politics

Chapter 3 Volume (A) One (3)
Next, we should inquire whether slaves, such as those mentioned above, originally existed in the world; for such a man, slavery is just what he should do and is a lawful institution, or whether, on the contrary, all slavery is against nature. ?It is not difficult to explain this question whether it is based on reason or facts. 20 It is clear that the following explanations involve theory and facts and emphasize theory. .There is a distinction between rulers and ruled, which is not only necessary but actually beneficial; some are born to be ruled, others to be rulers.There are many types of rulers and ruled.The better the kind of the governed, the better the ruler—for example, the government of men is better than that of cattle.Because one party is ruling, the other party is ordered to act, and the two can complete a cause together. The higher the two parties cooperate, the higher the cause will be completed.

If everything is a collective composed of several parts, whether it is a continuation, such as a human body, or a discontinuity, such as a master-slave combination, each component often has a clear distinction between ruling and being ruled.This situation can be seen not only in living things in nature, but also in inanimate things; in inanimate things, there must also be some guiding and auxiliary principles, such as a musical composition.But cases of this kind are too extensive; we must here confine ourselves to the sphere of living beings, and give the highest combination of them all, viz., body and soul, the former being naturally supposed to be the governing part and the latter being the governed. (subordinate) section.With regard to such a creature we should note that while he remains in a healthy state of nature;30 we should consider a man whose body and soul are in the best condition, for whom the soul clearly rules. his body.It is by no means possible to take as an example those who are in a state of corruption and have lost their nature. Those who are really corrupt or temporarily corrupt are just the opposite—they lose their natural nature, and the body rules the soul. 35b
Leaving aside the inanimate things, as far as the phenomena of the biological world are concerned, we can see (or, in this respect, we can see exactly) two systems: autocracy and republic (constitutional government): the soul-ruled The body holds the master's authority, and rational restraint of the passions is analogous to the authority of a statesman or king. See Plato: Phaedo 80A. .Obviously, the body is subordinate to the soul (human heart), and the lust part of the soul is governed by reason and its rational part. " (desire) corresponds to "body"; see volume 5a1260, volume 5 1333a18, 1334b20.Yes, these are always natural and beneficial; if the two are parallel, or if the mutual relation is reversed, it is often harmful.What is in man's heart is also manifested in his outward appearance or life; the relation between body and soul applies to the relation between man and beast.

Domesticated 10 animals are more kind-hearted than wild animals, and all animals are preserved and more tame because they are managed by people.Moreover, the relationship between men and women naturally has a distinction between high and low, which is the relationship between domination and domination.This principle is universal among all human beings.Here we can conclude that if the distinction between human beings corresponds to the distinction between body and soul, or between man and beast, such as 15 people who are superior in physical labor and only in physical strength, obviously have this distinction, then, where A class of this mere physical lowliness naturally ought to be a slave, and, on the above principles, it is actually more fitting and beneficial for him to be governed by a master.Therefore, anyone who lacks reason and can only sense other people's reason can become and truly become the property (goods) of others. Naturally, this kind of person is a slave.Here, he is still different from other animals. Other animals have no sense of human reason, and can only act according to their own endowments (instincts).But the difference between using slaves for labor and domesticating animals is very small; both use physical strength to supply the master's daily needs.

If we don’t talk about psychological phenomena, but only talk about the body, there are also differences in the physique bestowed by nature on free men and slaves. Suitable, but suitable for political life (including peacetime career and wartime military work).However, instances contrary to nature are still frequently encountered: some slaves have a body as handsome as a free man, and some slaves have the soul of a free man.These exceptions are not sufficient. Nature has endowed human beings with not only differences in physique, but also in such a degree that they are as distinct as the difference between a man and a god. Therefore, it should be admitted that the inferior physique is subordinate to the higher one. Man, be his slave. The ancient Greeks, who valued the beauty of the body, divided human beings into classes with handsome and rough bodies. This is their unique concept.In Plato's "The Statesman" 30D-E, and in Volume VII 35b301 of this book, both physique and soul are used to discuss the high and low of human beings. .Though the quality of the soul is more difficult to discern than the quality of the body, if this principle is applied to the differences in the body, it is more legitimate to determine the difference between master and slave according to the difference in the soul.It is thus evident that some men in the world are by nature free, while others are naturally slaves, and that for the latter slavery is both beneficial and just.

Chapter Six
However, it is not difficult to see that some people also have valid reasons to oppose the above theory. The terms “slave” and “servitude” have two meanings.In addition to the natural slavery described above, there are five categories of forced slavery and legal slavery.The laws in question are the laws of war—whatever is defeated is owned by the victor.Many jurists have denounced and denounced the principle of slavery established by this convention as illegitimate: they have held the idea that the weak should be subordinate to the strong to be illegitimate and abominable.Regarding the right and wrong of this principle, even the opinions of the sages will inevitably disagree.The origin of this controversy and the place that is enough to confuse the arguments of the two parties are as follows: People assume that the greatest power enough to subdue others must have material equipment "equipment" (κορηγα) Volume VII Chapter 5 10a1324 translated "attachment" also means equipment), Or translated as "means" and "methods".See Vol. VII 1a1332.

Therefore, a victorious person should have excellent moral character in battle.Since power is associated with certain virtues, the powerful become virtuous at the same time, so the dispute between the two parties turns to the issue of justice (question 15 on whether it is legal or not).One side believes that there must be mutual goodwill, which can be just (legal), and forced slavery established by convention is illegal; is justice, and slavery itself is lawful.If the points of confusion between the arguments of both parties are clarified, it can be seen that both sides of the argument are incorrect and not perfect. We still maintain the principle of advocating goodness, and believe that the relationship between master and slave should be based on vileness and kindness. Aristotle Germany does not recognize that power is good and in line with justice, he does not recognize forced slavery caused by war, and believes that it is not in line with nature.But he believes that human beings are inherently different in virtue and ability, and it is natural for the inferior species to be subordinated to the superior species' enslavement.

Here Aristotle applies his usual way of writing: firstly, two hostile arguments are cited, and then find ways to "drag or dissolve the arguments of both sides" to show that the arguments held by both sides are one-sided. .

Those who insist on the justness of slavery caused by the statutes of war (because laws or statutes are a derivative of justice) contradict themselves on the other hand: first, they admit that wars The reason may also be unrighteous; secondly, they know that those who should not be enslaved physically and mentally should not in fact be reduced to slavery.If according to the principles they uphold, as long as they or their parents are sold as slaves once they become prisoners of war, no matter how good the clan is, they themselves and their descendants will become slaves forever. Lycurgus, an anti-Macedonian democrat in Athens, created a decree prohibiting Athenians from buying freed prisoners of war as slaves.At that time Aristotle was 25 years old and was lecturing in Athens.The discussion in this section defends natural slavery and opposes forced slavery, which violates the Macedonian system and supports Lycagus.But at that time, Aristotle was regarded as leaning towards Macedonia and opposing democratic Athens. .

The Greeks are not willing to call the good Greeks slaves, they prefer to limit the name of slaves to barbarians (Gentiles). The Jews were "gentiles" (gentiles).Herodotus' "Herodotus, Historiae" volume 158, 119, Egyptians called non-Egyptians "different tongues", that is, "people of different languages", which is also like the ancient Chinese people in the Yellow River Basin called Wu Chu For the "tongue" of the Southern Man.Aristophanes, Avibus [-]: Hoopoe taught "foreign birds" in Greek, and each bird, since it learned Greek, called itself "Greek bird".Then, the Greeks despised the Gentiles, using "βαρβαρικós" (βαρβαρικós) as a "barbaric" adjective (became popular between the fifth and fourth centuries BC), and regarded Persia, Italy, and Europe on both sides of the Black Sea as "barbaric" adjectives. All the peoples of Asia are "barbarian peoples".

After the rise of Rome, people of all ethnic groups other than Rome and Greece were called "barbaries". , while in practice they admitted that prisoners of war could be used as slaves.Their ideological contradictions were eliminated, and everyone's real destiny fell on the "natural slaves" we mentioned earlier.In their view, some people (barbarians) should be slaves everywhere in the world because they are slaves by nature, while others (Greeks) should be free everywhere because they are free men by nature.The ideas arising from servility apply also to those of the superior species (nobility).The Greeks regarded themselves as superior species (nobility) and believed that they should be superior species not only in their own country, but also anywhere in the world. They believed that foreigners could only claim to be superior species (nobility) in their own country. But in other countries, it does not appear to be good.In this way, the superior species is divided into two categories, one is absolute excellence and freedom, and the other is not absolute excellence and freedom.In Theodectes' script, Helena refers to Nock's "Theodectes, Fragm" 30. :
"Both parents were descended from the gods,

Who has to insult and call me a servant girl? "

The meaning contained in these expressions is to judge slaves and freemen by virtue of good and evil, as well as the inferior kind 40 and the superior kind. "Strebo" p. 66: Alexander wanted the Gentiles (barbarian peoples) to be his enemies, and the Greeks his friends. Human beings would rather distinguish between virtues, good and evil, than between Greece and Gentiles (borders or languages)." Here is like Eratosthenes (lower third century BC) was criticizing Aristotle's national ideas.But in this section of the book, Aristotle does have Eratosthenes' thought of Datong.This kind of unity thought is also found in Isocrates' "Philips" (Isocrates, Phihppus) section 154 and Plato's "The Statesman" 262D. .According to their thinking, people are born, animals are born to animals, and the descendants of good people should also be good people.Although this is indeed the original purpose of nature, nature often fails to maintain such laws as it wishes.

The above-mentioned differences of argument are obviously well founded, and all slaves or freemen are now not actually quite natural slaves or natural freemen.Similarly, it is obvious that human beings inherently have the distinction between natural slaves and natural free people. The former are slaves, while the latter are masters. They each become rulers and subordinates according to their natural duties. This is beneficial and appropriate. Justice.If anyone abuses or misuses the authority of the master, the interests of both the master and the slave will inevitably be damaged.The part and the whole, like the body and the soul, must have the same interests; although the slave and the master are two different persons, in terms of the master-slave system,5 the slave becomes a part subordinate to the master.Both perform their own duties in the natural slave system, which shows the existence of friendship. Slaves are different from their masters, and they don’t talk about benevolence; but since masters and slaves are both human beings, there is naturally love in the world.” According to this argument, slaves should not be simply used as tools for production or behavior.and common interests.But with forced servitude by law and power, the opposite will be the case (where conflicts of interest and hatred will be rife).

章七
(End of this chapter)