-one’s responsibility. According to him, it is a difficult
business for the people to stay together. It is more difficult when the
question of property is involved. Common ownership is not good
for the property, person as well as society. It is impracticable.
 3. Common ownership and individual use – it is illogical in practical
and in case if it exists, it will be very exploitative. A situation which
can begin with socialism but would end up in capitalism. It is not
also acceptable.
4. Individual ownership and common use – he supports this system
on the principle of Golden mean. Private property is justified but it
has to be acquired through honest means.
Benefits of individual ownership:
• More productive
• Source of motivation to work hard
• Men of property are men of reason. So, good for stability.
• Source of Charity and generosity
Benefits of Common use: in order to minimize the evils of excessive
property which will develop jealousy against the rich, He suggest
that rich persons should keep the moderate wealth enough for a good
life and contribute the surplus for the well being of the society.
Why? Man needs to recognise the role played by the society in his
well being. Man is By Nature a social animal. He should be back to
the society.

Aristotle’s theory of justice:

The entire Greek political thought revolves around the important concept
of Justice. This is an abstract concept and is difficult to define it in fixed
terms, as it is viewed differently by different thinkers. Like his teacher
Plato, Aristotle believed that justice is the very essence of the state and
that no polity can endure for a long time unless it is founded on a right
scheme of Justice. Aristotle believed that justice provides an aim to the
state, and an object to the individual.

Like his teacher, Plato Aristotle regarded justice as

the virtue, complete virtue, and the embodiment of all goodness. Justice
is virtue, but it is more than virtue; it is virtue in action. Justice saves the
state from destruction, it makes the state and political life pure and
healthy.

But for Aristotle, justice is of two types, viz.,

1. universal justice - refers to obedience to laws—that one should be

virtuous.

2. particular justice - it is again of two types, viz.,

• Distributive justice - implies that the state should divide or

distribute goods and wealth among citizens according to the
merit.

• remedial or corrective justice - divided into two, dealing with

voluntary transactions (civil law) and the dealing with
involuntary transaction (criminal law). Further, Aristotle
added commercial and cumulative justice to the above-
mentioned types of justice.

Distributive Justice: Aristotle was of the opinion that this form of justice
is the most powerful law to prevent any revolution, as this justice
believes in proper and proportionate allocation of offices, honors, goods
and services as per their requirement being a citizen of the state.
This justice is mostly concerned with political privileges. Aristotle
advocated that every political organization must have its own distributive
justice. He, however, rejected democratic as well as oligarchic criteria of
justice and permitted the allocation of offices to the virtuous only owing
to their highest contributions to the society, because the virtuous people
are few. Aristotle believed that most of the offices should be allocated to
those few only.
Corrective Justice: All laws related to commercial transactions are
dealt within the remedial and corrective actions. It aims to restore what an
individual had lost due to the injustice of the society. This justice prevents
from encroachments of one right over the other.
Aristotle opined that corrective justice relates to voluntary and
commercial activities such as hire, sale and furnishing security. These
actions involve aggression on life, property, honor and freedom. In brief,
this justice aims at virtue and moral excellence of character and it is for
this reason, it is called corrective justice.

In the theory of distributive justice, Aristotle proposes the principle

of merit. What is the difference between desert and merit?
Desert means what one deserves (Person’s Talent). Merit is a social
concept. It is the value society gives to the particular work. For example,
it depends on society whether it gives better importance to the work of the
teacher or domestic servant.
Aristotle gives the principle of merit. Reward should be in
accordance to the importance of the work of the person for the society.
Aristotle does not believe in absolute equality, he believes in
proportionate equality.
“it is unjust to treat equals, unequally. It is equally unjust to treat
unequal, equally.” This statement explains Aristotle’s theory of justice.
His theory of justice is linked to the theory of equality / idea of equality.
According to Aristotle, justice demands that the persons who are equal,
possess equal merit, ought to be treated equally. If a state go for
discrimination against the person who deserve to be treated equally, such
person will be tempted to go against state. The commonest cause of
revolution is the feeling of inequality, real or imagined.
 Aristotle does not support absolute equality. Absolute
equality will be injustice with the person who is more talented or
meritorious. If state will give equal treatment to more meritorious and less
meritorious, it will give rise to the feeling of injustice. Feeling of injustice
will also lead to Revolution and suggestions. We can see the linkage
between Aristotle theory of justice and his theory of slavery. It will be
injustice if state will treat master and slave equally.
Criticism: Aristotle was supporter of meritocratic society. Merit can be
one of the criteria of the justice but it cannot be the sole criteria of Justice.
According to John Rawls, justice is fairness. Constitution of India reflects
the idea of justice based on the concept of fairness. In India, because level
playing field does not exist, merit alone cannot be the criteria of Justice.

Comparison of the notion of justice As given by Plato and Aristotle:

▪ Plato's justice is the performance of one’s duty to the best of one’s
abilities and capacities. For Aristotle, justice is the reward in
proposition to what one contributes.
▪ Plato’s justice is related to duties; it is duties-oriented where as
Aristotle’s justice is related to rights; it is rights oriented.
▪ Plato’s theory of justice is moral and philosophical and that of
Aristotle is legal.
▪ Both had a conception of distributive justice. Foreplay to, that meant
individual excellence and performance of one’s duty while for
Aristotle it meant what people deserve, the right to receive.
▪ Plato’s justice is spiritual where as Aristotle’s justice is practical that
is it is virtue in action, goodness in practice.
▪ Plato’s justice is related to one's inner self that is what come straight
from the soul. Aristotle’s justice is related to man's action that is
with his external activities.
Aristotle’s theory of justice is worldly, associated with man’s conduct in
practical life, of course with all ethical values guiding him. But he was
unable to correlate the ethical dimension of justice to its legal dimension.
His distributive justice is far away from the realities of the political world.
It is indeed, difficult to bring about a balance between the ever-increasing
population and ever decreasing opportunities of the state.

Aristotle’s theory of constitution:

Aristotle treats constitution, Government and state interchangeably.
Aristotle is known as father of constitutionalism because he does not
permit the deviation between constitution and manner of government.
According to Aristotle, constitution is an arrangement of political offices
that effectively determines who shall be allowed to participate in ruling
the state.
Aristotle has started 158 constitutions point on the basis of his
study he has given 6 basic forms of constitution. He has classified
constitutions on two parameters:
1. Objective of governance
2. Number of persons ruling
Aristotle proposes a six-fold classification of constitutions, 3 good and 3
bad. The three good constitutions are monarchy (rule by one),
aristocracy (Rule By the few) and polity (Rule By the many). The
corresponding types of perverted constitutions are tyranny, oligarchy,
and democracy. In this scheme, the absolute kind of Constitution is
monarchy, the absolute worst is Tyranny.
In his classification, monarchy or the rule of philosopher
king is the best but not the best practicable. The practical form of
monarchy will be Tyranny. Tyranny is the worst form of Government and
hence it will not be stable.
Polity is the rule of middle class in the interest of the people. According
to Aristotle, it is the best practice able form of Government. It represents
the golden mean of oligarchy and democracy. Polity is a rule of many but
not too many which means rule of ignorance and poor.
Democracy is the second worst form of Government. Democracy will get
replaced by Tyranny. Oligarchy is a rule of rich but it will also not be
stable because poors will be conspiring against the rich. Similarly, in
democracy the rich will be conspiring against poor.

Aristotle gives following arguments to support that the polity is the best
practicable form of government:
• Rich do not trust poor, poor do not trust rich. But both will trust the
middle class.
• Poor suffers from ignorance and rich from arrogance. Neither poor
nor rich are in the habit of obedience to the law.
• Middle class have reason and moderate wealth. They have been
many examples of great lawgiver like Solon belonging to middle
class.
Thus, polity avoid the two extremes –
▪ The extreme of richness and extreme of poverty.
▪ The extreme of arrogance and ignorance and it is based on the principle
of Golden mean.
From Aristotle’s theory, we should take the inherent message that those
societies where huge disparity exist are not stable and will be more prone
to conspiracy and societies where more number of person are in middle
class are stable.
Rule of law: “ law is a reason without passion”
Aristotle has compared rule of law with rule of philosopher King / person
and has established the superiority of rule of law. The context of
Aristotle’s theory is the criticism of the Institution of philosopher king.
Plato has given absolute powers to the philosopher king. In the words of
Plato, “For no law or Ordinance is mightier than knowledge”
Aristotle is the greatest critic of Plato and the greatest
disciple of Plato. If Plato talks about the best, Aristotle talks about the best
practicable. According to Aristotle, it is Utopian to think that we can find
a philosopher king. Even when we find philosopher King there is no
guarantee that he will not act with passion.
According to him, law and reason is same. They are two sides of same
coin. The purpose of both is to guide man about right and wrong. Law is
the outward manifestation of reason. If a reason is in Soul, law is in the
book of law. Not only law and reason is same, rule of law comes with
additional security and benefits.
• Law is a reason minus passion. Lord does not change according to
the person. It is impersonal. Law has additional benefits:
o Law represents collective wisdom which is preferable to the
wisdom of one person.
o Law represents the wisdom of ages and it would not be wise
to challenge the collective wisdom of ages in the name of
ultimate knowledge.
Aristotle suggests that we should not sacrifice good for the sake of best
because best is unachievable.

Aristotle's theory of revolution:

Aristotle preface stability and is sensitive about the changes in the
political system. Unlike contemporary definition of revolution associated
with Karl Marx, Revolution for Aristotle means any change in the political
system - big or small, peaceful or violent, change in the number of
persons, change in the constitution.
Aristotle has started 158 constitutions and has given a detailed
view on the causes of revolution. He has given general and particular
causes (regime specific) . In all forms of government, there exist some
general causes. Among these general causes, the commonest cause is the
feeling of inequality which is linked to the feeling of injustice. Thus, he
is sensitive about psychological conditions also. feeling of inequality may
be real or just imagined.
Among the other general causes include:
1. Universal passion for power and privileges
2. Carelessness and corruption of the ruling classes
3. Overreach of high headedness of the ruling class
4. Inequalities in income and wealth
5. If state gives undue importance to certain individuals and does not
give due importance to certain individuals who deserves
6. Disproportionate increase in any aspect of the state
7. Sudden influx of foreigners
8. Rivalry between classes
9. Neglect of small changes by the ruling class and Change inevitable
and people have liking for change

Regime Specific Changes:

I. Monarchy – family quarrels and jealousy
II. Oligarchy – poor will be conspiring against the rich and rich will be
neglecting the poor
III. Democracy - people will elect demagogic leaders who will
established Tyranny
Solution: treat the Causes- He give some additional solutions.
• Cultivate the spirit of obedience to law
• Educate citizens about Civic virtue
• Inculcate patriotism
• Moderate exercise of power