A Critical Analysis Of Aristotle's View Of Politics

Aristotle begins his discussion of politics by concerning herself with the setting of human interaction and politics itself: the city. He precedes to define the city as a community of sorts with the specific quality of being for the sake of some good. Aristotle basis this claim on his observations of his own city of Athens, and the philosophy of his mentor Plato. A community works for the good because humans individually seek what is good so a community ought to work towards the good. More specifically, “…the good that most of all controls all the other goods…” (930) Aristotle is seeking to critically analyze politics – in order to do so, he must break politics into their component parts therefor he identifies politics as the good or teleological end of the city, defines a city, and then identifies her component parts: individuals. From the component parts and their interrelations Aristotle identifies the end of a city: the good. And because political communities are merely communities arranged for the ascertainment of some good, the qualities of a city – instantiated for the greatest good –

He believes he can derive somethings nature from the state of something, when its coming to be is complete. A city’s character, upon completion, reflects the good that most of all controls all the other goods. We know this because Cities are composed of villages composed of families composed of masters and slaves, and men and women. Knowing that “everyone does everything for the sake of what seems good,” it would seem that a city is, in fact, the eventual and end state of a city. In addition to what is observable of a city in itself, it appears as if rational discourse, pleasure and pain, and empathy are innate features to man and ought to serve his nature. What we do that other animal do not is political organization and logical dialogue it is what separates human beings from the rest of the animal