Aristotle's View of Slavery

Born in the year of 384 B.C. Aristotle was seen as conventional for his

time, for he regarded slavery as a natural course of nature and believed that

certain people were born to be slaves due to the fact that their soul lacked the

rational part that should rule in a human being; However in certain

circumstances it is evident that Aristotle did not believe that all men who were

slaves were meant to be slaves.

In his book Politics, Aristotle begins with the Theory of The Household,

and it is here that the majority of his views upon slavery are found. With the

beginning of Chapter IV, Aristotle's idea of slavery is clearly defined. "The

instruments of the household form its stock of property : they are animate and

inanimate : the slave is an animate instrument, intended (like all the

instruments of the household) for action, and not for productions." This

distinction between action and production, is based upon the understanding that

'production' is a course in which a result is desired beyond the immediate act

of doing. Where as, the simple act of completing a task is identified as

'action'. Aristotle, who believed that life was action and not production

theorized that slaves were instruments of life and were therefore needed to form

a complete household. In fact Aristotle went as far as to say that a slave was

comparable to a tame animal, with their only divergence in the fact that a slave

could apprehend reason. For he concluded that a slave and animals only use was

to supply their owners with bodily help.

At the end of the Theories of the Household, Aristotle explains how

slaves are different from andy other types of people, in the sence that they are

the only class who are born into their occupation and become property of their

masters. In examining this relationship we find that he thought that while

masters were the masters of the slaves, they still held a life other than that

of being master; However, Aristotle believed that not only was the slave a

slave to his master, but the slave had no other life or purpose than belonging.

From this consideration we begin to understand Aristotle's views on the

relationship between Master and Slave.

At the beginning of Chapter V of the Theory of the Household, the

distinct role of master and slave is defined.

There is a principle of rule and subordin-

...

... middle of paper ...

... Aristotle we find that he was a man of great

curiosity, wisdom and ideas. Although his views on slavery seemed to hold true

to the times, he had many variations on the conservative norms and beliefs. He

had believed that slavery was a just system where both master and slave were

beneficial from this relationship. And with this he thought that by nature,

certain people were born to be slaves, yet with these beliefs we find many

exceptions, where Aristotle allocates areas to describe those who by chance

became slaves but in his opinion were born to be free. And in such incidence

where men born free were not fit to be masters Aristotle explained how it would

be easier for the master to obtain a steward who was more adept at giving

instructions to run the household and leave the master of the house to more

prudent issues.

We can only guess as to what made Aristotle believe that by the human

soul one could delineate whether or not a man was meant to be a slave or a

freeman. And with his arguments we find that it was just as difficult for him

to make that distinction as well. "Though it is not as easy to see the beauty

of the soul as it is to see that of the body."