In Aristotle's Politics, Book V, in part VIII, it says,
"And since innovations creep in through the private life of individuals also, there ought to be a magistracy which will have an eye to those whose life is not in harmony with the government, whether oligarchy or democracy or any other."
Does it mean that Aristotle approves extensive state survellance, like in the Orwellian state or the modern totalitarian institutions? Or does he mean something else different?
Who really knows what Aristotle thought. Translations, interpretations all differ. But, at least from this quote, it sure sounds like he (or whoever interpreted it) felt that some people were better than others and knew better than others who will watch over others.
Humankind never changes while it is changing. Fascinating!
Aren't some people better than others? Wasn't Albert Einstein better than Charles Manson. Or Winston Churchill better than Adolf Hitler?
I guess it depends upon who you asked. Millions of Germans loved Hitler. Don't know what to make of that. Actually lots of people in the U.S had lots of nice things to say about him. Charles Manson had his followers. There are all kinds in this world.
As for me, I don't think of myself as being better than anyone else, though others may believe I am. I just seem myself as different in some ways and similar in other ways. To each his own. If you feel you are better than someone else, then that's fine with me. Let me know what happens when you tell that person that you are better than him/her.
I don't understand your argument. Do you?
I don't usually tell people I am better than they are. Sometimes they know it is true so there is no point in it. And with others, they would not understand why it was true. So, why bother? But people have different talents and capacities. S
Remembering the situation in which Aristotle wrote, it might be difficult to extrapolate his words to fit more modern concepts; a magistracy is not the same as a state police, something unknown in his world. Moreover, it would require some consideration of the context of the passage to understand what "have an eye" to those not in "harmony" with the government meant for Aristotle.
If the OP could provide standard citation (Bekker numbers) of the passage as well as the translation quoted, it might be interesting to compare the text to different translations and to the original.
No argument. Just observation.
Yep, everyone is different. And everyone likes different things. Anyhow, that is how I look at it. Different strokes for different strokes. If you can figure out who is better, all power to you. :bigsmile:
Isn't that so. (Hell, there are, I suppose, some people who are better at logic and argumentation than others).
If you feel like you have to be better, fine. If you think other people are better, fine. If you think there is a concept of better. Fine. I don't. If it bothers you, I am sorry. You will have to somehow learn to live with it, because it is doubtful I am going to change my perspective any time soon.
I play chess. I took art classes. I play music. I embrace the concept of perspective. That is how I learned to play chess. Understanding the other persons perspective. Putting myself in my opponent's shoes.
Now, back to Aristotle and his perspective, and my perspective of what he wrote (or what someone translated and interpreted and said was Aristotle's perspective - or whatever).
So does that mean you think that Bobby Fisher was a better chess player than you, or not? And, does that mean that you think that Einstein was a better physicist than you, or not? I don't think you got to that. Or, perhaps, by putting yourself into the shoes of others, you don't think at all? You know, there is a stage beyond open-mindedness by which you become empty-headed. You have to be careful not to confuse the two. What about Aristotle and perspectives?
There are many dimensions to people. Everyone is his own person. None better than anyone else.
In my opinion there is a greater likelihood that Fischer (note the spelling) would be in in a game of chess than I would beat him. As for Einstein, there was a greater likelihood that he would understand a physics formula than I.
As for the rest of your comments, I am simply attempting to be polite and respectful of the op at this point. I do not want to digress from the topic at hand.
Also, if I feel you are being disrespectful to me in the future, I will not respond.
"Bekker numbers" refers to the page numbers of the collected works (in Greek) of Aristotle in the critical edition of the Prussian Royal Academy, edited by Bekker.
These numbers have a format of four numbers (page), a letter for the column (a or b, since there were two columns) and lastly a line number of the Greek text.
All modern translations or editions of Aristotle indicate the Bekker numbers so that readers may find the reference easily no matter which translation they have, or to compare it to the original passage. A similar method of citation is used for most classical works (Plato's is the Stephanus edition).
My copy of Jowett's translation shows the Bekker numbers, beginning with 1252a1 and ending with 1342b30. 1313-1316 appear to be page and not line numbers and enclude (in my copy) about 7 actual pages of small text.