Table Of ContentARISTOTLE ON EQUALITY AND JUSTICE
By the same author
JOHN LOCKE: Essays on the Law ofNature
REMEMBERING: A Philosophical Problem
SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY METAPHYSICS
HOBBES AND LOCKE: The Politics of freedom and Obligation
ARISTOTLE ON
EQUALITY AND
JUSTICE
His Political Argument
W. von Leyden
Palgrave Macmillan
ISBN 978-1-349-07739-7 ISBN 978-1-349-07737-3 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-1-349-07737-3
© W. von Leyden 1985
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1985 978-0-333-38515-9
All rights reserved. For information, write:
St. Martin's Press, Inc., 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010
Published in the United Kingdom by The Macmillan Press Ltd.
First published in the United States of America in 1985
ISBN 978-0-312-04918-8
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Leyden, W. von (Wolfgang von), 1911-
Aristotle on equality and justice.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
l. Aristotle-Political science. 2. Aristotle-Law.
3. Justice (Philosophy) 4. Equality-Philosophy.
5. Law-Philosophy. I. Title.
B49l.J87L48 1985 320'.01'1 85-1886
ISBN 978-0-312-04918-8
Contents
Preface Vll
Proportionate Equality and Social Class 1
(i) Justice and Equality 1
(ii) The Relationship between the Principles of Equality
and Equitable Inequality 6
(iii) Justice and Equality in the Exchange of Goods:
the Analogy of Builders and Shoemakers 10
(iv) Aristotle's Emphasis on Difference: the Claims of
Democracy versus Rule by Experts 17
2 Two Defmitions of Equality and their Significance for
Political Theory 26
(i) The Strict Defmition in the Physics: Kinds and
Species 26
(ii) A Wider Defmition in the Metaphysics: Common
Terms and Categories 32
3 J ustif1able Inequality and the Different Kinds of Civic
Excellence 41
(i) Diversity and Equality in Political Societies: the
Middle Class 41
(ii) The Diversity of Contributions to the State and
the Question of their Relative Merits 49
(iii) Justice and the Problem ofEqualising the Different 57
v
4 Revolution and the Law 65
(i) Revolutionary Justice and its Effect on the Status
of Equality and Inequality: Arguments For and
Against 65
(ii) Law as a Convention and Law as Natural: Facts
andNorms 71
(iii) Equality and Conventional Law 75
(iv) The Idea of a Natural Law 84
(v) The Generality of Law and the Concept ofEquity 90
(vi) The Rational and Moral Nature of Law: Conservative
and Reformative Justice 98
5 Summary and Conclusion 106
Appendix 116
Notes 118
Index 139
Preface
The issues chosen for examination in this book are central not only
to Aristotelian doctrine, but to political philosophy in general and
present-day discussion in particular.
For instance, there are those who argue for equality pure and
simple without regard for the differences between human capacities
and functions. Others, however, advocate preferential treatment for
a minority irrespective of whether this is in the interest of the
common good. Aristotle contends that, because of the absence of
relevant resemblances and adequate criteria of comparison, it is
difficult to establish true equalities between members of different
social classes and individuals of diverse character and abilities. It
follows that a more narrowly defmed equality between men in one
sphere may go together with a considerable variety of human
potential and achievement elsewhere in the body politic. In particu
lar, since equal shares would not always be fair, fair shares need not
always be equal. One might then argue that only an unfair dis
crimination of any sort should be remedied and replaced by equal or
at least just treatment, whether through legal means, public pressure
or revolutionary action.
My choice of subject matter has been determined by a desire to
contribute to the discussion of the Aristotelian as well as modern
questions of (a) how to render the principle of equality, no less than
that of inequality, compatible with the idea of fairness, and (b) how
to combine the facts of individual as well as social diversity in civil
life with the demands for political justice and cohesion.
Aristotle advances many illustrations and arguments, queries and
conclusions, bearing on these issues. He reflects whether political
rule should be in the hands of a few deserving people or in those of
the general body of citizens. Sometimes he assumes that these two
aspects of being meritorious and of having common characteristics
are of equal importance. He also perceives that a state is composed
not only of different elements but of different kinds of elements, and
that this is necessarily so both in commercial dealings and in the
Vll
Vlll Preface
contributions of citizens to the public good. For how could equality
ever have become an issue if men had truly and clearly been equal,
instead of different? This leads him to consider whether there are
reliable criteria for grading men and the relative merits of their
social functions and achievements. He leaves it unclear, however,
whether his principle of proportionate equality, which largely
insists on the factor of variety and difference, is to apply within any
one area of employment only, or to all professional occupations
throughout the whole of society. On the other hand, he stresses that
such notions as desert, equality, justice and the public interest
depend on interpretation and hence (one might say) on varying
moral or political forms of understanding. Certainly, he is in no
doubt that equalities assume different significance in different cate
gories of discourse, and therefore also vary in meaning from one
social class or 'part' of a state to another.
What most of these arguments have in common is an emphasis on
a contextual interpretation of political theory and practice. This is a
sensitive philosophical issue. The role which Aristotle assigns in the
Metaphysics to such common terms as equality and inequality,
especially in the context of his doctrine of categories, sets the stage
for the introduction of purely formal concepts to his political
theory. For 'equality' is a term which can be applied in metaphysi
cal and political thought no less than in other fields of discourse,
though it assumes a different meaning in each context. I believe that
the ultimately logical arguments about equality in Aristotle's Phy
sics (bringing to mind some of Russell's formulations on this topic)
also have a bearing- in fact a much stricter one-on his discussion
of equality and difference in the Politics. I have described both these
fmdings in Chapter 2. This is followed in Chapter 3 by a detailed
exegesis of those passages in the Politics which deal with the factor
of difference in ci vii society.
Another part of Aristotle's political philosophy concerns the
practice and theory of revolution and the rule oflaw, natural as well
as conventional. These two areas of outstanding political interest,
which I have investigated in Chapter 4, are of additional signifi
cance for Aristotle's arguments about a fair equality and the ques
tion of discrimination in society. There are also his exposition of the
multiple meaning of law, and his insistence on the demands of
equity. Again, he advances the possibility of various levels of inter
pretation in connection with the question of whether tradition or
progress should influence the law-making process. Finally, an
Preface IX
attempt is made to determine whether Aristotle's theory contains
the rudiments of a doctrine of natural law. I have found it harder to
ascertain whether his views on equality and justice, diversity and
law, with all the subtle distinctions he draws, form a well-connected
whole - an issue I examine in Chapter 5. However, I agree with
Werner Jaeger's general assessment that the new and important fea
ture in Aristotle's Politics is the union of normative thought with
the ability to organise the multiplicity of actual political facts. In
spite of this general recognition, I must stress that the examination
of Aristotle's political doctrine throughout this book is entirely the
result of my own interpretation.
In the last two sections of Chapter 4 use has been made of passages
from my paper on 'Aristotle and the Concept of Law' in Philosophy
(1967). Sincere thanks are due to the editor, Renford Bambrough,
for permission to reproduce this material, though it appears here in
a much revised and considerably expanded form. I am also indebted
to Miss Mary Ryle for allowing me to include in this book quota
tions from a letter to me from Professor Gilbert Ryle.
Finally, my thanks are due to the London School of Economics
and Political Science which, over the last ftve years, has given me an
opportunity of testing this material in postgraduate classes, to the
benefit of the author and, I hope, his advanced students.
W. von L.
London
