Aristotle, Politics book 1 | Natural and Unnatural Slavery | Philosophy Core Concepts
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 09. 2018
- Check out the Aristotle on the Moral Virtues class (starting April 13) - reasonio.teachable.com/p/aris...
Request personal videos on Cameo - www.cameo.com/gregorybsadler
Get Aristotle's Politics - amzn.to/2LBsQTj
Support my work here - / sadler
Philosophy tutorials - reasonio.wordpress.com/tutori...
Take classes with me - reasonio.teachable.com/
This is a video in my new Core Concepts series -- designed to provide students and lifelong learners a brief discussion focused on one main concept from a classic philosophical text and thinker.
This Core Concept video focuses on Aristotle's work, the Politics, and examines his discussion in book 1 bearing on slavery, and whether it is simply unnatural and therefore unjust, or whether in some cases it is natural. Aristotle argues that there are some people who are "natural slaves", but this class is smaller in his work than the much wider extension of those who would later use Aristotle to justify slavery in the Americas lent that concept.
If you'd like to support my work producing videos like this, become a Patreon supporter! Here's the link to find out more - including the rewards I offer backers: / sadler
You can also make a direct contribution to help fund my ongoing educational projects, by clicking here: www.paypal.me/ReasonIO
If you're interested in philosophy tutorial sessions with me - especially on Aristotle's thought and works - click here: reasonio.wordpress.com/tutori...
You can find the copy of the text I am using for this sequence on Aristotle's Politics here - amzn.to/2LBsQTj
My videos are used by students, lifelong learners, other professors, and professionals to learn more about topics, texts, and thinkers in philosophy, religious studies, literature, social-political theory, critical thinking, and communications. These include college and university classes, British A-levels preparation, and Indian civil service (IAS) examination preparation
#philosophy #Aristotle #metaphysics
(Amazon links are associate links. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases)
Hi Dr. Sadler,
Aren't these lessons on Politics by Aristotle going to continue? I hope so, as they are really good.
It's great to be able to learn so synthetically with these videos.
Thank you very much! You made my study and my love for Aristotle meet in an even more pleasant way.
Someday down the line, yes. I produce these for the classes I'm teaching, or when I have plenty of free time, or when commissioned to by viewers. So, unless someone commissions me, there's a lot to get to before returning to Aristotle's Politics.
Thanks, you teach well. The conclusion sounds more like the definition of guardian, parent, menthor or interventive authority than master-slave realtonship. You take over certain freedoms from someone because they don't have the capacity to do handle things on their own. I think the difference is whether they are given the chance to exit that realtionship upon growing, improving themselves, as you pointed out. Great lesson.
If you're talking about the natural master and slave - pretty rare - yes. Notice that Aristotle says its important not to mix up relations though, right at the start of Politics book 1. So it's not a parent-child relation.
Interesting! Great stuff
I have watched a number of your videos and they are very helpful.
Glad to read it
Good stuff. Well done. Much appreciated.
Thanks
this video is very helpful thank u
You're welcome!
Damn that "natural master" point was solid
Yes. All too often ignored
Hello Dr Sadler!
Was wondering if you think Aristotle's thoughts on slavery have any redeeming features.
Thanks old buddy old pal and keep up the great work :)
What do you mean by "redeeming"?
@@GregoryBSadler I mean do you think any parts of his argument can be supported apart from his claim that there are limited numbers of natural slaves
If that's all you're looking for, sure, there's plenty of parts of his account that can "be supported" (in whatever sense you're meaning that).
For example that some people would be better off having someone else make decisions for them. But you can make that point without saying those people should be slaves
@@GregoryBSadler My dawg thanks for the help DAWG
Can the force of virtues not be also the formulation of personal polity?
Not sure what you're asking there
The metaphysical supposition of the polity as a generational art fundamentally transcend the perceptive reality of archetypical construction.
How would you relate slavery to these three branches of philosophy? I'd like to hear your answer;
Ethics
Metaphysics
Politcs
Here you go - czcams.com/video/OV_T8Emyf6I/video.html
do you think anything at all can be said in defence about his theory of natural slavery?
Yes. Aristotle is clear that there are relatively few "natural slaves"
@@GregoryBSadler but just because there are a few why does that make it defensible since it still violates the right of all to equal treatment and all to liberty. if Aristotle thinks that they are not strong objections why are they not?
@@simonpanteli480 Who says there's a right of all to equal treatment or liberty?
@@GregoryBSadler I love your thought process, a true scholar you are.
You can’t even image anything outside of modern liberalism. Lol.
Kind of a bummer to listen to a great classical thinker like Aristotle jump through hoops to try to justify slavery. I wonder if Aristotle ever thought of testing his theory of "natural slavery". He could have taken one who was "suited to be a slave" as a student and educate them in virtue and reason to the point where the slave could try take care of his own affairs, thus disproving the notion of "natural slavery". Its my understanding in ancient Greece that slaves could be educated in fields like medicine, hard to think that someone who could study physical health to the point of treating others couldn't be trusted to educate themselves on reason and virtue and live a "good life" without the need of a master. The idea of "natural slave" seems like it could have easily been logically disproven even in Aristotle's time, and as bright as the man was seems like he would have known that, which is disappointing.
You could always read it more closely, and realize that your take of his "jumping through hoops" is dead off. Aristotle actually tells us that most slavery is contrary to nature, doesn't he?
Physicians weren't generally slaves in ancient Greece. Aristotle's father, of course, as you know, was a physician.
@@GregoryBSadler True that he tells us "much" slavery is contrary to nature, but his idea of "natural slavery" was used by many to justify the practice. It seems it could have been nipped in the bud and disproven with a little effort then and there, just my opinion.
@@JoshV74656 Yep, a pretty silly opinion this time around.
@@JoshV74656 the problem with your logic is that you are assuming Aristotle himself or others around him didn't try to educate slaves. Many people back then, as well as with modern slavery, were actually freed by their masters. It happened relatively often. If the master was impressed enough with the slave, they might free them and even give them property of sorts, to start them out. I know people want to beat around the bush on this subject, but there are many people alive today who, to keep, fall squarely in the category of Aristotle's "natural slave". In my own life, we grew up in a church where we had multiple grown adults from a special-needs facility come to our church every Sunday. They were people who, while fully grown, were mentally stunted. TODAY, we have facilities funded by taxes and donations who "care for" them, though many suffer abuse of all sorts from their "caretakers" in such facilities. Some like to think we live in a very virtuous society, but we really don't. In many ways, we put people in those facilities so we don't have to deal with them in the everyday world, causing chaos. In Aristotles time, someone with a mental retardation or limitation of some kind NEEDED slavery, because they could live in someone's house, and be expected to do menial labor, like sweeping floors or feeding the animals, or maybe harvesting some vegetables or grains, but wouldn't be expected to be able to survive on their own, having to find fresh water, and food, and clothing, and shelter, let alone build a house or have enough self control to go out and harvest the field when it's time.
Jump through hoops to make might not make right. It’s what your Christian moralists do.