Phil 2230:

Moral Issues in Business

Aristotle's Politics

 c.araujo@uwinnipeg.ca
 4G10
 MWF 1:00-2:00
ARISTOTLE OF STAGIRA
Aristotle's Politics
•The term politics derives from the Greek for 'city' ( polis or πολις).
• The polis was the basic political unit of Hellenic civilization. Greece was not unified as a nation, but
broken-up into a plurality of city-states, e.g., Athens, Sparta, etc.
•Aristotle's political philosophy is premised upon the view that every form of human association
'aims' at some 'good' or 'end'--- i.e., they have a 'purpose' or 'goal'.
•The highest form of association, the polis, aims at realizing the highest of goods.
• “[I]f all communities aim at some good, the state or the political community, which is the highest of all,
…aims at good in a greater degree than any other, and at the highest good.”
•The political association comes-into-being as a means of mere life, but the ultimate end of
politics is to actualize a 'Good Life'.
• “[T]he state comes into existence, originating in the bare needs of life, and continuing in existence for
the sake of a good life.”
Teleology
 Teleology is rooted in the Greek term τελοσ or telos ('end', 'aim', 'goal' or 'purpose').
• Aristotle's Metaphysics identified four types of causation, including this idea of final causation.
• Teleology implies a process of immanent development oriented towards realizing final ends.
• “Nature…does nothing in vain” (e.g., acorn/oak, metaphysics of potentiality/actuality).
 “Things are defined by their function and power;” but these are potentialities actualized only in
their maturity, i.e., in the highest form given to their process of development.
• The complete development of a function is what Aristotle terms 'virtue'.
• What is the function of the musician? To play music. What is her virtue? To play music well.
• “[T]he nature of a thing is its end. For what each thing is when fully developed, we call its nature,
whether we are speaking of a man, a horse, or a family. Besides, the final cause and end of a
thing is the best.”
 Aristotle's political philosophy is teleological in that adheres to the view that political progress is
oriented towards the highest good: viz., human happiness or flourishing ( 'eudaimonia').
 Economics is 'instrumental' to serving this end. Aristotle treats it as subordinate to the ultimate
purpose of human life.
 Aristotle's Political Anthropology
▐ Aristotle's political anthropology defines the human as a zwon politikon .
• We are “more of a political animal than bees or...gregarious animals.”
• “[T]he state is a creation of nature...[M]an is by nature a political animal.”
▐ While he was aware that politics developed out of earlier forms of association (e.g., the
family, village life, etc.), Aristotle argues that the polis is prior to the individual--- a claim
which can be made sense of only with reference to the idea of final causation. Teleology
therefore informs his conception of the human being as an 'animal that lives within a city'.
• Aristotle views humans as endowed, by nature, with certain essential capacities (viz.,
reason); but those capabilities must be cultivated through practice and within society.
• Aristotle's political animal is therefore capable of individuating itself only within society.
• Social relations are required for the human to realize its 'final end' or 'purpose'.
• “[T]he 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 self-sufficing...For man, when
perfected, is the best of animals, but, when separated from law and justice, he is the
 Oikonomia & Chrematistike

 'Economy' is derived from 'oikonomia': the 'art of household management' ('oikos' = home, i.e., a private
sphere distinct from the public realm of the polis).
 Since the home includes its property, the 'art of wealth-making' is included within household management.
• “Property is a part of the household, and the art of acquiring property is a part of the art of managing the
household; for no man can live well, or indeed live at all, unless he is provided with necessaries.”
 However, Aristotle distinguishes between two forms of accumulation: the unlimited and the limited forms.
• “Of the art of acquisition then there is one kind which by nature is a part of the management of a
household…They are the elements of true riches; for the amount of property which is needed for a good
life is not unlimited.”
 The unlimited form, chrematistics, regards wealth-making as an end-in-itself, not as a mere means to the
realizaton of a 'Good Life'--- which Aristotle refers to as true wealth.
• “But the art of wealth-getting which consists in household management, on the other hand, has a limit; the
unlimited acquisition of wealth is not its business.”
 Oikonomia & Chrematistike
• For the “art of household management” (oikonomia), there is a definite “boundary fixed”
to the amount of wealth: namely, the amount required to live a fulfilling life.

• For chrematistics, the “riches and property have no limit” and, in pursuing of such aims,
individuals ignore the more important goal of developing their human capacities.

• Aristotle associates the unlimited form of wealth-making with merchants and “retail
trade.”
– These modes of economic life conflate wealth with a great “quantity of coin” and with
the “greatest profit” to be made. They only aim at increasing their “hoard of coin
without limit.”
– The “whole idea of their lives is…to increase their money without limit…The origin of
this disposition in men is that they are intent upon living only, and not upon living
well.”
 The Desire for Unlimited Accumulation
• Aristotle associates this passion for the unlimited accumulation of
money with an accursed hunger for gold.
– “But how can that be wealth of which a man may have a great abundance
and yet perish with hunger, like Midas in the fable, whose insatiable
prayer turned everything that was set before him into gold?”

• These two arts of wealth-making are sometimes confused with one

another because their “instrument,” or means, may be similar at
times. However, their ends are entirely different: “accumulation is
the end in the one case, but there is a further end in the other.”
– The art of oikonomia therefore “attends more to men than to the
acquisition of inanimate things.” It is concerned more with the
development of “human excellence,” or virtue, rather than the heaping up
of coins.
 The Story of Thales
–Thales, who coined the term chrematistics, was a philosopher who
famously dabbled in economic affairs.
• He had taken a vow of voluntary poverty in pursuit of a life of
philosophy. However, he was “reproached for his poverty, which was
supposed to show that philosophy was of no use.”
• Using his knowledge of astronomy and meterology, Thales speculated
that there might be a “great harvest of olives in the coming year.” He
placed downpayments on all of the presses in Miletus, purchasing
them cheaply during the off-season, and amassed a great sum by
lending them out to the highest bidders at the time of harvest.
• Thales “showed the world that philosophers can easily get rich if they
like, but that their ambition is of another sort.”
 Aristotle on Labour
–Just as Aristotle did not believe that unlimited wealth-making was a worthy
activity, neither did he regard labour as anything but a mere means to satisfying
the economic conditions required for a 'Good Life'.
• “[I]f every instrument could accomplish its own work, obeying or anticipating
the will of others, like the statues of Daedalus, or the tripods of
Haephaestus….if, in like manner, the shuttle would weave...chief workmen
would not want servants, nor masters slaves.”

• In the Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle tells us that the highest form of life
involves not physical labour but exercising the highest function of human
nature, viz., the “contemplative life.”
 Economic Inequality & the Middle Class
–What is the adequate amount of wealth? Two main principles seem to inform
Aristotle's thoughts on the economic basis of human well-being.
• On the one hand, then, no individual can live a good life without a certain amount of
property and wealth.
• On the other hand, however, the amount of property and wealth required for a happy life is
limited.
–Since individuals who are too poor and too rich find it difficult to lead 'good'
lives, Aristote was opposed to extreme disparities of wealth and excessive
economic inequality--- an economic problem which he also regarded as
undermining the political order, ethical purpose, and social cohesion of the polis.
–As such, Aristotle contends that a well-functioning and flourishing society would
have a very large middle class, with political power being concentrated neither in
the hands of the populist demagogues for the poor nor in the hands of an
oligarchy of the rich.
 WHAT IS Eudaimonia?
• For aristotle, the highest end and chielf good is happiness
(“eudaimonia”) – a state of flourishing or excellent. What
brings us happiness?
– Happiness is not fun, or more amusement, for Artistotle.
Eduaminonia is more akin to self-realization or self-fullfiment
and it requires work, education, activity, effort, etc.
– Happiness does not consist of pleasure, honour, or wealht, it
consists of developing and realizing your essential capacities,
viz, your installe. The highest and happinest fomr of life is
therefore