Analysis Of Tannenbaum's Inventors Of Ideas

This paper explores Aristotle’s sentiment, “that man is a political animal”, as interpreted by Tannenbaum in his work, Inventors of Ideas (2012, p. 35). Thus, it seeks to elaborate on this writer’s interpretation of Aristotle’s intent with this statement. Additionally, this analysis incorporates this writer’s opinion about Aristotle’s perspective as it relates to political and social science in the twenty first century; specifically, it’s this writer’s position that Aristotle’s viewpoint about the actions of the “political animals” within our polis is, indeed, relevant to our modern day politics. That is to say, we seem to have passed an inflection point in our recent political institutions, which has propelled us to the brink of sanity. Hence, our polis is now experiencing, and suffering, the consequences of the irrational behaviors of the “beasts” within our social and

political spheres (Tannenbaum, 2012, p.35).

Thus, if we are not cautious, we may plunge ourselves off of the cliff of democracy and meet our own demise in the chasm of fascism. Indeed, political and social scientists in today’s world might benefit from reflecting back to Aristotle’s interpretation as a means of identifying the “beasts” and “gods” in various democratic and non-democratic regimes around the world today.

To begin, this writer interprets Aristotle’s vision of “man is a political animal” to mean that man’s disposition is dependent on the natural order of life. “Hence it is evident that the state is a creation of nature, and that man is by nature a political animal” (Liberty Fund, Inc., 2008). That is to say, that man is an individual within the community, within the state; therefore, he is

a subject and/or participant in the polis within the community, within the state. Moreover, Aristotle’s perception of the polis’ telos, symbolizes his belief that human happiness is the indicator of strength within any polis. Hence, he characterizes the clear delineation between decisions and actions of individuals and the collective as being either rational or irrational, as these mechanisms of judgment are what impact people’s level of happiness, both on an individual and collective level. For example, when rational reason is applied, the level of happiness within the individual increases, thereby increasing the level of happiness within the community and subsequently the polis. Conversely, when irrational reason is applied, the opposite effect occurs and happiness is decreased within the polis, the community, and down at the individual level. Correspondingly, it is only man, or humans, who possess the capability of reason and speech, which further supports Aristotle’s claim of man’s natural disposition being political. In other words, it is by nature’s design that man was given the capacity to think and verbalize thoughts through communication, therefore, man uses his reason and speech to spawn change in the telos within the polis, ergo, “man is a political animal” (Tannenbaum, 2012 p.35).
Secondly, it is this writer’s opinion that Aristotle’s concept is apropos for modern day political and social scientists as it is useful in gathering empirical data, through identifying the matter which risks the efficacy of any given polis’ telos (Gaffaney, Lecture 7, 2016). To clarify, when applying Aristotle’s logic, scientists can categorize the rational and irrational behaviors of world leaders, and/or potential leaders, in an effort to measure the risks or benefits their behaviors will have on their nation-state’s polity. In fact, this very logic is applied in two critical datasets which political and social scientists use to measure democracy and freedom, or what Aristotle would consider the telos, within nation-states. In particular, they are the Polity IV and the Freedom in the World indices. While each differs in their measurement approaches for democracy (minimalist versus maximalist), they are both essential tools for examining the health of any polis worldwide. To elaborate, Aristotle’s point of view is a fundamental concern we are experiencing today within our United States legislature, as well as with corporate interests:
“The good polis can never be a place where a mere collection of people pursue the private interest in a public arena. When men set themselves apart from the polis by satisfying personal concerns, they harm the community” (Tannenbaum, 2012, p.35)
This writer believes that this sentiment applies to the significant issue of wealth inequality in our country at present. Where man, “as a political animal”, has become irrational and has begun heavily pursuing private interest to the detriment of the polis. Most notably, we may recall the near collapse of our banking industry in 2008. With this in mind, it was the greed of the men who set themselves apart by implementing unscrupulous lending practices, and the lawmakers who contributed to the deregulation of the oversight which should have identified and prevented this irrational behavior from happing. Thus, the polis of the United States suffered deeply, and is still reeling from the effects of these actions by the “mere collection” of the banking and legislative “beasts”, which perpetuated this crisis – we call these people, “the 1%”.
In conclusion, this exploration argues in support of Aristotle’s conception about the nature of man as a political animal being relevant to our modern day political and social scientists. Moreover, it is this writer’s opinion that Aristotle, if alive today, might perceive the socioeconomic and political issue of inequality as a gross deviation from his idea of the golden mean, thus interpreting our polis to be in a dire position. “The task of the good polis is to determine the proper mean in those things it must regulate, and translate that mean into its laws” (Tannenbaum, 2012, p.35). He might be appalled at how man’s behavior, has led us down a dismal path through a series of irrational acts. For example, the banking crisis, and the decision to remove the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein, which has in turn, creates a vacuum in the Middle East and gives rise to the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant. On the contrary, he might also be enamored by the depth and breadth at which our scientists have examined the matter which constitutes his vision of the telos within the polis. Specifically, as it relates to his notion of man as a political animal, and how man propagates differing forms of government through rational and irrational reason and actions, as well as the positive and negative impact of man’s reasoning on the liberties of the individuals within the communities and within our polis (Gaffaney, Lecture 7, 2016).