Aristotle on Politics as Art and Praxis

• In Event: Politics, Science, and the Art of Interpretation

Abstract

In his political writings Aristotle describes the activity of political rule using two very different lenses or frameworks. In the first, politics is an art, an application of reason to achieve a result beyond the activity, namely the happiness of the ruled, which may incidentally include that of the ruler as one member of the community. In the second framework, political activity is choiceworthy as an end in itself, one of the two lives chosen by those most serious about virtue as an opportunity to put one’s excellence into activity in the best way. According to this framework, ruling is a prize deserved by the very best in recognition of their excellence. The first framework if followed exclusively leads to the conclusion that the single wisest person should rule, while giving him little reason to wish to rule. The second framework if followed exclusively points again towards monarchy but in an opposite way, spurring those most serious about virtue to desire sole rule for themselves. This paper explores the tension between the two frameworks and their possible reconciliation. It argues that each framework without the other is radically incomplete: viewing politics solely as art is to fail to do justice to our political nature, while viewing it solely as praxis without reference to art is to leave political virtue empty and without content. Understanding their proper reconciliation is key to understanding Aristotle’s deepest arguments for republican self-government.

Author

• Lorraine Pangle, University of Texas at Austin